Electric Mandates Have California Truckers Charging Overtime
wsj.com
wsj.com
For example, the commission truckers earn when they make a delivery incentivizes faster delivery. This incentive structure makes no sense when time is spent charging.
Assuming no technological changes, the trucking industry, state of California, and vendors can do things like install chargers at delivery points, pay workers a consistent wage, give truckers more freedom in what they can do during charging, provide more accommodations in trucks, purchase more trucks, hire more workers, adjust schedules, have more robust grid hookups for charging stations, charge customers more for denser loads, give customers discounts for having charging infrastructure. And yes, this is expensive, but so are natural disasters and our society doesn’t have significant problems paying to recover from those.
>A second haul started around noon—and that was it for the day. In a diesel truck, Mr. Ramos said, he could have made six hauls. But even the second one required another visit to the charging station—33 miles out of his way, and another hour and a half of charging. A diesel semi can fuel up in 15 minutes and then drive 1,000 miles—a round trip from Los Angeles to Reno, Nev.—before needing to refuel.
How is this going to work exactly? 2/3 less hauls And that's before the mandate. We had logistic issues with far less trucking problems than that.
California has nowhere near enough chargers to service the number of electric semi trucks that will soon be on the road. Mr. Stanley can’t risk a truck running out of battery; getting towed only 10 miles costs $600.
This is literally an article about issues faced by early adopters, not a blueprint for problems that will be locked in forever .. unless, of course, the US no longer has any ability to adapt and change.
and who do you think that hypothetical class is going to sue? when the government enacts some legislation or a new regulation that doesn't work, your recourse is to vote them out. if you are in the minority, your next recourse is to go somewhere else or quit. you can't sue edison, the port, the trucking company (etc.) for not fixing a broken mandate to your satisfaction.
and you can't legislatively or via lawsuit force an industry to do something that doesn't make economic sense. they'll just quit/leave/avoid/die instead.
what needs to happen is for the infrastructure and other significant problems to be solved and then it will organically slowly displace an older "worse" technology. the point to the article is that we ain't there yet.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-29/planned-hydrogen-fuel...
pan out.