The most important aspect now and in the future is the cost of energy, of course in harmony with all environmental aspects. The consumption of energy must be the lowest possible considering that it is constantly consumed, must be renewed and again. If we can reduce the energy consumed to a minimum, much has been gained. We have been spoiled with petrol/diesel which contains a lot of energy and at really low costs.
A simple comparison that the average person can understand. A standard 85 Ampere-hour starter battery that is normally installed in standard cars contains the same amount of energy as 1 dl diesel/petrol, i.e. a cup of coffee. If we now look at a truck with a large tank of 600 liters. If it is to be replaced with a battery of equivalent efficiency, the battery should last 6000 kWh.
The premium sedan Tesla Model S 100 D, the battery weighs a whopping 625 kg due to the heavy 100 kWh battery. Here we are talking about a power that is 60 times greater, which would give a battery weight equivalent to 37.5 tons. That weight will remain at all times and reduces the paying weight of the goods on the truck, it does not exist at all either. Can this be a real alternative? The truck is completely undriveable and consists only of enormous battery weight + tare weight of the truck. We strongly doubt electric trucks in the future! Their time is over and will only exist as distribution trucks.
There is no doubt that energy consumption will be decisive. There is reason to look at the possibilities for transporting goods without any prejudice. We will stop here with a comparison between land-based transport systems.
Transport with rail-based solutions
Transport with wheel-based solutions
Since trucks have a speed of < 90 km/h. The railway in largely similar speeds, there are exceptions at higher speeds. A factor that dominates in that speed range is rolling resistance. Air resistance begins to affect at speeds above that. There is a generally accepted practice when comparing trucks and railways. To transport unit 1 on rail, the factor is 1 and with a truck 15. To get the actual energy consumption, you have to divide by the efficiency of the vehicles, to find out what comes out of the wheels of each vehicle.
A compilation can look like this:
We are then looking at future opportunities for transporting at higher speeds.
If you look at the figures, all transport in the future will be carried out using rail solutions. Anything else is not economically, energy-wise or time-wise justifiable. It is also clear that it is possible to save large amounts of energy by carrying out transport using rail.
Now the truck must enter at the end and at the beginning of almost every transport relationship of goods with the railway. With automatic reloading stations, the reloading cost can be kept down to 100 – 125 SEK per handling. With dense terminal placement and short distribution routes, both energy and time aspects can meet a future challenge in transport and logistics.
A long-distance truck has a tank of about 600 liters. This corresponds to an energy content of about 6000 kWh. Such large batteries are not available at all for the automotive industry. They would also cost enormously and would also be incredibly heavy. If you use Tesla as a comparison, battery 100 kWh, weight 625 kg. In this case, there would be 60 batteries, which would not fit and also weigh 37.5 tons, which is completely impossible. The vehicle is completely undriveable.
The solution now advocated by truck manufacturers is that the truck should be able to run for 3 or 4 hours, with a 45-minute break for quick charging. This is of course to keep the weight of the heavy batteries down. Of course, it will not work for medium-long transports. It can work within a distribution distance that can be accommodated within the time of 3 to 4 hours/2, i.e. the truck must also return. Trucks will in the future be located in distribution traffic only. It is also seen that it is possible to save large amounts of energy by carrying out large parts of the transports by rail. (consumption for the railway is 1.2 compared to road vehicles 35 - 75.
Now almost every transport relationship of goods with the railway, at the beginning and at the end, must be carried out by trucks (distribution vehicles) to get to individual customers. With automatic reloading stations, the reloading cost can be kept down to 100 - 125 SEK per handling of the unit load container. With dense terminal placement and short distribution routes, both energy and time aspects can be optimized and meet a future challenge in transport and logistics. Trucks cannot do this, even if they are electrically powered.
Even if there were to be a fantastic development on the battery side, it will always remain: it is at least 15 times more expensive in terms of energy to transport goods with wheeled vehicles. It is time to realize that the truck as a means of transporting goods, for medium and long distance transports, is not an alternative in the future, whether they are called Volvo, Scania, Mercedes or even the modern alternatives now developed such as Einride.
In addition, the major environmental nuisance associated with wheeled vehicles remains, which negatively affects humans, such as the very small rubber particles that come from tire wear and which result in a large number of premature deaths per year.
Future freight transport structure.
How will the future transport structure develop, considering that the truck cannot participate in medium and long-distance transport, which is explained above and is completely unfeasible. We are facing a major change in the future transport structure. The only thing that will work is that all long-distance transport of goods is transferred to rail transport. Considering the electrification that is to be implemented, the future transport should be set up as intermodal transport and that it is only handled by unit load containers. At the same time, it would provide opportunities to implement that the traffic takes place according to an efficient line layout and not as now in end-point traffic.
Several smaller terminals with a distance between the terminals of 150 kilometers, which means that there are opportunities to carry out distribution using electrically powered distribution vehicles. A fine-meshed and efficient transport network that can handle the higher demands on low energy consumption and low CO2 emissions. The environmental requirements for a future structure are met. This will of course require an expansion of the existing railway network.
There really is no other option.
Inom EU finns ett intressant koncept och man har byggt upp en prototyp på en ny järnvägsvagn. Den skulle kunna ligga till grund för en järnvägsvagn som ansluter till CCT konceptet på en modern järnvägsvagn.
This site was created with the Nicepage