Why would we *NOT* replace government fleets with electrics?

[Derec]

Ordinarily I totally agree. However, our power grid's are failing. We don't have enough base load power. Even if we brought back nuclear power, it would take 10 years to bring the plants back. We're screwed...

I would not say the grid is failing. Certainly not to the point that it could not support an electrified USPS delivery fleet.
200k mail trucks * charge one 60 kWh battery each day / 0.8 charging efficiency = 15 GWh/d.
US electricity production: 11.3 TWh/d

So electricity required to charge up all mail trucks would be ~0.13% of total US production.

 

[Derec]

USPS also delivers to small towns and rural areas, including some very rural areas where charging stations are currently non-existent or sufficiently far apart to make it problematic to have a totally EV vehicle.

EV charging stations would be part of the USPS centers where the mail trucks are loaded in the first place and the stations would be ordered and installed at the same time the trucks are ordered and delivered. The USPS trucks would not be charging at public chargers in front of Target or something.
So that at least would be no problem.

Mail routes can be well over 100 miles/day with the longest route I could find being something over 182 miles.

Which are ranges EVs can do with no problem these days. And even regular EV cars can be purchased with different capacity batteries. Same can go for EV mail trucks - larger batteries would be ordered by districts with longer mail routes.

When outside weather temperatures dip to 20F or lower, such as those which exist in northern regions, EV battery life is decreased by as much as 40%. This is very significant when one is talking about more rural areas in northern parts of the US. EV vehicles will have much less range and there exist fewer opportunities for them to recharge during their routes.

Much of that is due to use of resistive heaters which drain the battery.
But yes, the battery itself is less efficient in colder temps. That should not be a barrier to implementing this technology. For one, it can be rolled in temperate parts of the US first, since we all know it would take years even if the federal government pursues it aggressively.
The thing is, people drive electric cars even in cold climates. Most new cars in Norway are electric. So it's not like this is some insurmountable barrier.

I understand that city folk, especially those living in less northern climates will think 'so what? They can just get mail once or twice a week?'

I was thinking more get a higher capacity battery.

Converting to 100% EV vehicles is simply not practical, however desirable it might be from a fossil fuel perspective.

You are wrong on that.

What I'm saying is that we are not there yet--and perhaps we won't be 'there' for a long time.

If private individuals in Norway can drive electric cars, why can't your Bumfuck, ND version of Newman do the same?

 

[Derec]

I'm pretty sure that the impact of a government agency buying fleets of EVs will do a lot more for EVs as a concept than Elon Musk making them sexy and super expensive.

I agree with the goal of US (as well as state and local) agencies investing in EV fleets.

However, Musk making EVs sexy was essential. It changed the negative public perception set by the likes of GM EV1.
And Teslas are not really (significantly) more expensive than the cars they are competing with.
That's why that strategy was correct to make EVs mass market ready. You build a luxury sedan or a sports car and you can make it cost-competitive with the cars it's competing against even in mid-2000s. You make an underpowered subcompact and it will cost twice what a subcompact Suzuki or something costs.

Now the technology has matured to the point that smaller, less exciting cars can be made with less of a price shock, but we are still not anywhere near parity for such vehicles. And technology would not have progressed nearly this quickly without Tesla Roadster, S and similar cars.

 

[Derec]

Why is it that plug-in hybrids are always ignored, as if that technology does not exist, in the gas vs. EV debates?

They were always a transition technology. The bog problem with them is that you basically have to carry two motors (plus associated parts like fuel tank, fuel lines, intake, exhaust, catalytic converter, muffler) with you all the time. In city driving you may not use your ICE for weeks. Is the weight penalty really worth the ability to make a rare road trip more conveniently? Maybe renting a ICE car for a road trip would be better.

Another problem with PHEVs is that they as far as I know do not have an heat engine that has been optimized for generator use (as opposed to driving wheels). Something like a gas turbine would work great - they are rubbish for driving wheels but perfect for running a generator. They are also running very high RPMs which means they can be made super-small and thus use less room under the hood and have less of a weight penalty. I do not know of any manufacturer pursuing gas turbine PHEV.

