Replacing diesel trucks with electric semis led to charging time and load loss passed on to customers

[Funkyodor]

Please see the attached letter from CARB regarding enforcement of the ACF pending
Issuance of a waiver determination from EPA. This stay of enforcement is the result of many hours of discussions by CTA with CARB and the Attorney General's office. CARB plans to release an enforcement advisory to regulated entities soon reflecting this agreement.
Some highlights of this agreement:
• CARB has agreed not to enforce the reporting or registration requirements of the ACF as it applies to high pricrity fleets and drayage until a waiver determination is issued by EPA
• Fleets may voluntarily report and apply for flexibility provisions.
• CARB reserves the right to take enforcement action to remove internal combustion trucks added after 1/1/24 that would not otherwise be in compliance with the ACF.
While there is no set time for granting of a waiver by EPA, waivers typically take 9-12 months to process. CARB applied for this waiver on 11/17/23. CTA will continue to move its Stigation against the ACF forward. If you have any questions. please feel free to reach out to Chris

[Lee Helms]

This Bs is not going to work idk why these idiots keep pushing this specially that stupid state of California. That state is ruining Trucking with all this emissions crap and now pushing for the electric trucks.. And the idiots in government is bowing down to them just like do for everything else cause they don't want to hurt anyone feelings. They rather shut the world down with all this crap so they want to hurt anyone feelings but like I said idk why these idiots can't see that this crap is NOT going to work. 

[Question everything]

Pepsi and it's tesla electric semitruck drivers all seen very happy with their trucks and the fact that it does the 500 mile range is a bonus, is quicker up hills,charges while going down hill less maintenance, cheaper to fuel, drivers are happy with a truck that doesn't vibrate and spew vile poisons all over the place is a win win in my view

[A]

This Bs is not going to work idk why these idiots keep pushing this specially that stupid state of California. That state is ruining Trucking with all this emissions crap and now pushing for the electric trucks.. And the idiots in government is bowing down to them just like do for everything else cause they don't want to hurt anyone feelings. They rather shut the world down with all this crap so they want to hurt anyone feelings but like I said idk why these idiots can't see that this crap is NOT going to work. 

This regulation is for drayage trucks, all that really means is you must run electric when visiting the port and they can go ICE once out. This is very easy to do, the actual requirement for new trucks to be electric doesn't happen until 2045 and by then there would be no problem as more Tesla Semis will be out and others as well with similar or better range by then

Electric grid can't handle it. Unless a mysterious asteroid falls to earth and gives out energy to earth!

The grid can handle it just fine

It is plane n simple it is called climate scam. Billionaires buy mansions around the world by beaches. If it really was a urgent climate issue Billionaires would dump their properties. Also ask yourself why are they building bunkers around the world?  Will there be a emp attack or a dirty n bomb go off? Think about it.

Why would billionaires not buy mansions by beaches? You are aware that flooding insurance is funded by the federal government. It isn't like they live in those mansions 24/7, they just come to visit and when it gets flooded, cash in their checks

Drive to the state line and drop the load, or don,t carry loads for California.

This is for trucks visiting CA ports... not making deliveries to CA

those pounds are costing significantly less to deliver, meaning they're more profitable for the fleet

Article says literally the opposite.

The cost of the load is significantly less cost to deliver. The cost here isn't the cost to deliver but a company doing something stupid, probably intentionally to create political outrage

EVs for haulage? That is not smart. They scale best in the other direction where things powered by small lithium batteries work the best. That's why they started in small electronics. Ever used a diesel engine to power a laptop? Just found this  - American Trucking Association says tests replacing diesel with EVs mean a 3:2 or 2:1 ratio increase in the number of trucks required for the same tasks, due to charging downtime and lower load capacity. The batteries weigh 3 tonnes or more. Need to commandeer global lithium supply for 7 years to make all US trucks EV. Other rare metals 35 years of global supply needed. Need a little more forethought here.

