Driving up the M1 on a Monday afternoon brings home just how much stuff moves around the UK in lorries. Road transport is clearly an important component of our infrastructure, but we may not put enough effort into applying technology to make it more efficient and to reduce its emissions of CO2.
The lorry drivers who recently failed to bring the country to a standstill were not thinking about climate change, but their complaints about fuel prices should prompt us to improve the efficiency of freight transport rather than to cut the tax of diesel. Fortunately, the USA is already thinking along these lines.
You can see why the US, where lorry drivers ply their trade under the more glamorous job title of "trucker" – a profession that even manages to generate songs and movies – sees the need to act. The fuel consumed annually in the US by heavy-duty trucks and buses has more than doubled over the past 35 years and now accounts for 21 per cent of the fuel used for surface transportation in that country.
One manifestation of the interest in more efficient trucking is a research effort that goes under the name of the 21st Century Truck Partnership (21CTP). This cooperative R&D partnership, which hit the road in 2000, brings together four federal agencies and 15 industrial partners. The hope was that 21CTP "would dramatically advance the technologies used in trucks and buses, yielding a cleaner, safer, more efficient generation of vehicles".
Unfortunately, there seem to be some roadblocks on this particular highway. 21CTP recently asked the US National Research Council (NRC) to create the Committee to Review the 21st Century Truck Partnership. The subsequent report isn’t very encouraging.
In essence, the report reckons that the big gain is in the critical mass and coordination that the partnership creates. "The key benefit of the 21CTP is the coordination of research programs directed toward the goal of reducing fuel usage and emissions while increasing heavy vehicle safety." Surprisingly, it adds that "Very few US manufacturers of trucks and buses or heavy-duty vehicle components have the R&D resources to develop new technologies individually."
Perhaps the nature of the industry also explains why the current level of spending has declined in recent years and, says the report, "is not in proportion to the importance of the goal of reducing fuel consumption of heavy-duty vehicles".
Somehow, truckers don't seem to have the political appeal of motorists. The FreedomCar not only gets a presidential endorsement but a budget an order of magnitude larger.
In all, the NRC’s report paints a gloomy picture of the work of the 21CTP, with vague and un-met goals and dilatory coordination and communication. But all is not lost. In offering plenty of advice on where the research should focus on technology issues, the report could also influence R&D efforts elsewhere.
Perhaps the state of the game explains why the US is happy to rope in others who share its interest in truck technology. At the end of June, the US Department of Energy signed a deal with the Swedish government and Volvo Group, one of Europe’s bigger truck makers, and Mack Trucks Inc., whose vehicles feature in some of those trucking movies. The agreement will put $48 million into R&D "to demonstrate heavy duty engine systems with at least 10 percent higher fuel-efficiency than conventional diesel engines".
The money involved in this collaboration, somewhat similar to the annual budget of the 21CTP, means that this can have only limited effect. After all, a single fuel-cell bus can cost more than $3 million.
As the wording on the lorries on the M1 shows, trucking is a Europe-wide activity, with vehicles criss-crossing Britain and the continent. Perhaps protesting lorry drivers might have more effect if they forgot about picketing refineries and went after the people who should be creating the technology needed to reduce their fuel bills and impact on the environment. The problem could be in tracing the European equivalent of 21CTP.
Further information:
www.nap.edu/catalog/12258.html
Categories: Commentary ,
Comments
All comments
You need to be registered with the IET to leave a comment. Please log in or register as a new user.