A more dense network of Level 3 chargers will make plug-ins obsolete anyway though.

That has nothing to do with the USPS issue, as the mail carrier trucks are basically all local drives that can be done with BEVs.

 

[Derec]

ETA ~This is already how other countries handle transportation. In Japan, highways have a toll of about $.10/ mile. Gas costs around $10/gallon. People are free to drive personal vehicles all they want. But for distance driving, they have the option of cheap and convenient public transportation, like light rail. Most people choose that option.~

Japan is a much more compact country though. That approach would not work well for a spread-out country like ours.

 

[Derec]

Did anyone suggest 100% EV vehicles?
I don't recall that.
Tom

Eventually it should be. Say replace all local delivery vehicles with BEVs by 2035. A very doable plan.

 

[Ford]

Oh look. Something I can speak to! Our fleet of autonomous vehicles is electric, and I spent most of last year road testing them, so I've got a bit of experience.

A very big caveat is that our vehicles have been heavily modified - with a suite of radars, lidars, other sensors, and computers that add a lot of weight and drain batteries - so it's not quite the same, yet it also speaks to what an EV can do under a load that no consumer or commercial fleet would put them through. With that out of the way...

Whenever someone points at it and says "what is this?", the easy answer is "it's a car." People seem to think that an EV is some weird technological unicorn, but at the end of the day, it is a car (or truck, or SUV). It has a steering wheel, tires, brakes, and all the usual stuff you're used to. Just the power train is different. The Chevy Bolt - which our cars are based off of - has an EPA estimated range of 259 miles. Enough for a 100 mile delivery route and then some. What about rural roads? There's a few electric trucks and SUVs coming to market, and an EV has something that comes in really handy on rough back roads: torque. That's why your Tesla accelerates so quickly, and an electric off-road vehicle actually might be better than an ICE one for the same reason. Climbing mountain roads? Oh yeah.

Range in bad weather? Yes, extreme cold and heat reduce range, but that's a solvable problem. Our vehicles operated in the height of summer in Phoenix, and held up because they have extra cooling to handle not just the outside heat, but the heat generated by the computers that take up much of the rear cargo area. Another neat trick? We used to have to sit for long periods of time in the blistering heat. Waiting for a delivery (more on that in a moment) or troubleshooting the finicky autonomous systems. I've spent hours in parking lots or on the side of the road with the AC on full blast, and the drain on the charge was minimal. Try that in your gas powered SUV. And yes, we did deliveries. I worked on a pilot program to deliver groceries, so there was a lot of waiting, followed by a lot of driving, then returning to the staging area and waiting for the next delivery to pop up. As we speak, the company is taking what we learned in the past year and expanding it city-wide, so an EV - even one that doesn't drive itself - can absolutely be used as a delivery vehicle. You figure out the problems, then scale up.

There is one other thing to consider, and this is something that could save the evil 'ole government a lot of money in the long run. Maintenance. There's a whole host of things that break or wear down over time on an internal combustion engine that an EV doesn't have to worry about. An electric motor is several orders of magnitude more simple than an internal combustion engine, and it doesn't need oil changes, or gaskets replaced, or a bunch of other things that can go expensively wrong. You've really just got to worry about the brakes, the tires, and a few other things like the heater or AC. Battery replacement is an issue, but battery technology is advancing, the cost is going to come down, and the savings should more than outweigh that needed by a fleet of gas-guzzling trucks.

Yes, there are challenges with charging infrastructure and the electric grid, but these are not insurmountable, and if we start working on them now rather than throwing up our hands and saying 'nothing we can do...just order thousands more old postal trucks!" we'll be better off in the long run.

 

[Hermit]

Did anyone suggest 100% EV vehicles?
I don't recall that.
Tom

Eventually it should be. Say replace all local delivery vehicles with BEVs by 2035. A very doable plan.

In 2019 Australia Post began replacing its last mile fleet of Honda CT110 motorbikes

with electric trikes.

The last bike will be gone in 2025.