Actually, semis are one of the best options for converting to EVs. The reason why is because there are laws that limit truckers to drive only 8 hours, after which they need 30 minute breaks and a day limit of 11-14 hours. So when you have a decent range and charge time Truck like a Tesla semi, you pretty much have 0 time loss vs a diesel truck. EVs are also allowed 2 tonnes extra load capacity vs diesel so no loss there either

As for supply, when the Model T first came out, converting all US horses to cars would have taken hundreds years of global supply, your point? Global supply is growing rapidly, and conversion isn;t something required overnight

electrification is needed but it's often done the wrong way. instead of mandating diesel truck they should start by a electrifying all the shirt range trucks and passenger vehicles that can charge overnight and drive all day on a charge, with zero need for expensive infrastructures like super high speed DC chargers. just good old proven tech and batteries kept within 20-80% and charged level 2 overnight will last forever. level 1-2 chargers cnn be mass produced for very cheap. they don't even convert AC to DC or convert voltage, electricity just passes through. . public/school busses, dump trucks, delivery vans etc. they all do a lot of driving at low speed, in urban or residential areas, with a lot of stop signs , stop and go etc.these are the low hanging fruits that generates the most emissions, particles where the most people live.

The regulation for trucks isn't until 2045... this regulation is just for port trucks

Summary: Electric trucks are useful

That was not the idea of original WSJ article.
Driver was idling while charging on his paid time, EV truck can carry smaller loads so it has limited use.

Increased costs are compensated by raising delivery costs. And their customer will of course include raised costs in retail price, so eventually those costs are coming down on YOU.

The idea of the WSJ was to write a fake hit piece doing something no sane company would do, I am surprised they didn't drive their trucks backwards while at it to make it even more ridicilous

[A]

The cost of the load is significantly less cost to deliver. The cost here isn't the cost to deliver but a company doing something stupid

The idea of the WSJ was to write a fake hit piece doing something no sane company would do, I am surprised they didn't drive their trucks backwards while at it to make it even more ridicilous

If your only argument in this discussion is "they all are stupid, I'm smart" then there's nothing to talk about. Sadly, you are a nobody with zero real delivery company experience and you are clearly simply trying to dismiss inconvenient information.

[A]

The cost of the load is significantly less cost to deliver. The cost here isn't the cost to deliver but a company doing something stupid

The idea of the WSJ was to write a fake hit piece doing something no sane company would do, I am surprised they didn't drive their trucks backwards while at it to make it even more ridicilous

If your only argument in this discussion is "they all are stupid, I'm smart" then there's nothing to talk about. Sadly, you are a nobody with zero real delivery company experience and you are clearly simply trying to dismiss inconvenient information.

They are likely not being stupid, they are just putting up a stunt to make an article. But reality is, they are not going to get anywhere

They can write all the hit pieces they want, but it will have no impact on changing the rules. As more EV semis get on the road and clients save money, those desperately pushing for diesel trucks, their clients will just have to pay more or more likely they will just switch before their clients leave

PS it is funny how you actually ignored my real argument where I pointed out the flaws in their stunt in comments above

[A]

They are likely not being stupid, they are just putting up a stunt to make an article

Yeah, nice attempt to backtrack after calling them "stupid" and telling "no same company would do that". Now they are just conspiring, lol.

it is funny how you actually ignored my real argument where I pointed out the flaws in their stunt in comments above

There's only one real argument, about 8 hours, but it _theoretically_ works only for long haul (still have to do two runs instead of one), not the short ones described. Actually it's making short hauls even worse. So you have no arguments, and your credibility is non-existent after trying to just dismiss WSJ and real delivery company by calling everyone stupid while having zero actual experience.

[Anti-propaganda man]

This regulation is for drayage trucks, all that really means is you must run electric when visiting the port and they can go ICE once out. This is very easy to do, the actual requirement for new trucks to be electric doesn't happen until 2045 and by then there would be no problem as more Tesla Semis will be out and others as well with similar or better range by then

The way logic works is: you develop a better technology and then mandate its use, not the other way around. What happens if a better battery technology cannot be invented? Tesla semi batteries weigh almost 5 tonnes. That is idiotic. Batteries are good for scooters not haulage. Suitable power sources change with the scale of power you need. That's why trucks use diesel instead of gasoline as it's more efficient for heavy loads. Switching trucks to gasoline would actually improve air quality, but no one is advocating that. Modern exhaust systems have done the most to clean up air quality. Banning internal combustion engines is a ludicrous answer to that problem.

