"The pier has found big wins by making the whole truck-and-cargo flow less “wait your turn,” and more “keep it moving” with the addition of green lanes for ZEVs, tighter gate operations, and by pairing electrified equipment and its superior uptime with new, better rail and yard coordination."
This is basically PR from the truck company. Electric trucks allowed them to rejigger their procedures but there's nothing inherent in the trucks themselves that did that.
Electrek is a fanboy blog and will post anything that casts electric xyz in a good light. It's fun to read but yeah, it is what it is.
That's what it was sounding like; the "superior uptime" was confusing as I couldn't figure out what about ZEVs would be "uptime". So the electrification was an excuse to fix lots of procedural issues at the port that had developed over time.
>CA has the 2nd highest electricity cost in the country. No where in the article do they mention cost savings, nor end-to-end carbon footprint savings.
I imagine for APM, reducing dwell time has more impact on the bottom line than fuel costs. At the end of the day, they're a for-profit company so they're gonna do what makes the most sense for their shareholders.
The crazy thing about electric vehicles is that mile for mile, electricity is nearly always cheaper than gas. Even for me, paying residential rates in California, my EV is still cheaper than a hybrid! And APM has a contract for like 10Mw from LADWP, they're probably paying 1/3 of what I do for electricity. It's a pretty sweet deal- I can't imagine it's possible to get a 67% discount on diesel just by buying in bulk.
Plus, the port is one of the biggest polluters in the area. Wilmington has like 2x higher cancer rates than LA in general. If this saves a few hundred lives/year, would it be a worthwhile use of taxpayer money? How much? (and to be clear, unless you have actual data it's not clear to me that this is "losing" money at all. The port has like 20Mw of solar panels, that's a lot of electricity to take advantage of on sunny days)
> CA has the 2nd highest electricity cost in the country. No where in the article do they mention cost savings, nor end-to-end carbon footprint savings.
And diesel is approaching $8 per gallon. So ...
First, trucking inside the port has lots of idling. Electric trucks don't have that. That's a Divide By Zero error on pollution.
Second, trucking inside the port needs low speed torque. Electric trucks are superior at that.
Third, electric trucks seem to have better uptime. We'll see if that holds over time.
Finally, I'm surprised that some company hasn't made it a business to do electric trucks from the port to a transfer point out on the interstates and then hand off to diesel for long haul. I presume the whole "Subcontract All The Things!" of the trucking industry means the economics can't be made to work.
I couldn’t find how the electric trucks are reducing dwell time - what is it about gas that required longer dwell?
"The pier has found big wins by making the whole truck-and-cargo flow less “wait your turn,” and more “keep it moving” with the addition of green lanes for ZEVs, tighter gate operations, and by pairing electrified equipment and its superior uptime with new, better rail and yard coordination."
This is basically PR from the truck company. Electric trucks allowed them to rejigger their procedures but there's nothing inherent in the trucks themselves that did that.
Electrek is a fanboy blog and will post anything that casts electric xyz in a good light. It's fun to read but yeah, it is what it is.
That's what it was sounding like; the "superior uptime" was confusing as I couldn't figure out what about ZEVs would be "uptime". So the electrification was an excuse to fix lots of procedural issues at the port that had developed over time.
CA has the 2nd highest electricity cost in the country. No where in the article do they mention cost savings, nor end-to-end carbon footprint savings.
This appears to be nothing more than a gimmick under the disguise of “green” that does nothing but waste CA tax payer money.
It’s all so tiring..
>CA has the 2nd highest electricity cost in the country. No where in the article do they mention cost savings, nor end-to-end carbon footprint savings.
I imagine for APM, reducing dwell time has more impact on the bottom line than fuel costs. At the end of the day, they're a for-profit company so they're gonna do what makes the most sense for their shareholders.
The crazy thing about electric vehicles is that mile for mile, electricity is nearly always cheaper than gas. Even for me, paying residential rates in California, my EV is still cheaper than a hybrid! And APM has a contract for like 10Mw from LADWP, they're probably paying 1/3 of what I do for electricity. It's a pretty sweet deal- I can't imagine it's possible to get a 67% discount on diesel just by buying in bulk.
Plus, the port is one of the biggest polluters in the area. Wilmington has like 2x higher cancer rates than LA in general. If this saves a few hundred lives/year, would it be a worthwhile use of taxpayer money? How much? (and to be clear, unless you have actual data it's not clear to me that this is "losing" money at all. The port has like 20Mw of solar panels, that's a lot of electricity to take advantage of on sunny days)
Two things need to happen but are independent of each other.
1. Work needs to be done with electric motors instead of ICE.
2. The electrical grids need to be powered by green power.
> CA has the 2nd highest electricity cost in the country. No where in the article do they mention cost savings, nor end-to-end carbon footprint savings.
And diesel is approaching $8 per gallon. So ...
First, trucking inside the port has lots of idling. Electric trucks don't have that. That's a Divide By Zero error on pollution.
Second, trucking inside the port needs low speed torque. Electric trucks are superior at that.
Third, electric trucks seem to have better uptime. We'll see if that holds over time.
Finally, I'm surprised that some company hasn't made it a business to do electric trucks from the port to a transfer point out on the interstates and then hand off to diesel for long haul. I presume the whole "Subcontract All The Things!" of the trucking industry means the economics can't be made to work.
> And diesel is approaching $8 per gallon. So ...
$13-14 in some places in Europe lol.