 

[Rhea]

For background:

USPS Places Order for 50,000 Next Generation Delivery Vehicles; 10,019 To Be Electric

• The Next Generation Delivery Vehicle (NGDV) program offers significant benefits through the introduction of safer and more environmentally friendly vehicles for our carriers and the communities we serve
• Postal Service makes good on our pledge to accelerate our electric vehicle strategy by increasing the quantity of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) as our financial condition improves and as we refine our network and vehicle operating strategy
• Postal Service has identified 10,019 specific delivery routes that present the best initial application for electric vehicles
• The flexibility in the NGDV program allows for future increases in the mix of BEVs should additional funding become available from internal or other sources, and if the use case for BEVs continues to improve
• Through the NGDV program, Postal Service commitment to the fiscally responsible roll-out of electric-powered vehicles for America’s largest and oldest federal fleet remains ambitious and on schedule

DeJoy added, “Today’s order demonstrates, as we have said all along, that the Postal Service is fully committed to the inclusion of electric vehicles as a significant part of our delivery fleet even though the investment will cost more than an internal combustion engine vehicle. That said, as we have also stated repeatedly, we must make fiscally prudent decisions in the needed introduction of a new vehicle fleet. We will continue to look for opportunities to increase the electrification of our delivery fleet in a responsible manner, consistent with our operating strategy, the deployment of appropriate infrastructure, and our financial condition, which we expect to continue to improve as we pursue our plan.”

 

[ZiprHead]

Agree 100%. It should have bene done under Obama already. I think Obama and Biden talk a good game on climate, but implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

EV technology has come a long way since Obama was president. And why no mention of Trump who was literally hostile to anything non fossil fuels? I believe your bias is showing.

 

[Toni]

USPS also delivers to small towns and rural areas, including some very rural areas where charging stations are currently non-existent or sufficiently far apart to make it problematic to have a totally EV vehicle.

EV charging stations would be part of the USPS centers where the mail trucks are loaded in the first place and the stations would be ordered and installed at the same time the trucks are ordered and delivered. The USPS trucks would not be charging at public chargers in front of Target or something.
So that at least would be no problem.

Mail routes can be well over 100 miles/day with the longest route I could find being something over 182 miles.

Which are ranges EVs can do with no problem these days. And even regular EV cars can be purchased with different capacity batteries. Same can go for EV mail trucks - larger batteries would be ordered by districts with longer mail routes.

When outside weather temperatures dip to 20F or lower, such as those which exist in northern regions, EV battery life is decreased by as much as 40%. This is very significant when one is talking about more rural areas in northern parts of the US. EV vehicles will have much less range and there exist fewer opportunities for them to recharge during their routes.

Much of that is due to use of resistive heaters which drain the battery.
But yes, the battery itself is less efficient in colder temps. That should not be a barrier to implementing this technology. For one, it can be rolled in temperate parts of the US first, since we all know it would take years even if the federal government pursues it aggressively.
The thing is, people drive electric cars even in cold climates. Most new cars in Norway are electric. So it's not like this is some insurmountable barrier.

I understand that city folk, especially those living in less northern climates will think 'so what? They can just get mail once or twice a week?'

I was thinking more get a higher capacity battery.

Converting to 100% EV vehicles is simply not practical, however desirable it might be from a fossil fuel perspective.

You are wrong on that.

What I'm saying is that we are not there yet--and perhaps we won't be 'there' for a long time.

If private individuals in Norway can drive electric cars, why can't your Bumfuck, ND version of Newman do the same?

I happily admit that I was thrilled to read that individuals in Norway are driving electric cars.

I decided to look up annual driving distances in Norway and found this:

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/gives-the-yearly-average-driving-distance-per-vehicle-type-in-Norway-and-in-Sweden-based_fig3_332585265

(Note: The following is updated thanks to Elixir's better reading of the chart in my link. I inadvertently dropped one of the 0's so I was off by a factor of 10! Many thanks to Elixir!

In Norway, the average driver drives very, very, very much less on an annual basis compared (maybe 12000 km/year = less than 8000 miles/year) with the average US driver (14,000 miles). Even the average annual distance driven by busses in Norway (less than 60000km = less than 40000 miles) is a fraction of the annual distance of the average annual distance a US driver will put on their vehicle (more than 14,000 miles), much less a postal vehicle. seems low for a rural postal route in sparsely populated states.