The grid can handle it just fine

How? Recent BBC news article said that for all cars to be EV the grid in Britain has to be increased by 2-4x in capacity... and with what? Nuclear and renewables? Renewables need 100% back up for when wind isn't blowing meaning 2x the infrastructure needed. If that backup is nuclear there is no need for the renewables in the first place. Britain is 1/3 renewable generation and our electricity prices have doubled. It now costs the same to 'fill' an EV as a gasoline car. Now double or quadruple generation again? Enormous financial and environmental costs in terms of construction, fabrication and waste. Idiotic. I would go so far as to say "insane". What's your motivation for propping up this insanity?

As for supply, when the Model T first came out, converting all US horses to cars would have taken hundreds years of global supply, your point? Global supply is growing rapidly, and conversion isn;t something required overnight

Cars are made from iron, most abundant resource. They are a significant improvement over horses. EVs require rare metals and minerals from unproven reserves, and are a downgrade for cars. Massive financial and environmental costs to mine that much rare materials, if it's even possible. NOT 'SUSTAINABLE'!

[Adrian Midgley]

Filling an electric car in the UK is cheaper than filling a petrol car.
Even if you do it exclusively at rapid public chargers.

Dark windless days, rare, sre not without tides.

The costs of diesel trucks are large, but some of them are hidden from the users.

[Osh]

Seems pretty obvious the solutions to the problems mentioned in the article are a return to the depot and terminal system. Driver hits the depot at the end of his shift, tractor goes on a charger, trailer continues to delivery with new tractor and driver, original driver takes his rest break and returns to his home terminal next day with different trailer. We never should have gotten away from this model in the first place.

[A]

trailer continues to delivery with new tractor and driver

So you need two trucks instead of one.

[D Y]

The US is going to have to change the way freight is moved, period.

This perceived "mandatory rest period charge window" is great, in theory. In reality, nearly every off ramp on every major highway across the US has semis parked for their rest period, because there isn't enough room for them.

There is no point addressing efficiency or anything of that sort. There are far too many trucks on the road, and nowhere near enough space to charge all of them. There isn't one corporation running all trucking that can manage movement enough to mitigate the sheer volume and lack of space.

Far too many legislators don't understand, and/or don't care what reality and the facts are. Mandating electric across the board is a great way to even the playing field in terms of cost, but if it's not practical, all that ends up happening is billions of dollars being thrown away. CARB wouldn't have backpedaled if they weren't worried. This is a prime example of California *thinking* their market is so valuable everyone will bend over backwards to stay in it, and they found out otherwise.

[Martin Stone]

The problem described in this article calls out to be solved by swappable battery units. With the demise of fueling stations, we ought to consider swapping stations, instead. In other words, when a driver pulls into a rest station for a mandatory 45 minute break, the rest station out to be able to swap his drained battery units for fully charged units within those 45 minutes. In the same way that all fuel tanks can be refueled by the same size gas pump nozzle, batteries should be able to be mounted in a uniformly sized drawer so that the drawer can be pulled out and the battery promptly replaced. Why not?

[A]

They are likely not being stupid, they are just putting up a stunt to make an article

Yeah, nice attempt to backtrack after calling them "stupid" and telling "no same company would do that". Now they are just conspiring, lol.

Not backtracking, I said "but a company doing something stupid, probably intentionally to create political outrage". I said they were doing something stupid, and called it out as likely intentional. Please learn to read!

it is funny how you actually ignored my real argument where I pointed out the flaws in their stunt in comments above

There's only one real argument, about 8 hours, but it _theoretically_ works only for long haul (still have to do two runs instead of one), not the short ones described. Actually it's making short hauls even worse. So you have no arguments, and your credibility is non-existent after trying to just dismiss WSJ and real delivery company by calling everyone stupid while having zero actual experience.

