Trucks are facing their own obesity epidemic
BEV vs FCEV truck
The one figure that matters above all to truck operators is cost per mile. They operate on wafer-thin margins, and a couple of pence per mile can make the difference between profit and loss. The fact that the truck might cost £100,000 or more to buy is not the critical factor: it is all about how much it costs to transport one tonne of cargo one kilometre. After all, that is how they charge their customers.
The fact that battery electric trucks carry less payload for shorter distances has not been lost on the industry. In a poll we caried out on LinkedIn, we asked:
In 10 years’ time, which powertrain do you believe will be more commonly used in heavy trucks (over 26 tonnes)?
The result was:
Battery electric powertrains (BEV): 8%
Fuel cell electric powertrains (FCEV): 53%
Hydrogen combustion powertrain (H2 ICE): 39%
So what are the implications of converting a truck to BEV? According to Transport & Environment¹, a leading environmental NGO, a BEV truck would require 1243 kWh of batteries to give it a range of 800km (approximately 500 miles). Each kWh of batteries weights 5.43 kg, so that is 6.8 tonnes of batteries in total. Allowing for the weight of the ICE powertrain (1.9 tonnes), the net additional weight of the BEV truck compared to a diesel equivalent would be 4.9 tonnes.
A typical 44 tonne diesel-powered articulated truck has a payload of 28.3 tonnes. As a BEV, that would reduce to 23.4 tonnes - a 17.3% reduction.
You then have to add the time off the road while the truck is recharging. Even with the latest 350kWh chargers, that is over three hours when the truck is not earning money. It is no wonder that the UK’s Advanced Propulsion Centre calculates that a BEV 44-tonner would be 25% less productive than a current diesel truck. That means transport costs go up by 25%, the number of trucks on the road goes up by 25% and the number of drivers required also goes up by 25%. That is not a combination of factors any politician would relish selling to their electorate.
Hence the only game in town for articulated trucks is hydrogen. But which hydrogen – FCEV or H2 ICE? We believe that H2 ICE is a very good “bridge technology”. Trucks can be converted to burning hydrogen immediately, while fuel cells are still a few years away from commercial maturity. By the early 2030s, the fact that fuel cells are 60% efficient, while H2 ICE are around 40% efficient means that fuel cells will win out in the long run. In addition, H2 ICE is zero carbon, but not zero emission – they still produce NOx, a major cause of urban air pollution.
That is why Viritech, in partnership with HORIBA MIRA, a global provider of automotive engineering, research and test services, plus Intelligent Energy, a leading UK fuel cell manufacturer, are developing a fuel cell powertrain for HGVs that will weigh almost the same as a diesel equivalent.
This will open the door to zero-emission logistics with no increase in operating costs or congestion. Independent analysis shows that fuel cell trucks will be cost-competitive with diesel trucks by the early 2030s². Hence fuel cell trucks can offer operators the same costs they have now (and lower costs by 2035). They offer drivers a truck that can refuel like a diesel, but one that is smoother and quieter to drive. Meanwhile home-owners will enjoy trucks that no longer thunder down their roads, but whisper along them. Now that is a policy that a half-decent politician could sell.
¹ “Techno-economic uptake potential of zero-emission trucks in Europe” T&E
² Consultation-HGV-Phase-Out.pdf (apcuk.co.uk)