Obviously, mail carrier vehicles would charge at charging stations at whatever facility they park. 182 miles is the longest route I saw mentioned but: given the decreased battery life in cold weather and the absolute truth that vehicles use much more energy if they travel over snow covered roads--as indeed would definitely happen during winters in the northern parts of the US--including falling snow, blizzard conditions, icy conditions, high winds, etc. I don't live in ND but I do live in a northern state and in my last job, I drove 100 miles round trip every day through all of this every winter and it was not great for mileage on my efficient gas powered car. I am not at all confident that current battery technology is sufficient for practical use in rural areas in cold parts of the US, even assuming that they can get back to their charging station at the end of every delivery day. Improved batteries would absolutely be necessary. Rolling them out in more temperate areas would be wise. It will take time to improve battery capacity.

One other wrinkle that will need to be factored in: Many rural mail carriers drive their own vehicles. I've read some of their feedback on USPS sites and they aren't earning much at all, given fuel prices and wear and tear and also, rural mail carriers who drive USPS vehicles have a lot of complaints about their performance on some of the more rural routes. I'm not certain that most urbanites area aware but there are still plenty of dirt and gravel roads in rural USA. While what I've read suggests that rural mail carriers would like to be provided a vehicle, they aren't necessarily happy with how the vehicles they are provided (when they are provided a vehicle)performs on the routes they drive. Also of note: USPS is delivering far more packages compared with the past--including last mile delivery for FedEx, UPS, Amazon.


Don't get me wrong: I will love it when we get higher capacity motor vehicle batteries which will allow widespread adoption of EV. One of our vehicles is a hybrid that does not require plug in--self charging as the vehicle drives. We love it and love the mileage it gets, including in bad weather. It's still less than a year old and we haven't yet had it out on what we consider bad roads. All y'all southerners would die at the idea of driving in these here parts come wintertime.

 

[Elixir]

In Norway, the average driver drives very, very, very much less on an annual basis compared (maybe 1200 km/year = less than 800 miles/year) with the average US driver (14,000 miles).

Uh, I think one of us read that wrong.I saw 12,000km/yr, or around 8k miles vs 14k in the USA.

So… less. Maybe much less. But not very, very, very much less.

 

[Toni]

In Norway, the average driver drives very, very, very much less on an annual basis compared (maybe 1200 km/year = less than 800 miles/year) with the average US driver (14,000 miles).

Uh, I think one of us read that wrong.I saw 12,000km/yr, or around 8k miles vs 14k in the USA.

So… less. Maybe much less. But not very, very, very much less.

D'oh! You are absolutely correct: I dropped a 0. I'll go back and correct now. I admit I was very, very shocked at how little people in Sweden drove with that missing zero.

Thanks for the correction.

 

[Rhea]

Overall - the push for electrification should be much faster than it is. Much.

Toni’s potential problem analysis is valid in a “see the trees” scale, but definitely does not cover the majority of vehicles in a “see the forest” scale, and definitely not 80% of the vehicles.

So DeJoy’s plan for only 20% of vehicles to be purchased as BEV is not supported by the reality. It should be much higher. I don’t think it is good fo us to get bogged down in worst case scenarios when the proposal we are objecting to is about typical use scenarios.

Toni - I get that many roads are dirt; I live on one of them. I get that we have to travel a long way to get to groceries and malls; an actual mall is over 100 miles from me. I get that some carriers are required to drive their own car; mine does (well until he retired last month and now they are having a terrible time filling the route, and we’re only getting mail every other day lately.)

So even personally knowing and living all of those barriers, I STILL advocate for more EVs, far more than 20% of the fleet. It’s the riight thing for the planet and it’s the right thing for the economy.

And there should be a solar panel on the top of every postal delivery vehicle!

 

[TSwizzle]

So even personally knowing and living all of those barriers, I STILL advocate for more EVs, far more than 20% of the fleet.

Of course you do. For despite all evidence to the contrary, your beliefs are religious in nature and you will continue to believe.

It’s the riight thing for the planet and it’s the right thing for the economy.