You clearly don't read. If for whatever reason a BEV truck isn't working for you, a PHEV truck qualifies as well. If you don't know what a PHEV is, it is an EV truck but less electric range, and has a backup gas engine. So it can do both plugin and drive on gas/diesel.

The WSJ leaves out this fact cause it goes against their narrative, the same how they leave out PHEVs are allowed towards the 2035 100% EVs mandates as well in California. Hard to create fake outrage when you don't tell people their ICE engines are being taken away completely

This regulation is for drayage trucks, all that really means is you must run electric when visiting the port and they can go ICE once out. This is very easy to do, the actual requirement for new trucks to be electric doesn't happen until 2045 and by then there would be no problem as more Tesla Semis will be out and others as well with similar or better range by then

The way logic works is: you develop a better technology and then mandate its use, not the other way around. What happens if a better battery technology cannot be invented? Tesla semi batteries weigh almost 5 tonnes. That is idiotic. Batteries are good for scooters not haulage. Suitable power sources change with the scale of power you need. That's why trucks use diesel instead of gasoline as it's more efficient for heavy loads. Switching trucks to gasoline would actually improve air quality, but no one is advocating that. Modern exhaust systems have done the most to clean up air quality. Banning internal combustion engines is a ludicrous answer to that problem.

The technology already exists, the Tesla semi proves it. But again, PHEVs are an option in worst case.

As for Tesla semi, while the battery has some weight, be aware that EV trucks are allowed 2 tonnes extra. Also be aware that EVs are not ICE cars + batteries. Motors are lighter than engines, and less other parts as well

There is no ban on internal combustion engines, that is fake news. The ban is only on traditional ICE vehicles. PHEVs that have ICE engines are allowed

The grid can handle it just fine

How? Recent BBC news article said that for all cars to be EV the grid in Britain has to be increased by 2-4x in capacity... and with what? Nuclear and renewables? Renewables need 100% back up for when wind isn't blowing meaning 2x the infrastructure needed. If that backup is nuclear there is no need for the renewables in the first place. Britain is 1/3 renewable generation and our electricity prices have doubled. It now costs the same to 'fill' an EV as a gasoline car. Now double or quadruple generation again? Enormous financial and environmental costs in terms of construction, fabrication and waste. Idiotic. I would go so far as to say "insane". What's your motivation for propping up this insanity?

If they said that, they are wrong. The most common mistake is comparing primary energy which doesn't take into account fossil fuel inefficiency instead of useful energy which does work (calculating off gasoline/diesel and cross referencing average miles vs EV efficiency per mile). The end result would be around 1/4th more electricity needed to be added to the grid. Considering not all cars are going electric overnight, you easily have multiple decades

As for why Britian's electricity prices doubled has nothing to do with renewable energy and everything to do with how expensive fossil fuels have gotten. One of the issues with them is they are highly volatile. And how Britain's electric market works is like this: You have multiple generators bid their prices until they fill demand. The cheapest ones provide the electricity, but the cost is based on the most expensive of the cheapest. What that means is, unless you are 100% renewables, the expensive fossil fuels set the price for everyone

As for supply, when the Model T first came out, converting all US horses to cars would have taken hundreds years of global supply, your point? Global supply is growing rapidly, and conversion isn;t something required overnight

Cars are made from iron, most abundant resource. They are a significant improvement over horses. EVs require rare metals and minerals from unproven reserves, and are a downgrade for cars. Massive financial and environmental costs to mine that much rare materials, if it's even possible. NOT 'SUSTAINABLE'!

[/quote]
No material is EV batteries is rare, most of it is fairly common. EVs have a lot of advantage, not just them being better for environment and people's health. They also have instant response time, less maintenance, torque, safer, convenience of charging at home, fuel agnostic, 1 peddle driving and etc

[td]

PERFECT SOLUTION WOULD BE 15 MINUTE CITIES. DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS? CHECK OUT THE NETHERLANDS. PERFECT HARMONY WITH ALL THESE THINGS ALONG WITH CONTROL.