The right thing for the economy and the planet would be to do away with the USPS. It’s a terrible service subsidized by the tax payer delivering shite that I did not ask for.

 

[Toni]

Overall - the push for electrification should be much faster than it is. Much.

Toni’s potential problem analysis is valid in a “see the trees” scale, but definitely does not cover the majority of vehicles in a “see the forest” scale, and definitely not 80% of the vehicles.

So DeJoy’s plan for only 20% of vehicles to be purchased as BEV is not supported by the reality. It should be much higher. I don’t think it is good fo us to get bogged down in worst case scenarios when the proposal we are objecting to is about typical use scenarios.

Toni - I get that many roads are dirt; I live on one of them. I get that we have to travel a long way to get to groceries and malls; an actual mall is over 100 miles from me. I get that some carriers are required to drive their own car; mine does (well until he retired last month and now they are having a terrible time filling the route, and we’re only getting mail every other day lately.)

So even personally knowing and living all of those barriers, I STILL advocate for more EVs, far more than 20% of the fleet. It’s the riight thing for the planet and it’s the right thing for the economy.

And there should be a solar panel on the top of every postal delivery vehicle!

Forests are not forests without trees.

I also advocate for more EV vehicles! I’m just one of those people who must look at all the worst case scenarios—and am familiar with situations when people from ( somewhere else) think they have the best solution for an area where they don’t actually live.

I hope that we can all move to a more green footprint—individually and as a nation.

 

[Toni]

So even personally knowing and living all of those barriers, I STILL advocate for more EVs, far more than 20% of the fleet.

Of course you do. For despite all evidence to the contrary, your beliefs are religious in nature and you will continue to believe.

It’s the riight thing for the planet and it’s the right thing for the economy.

The right thing for the economy and the planet would be to do away with the USPS. It’s a terrible service subsidized by the tax payer delivering shite that I did not ask for.

The USPs is not funded by government funds.

I’m pretty convinced you have no idea what is best for anyone, much less for everyone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Why is it that plug-in hybrids are always ignored, as if that technology does not exist, in the gas vs. EV debates?

A good solution for the ultra-rural and ultra cold routes.

How so?

That it runs on the gas side when the battery side is depleted.

What battery?

Maybe a Volt, but plug-ins are generally useless.

 

[Rhea]

Forests are not forests without trees.

True, agreed. I don’t think it’s an unknown that more than 50% of the USPS fleet is not in the northern row of states, though. That’s all I’m saying. There is so MUCH to be gained in BEV-ing as many as we can and so much to be lost by stalling the cnversation so that we can solve the outliers.

I mentioned above the reality that the whole fleet will not be replaced at once, and that the still-running gasoline ones can be moved to the north while they do the potential problem analysis.

I also advocate for more EV vehicles! I’m just one of those people who must look at all the worst case scenarios

I’m also one of those people. And one of the worst case scenarios is not doing what’s needed because of decision paralysis. So determining the safe line between them is something that I’m trained to do (fyi - I am trainined to facilitate potential problem analyses, risk analyses, risk mitigation plans and recovery plans. So I get what you’re saying, and I also get how focusing on rare cases with known mitigation plans can get in the way of enacting appropriate changes)

—and am familiar with situations when people from ( somewhere else) think they have the best solution for an area where they don’t actually live.

Too true.

I hope that we can all move to a more green footprint—individually and as a nation.

And fast enough to preserve it for our children.

 

[Elixir]

So even personally knowing and living all of those barriers, I STILL advocate for more EVs, far more than 20% of the fleet.

Of course you do. For despite all evidence to the contrary, your beliefs are religious in nature and you will continue to believe.

It’s the riight thing for the planet and it’s the right thing for the economy.

The right thing for the economy and the planet would be to do away with the USPS. It’s a terrible service subsidized by the tax payer delivering shite that I did not ask for.

The USPs is not funded by government funds.

I’m pretty convinced you have no idea what is best for anyone, much less for everyone.

Now you’re getting smarter. There is every indication the Swiz knows zero about how the USA and its government works. He’s either idle rich, uneducated and disinterested in anyone else’s concerns, or completely ignorant due to never having been to America or studied American government or politics.