The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities is preparing a draft proposal on how to encourage the installation of EV chargers for heavy-duty electric trucks statewide, as a Newark-based trucking company is developing a project that could significantly advance the use of electric trucks in the Port of New York and New Jersey.

In the coming months, the board expects to release preliminary guidelines for promoting the development of charging sites for medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks and ensuring they are distributed across the state in line with the needs of trucks, buses and other users, said spokesman Peter Peretzman. The evaluation process will be similar to that in guidelines the BPU is close to concluding to set out rules on how and where to locate charging sites for light-duty electric vehicles around the state. (See NJ Looks to Boost EV Charger Numbers.)

The heavy-duty charger proposal and a project that trucking company International Motor Freight (IMF) has under development in the port are designed to put more electric trucks on the road in the state, where 42% of the carbon emissions come from transportation and electric truck use is minimal. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, for example, says it has only three electric trucks in service.

Truckers in New Jersey, like those around the nation, cite the lack of medium- and heavy-duty charging sites as a key obstacle to greater use of electric trucks. Other drawbacks include the short range of existing electric trucks ­— only up to around 250 miles — the high cost of the vehicles and the amount of space taken up by the battery, reducing the cargo area.

Yet industry analysts, including the authors of reports released last month by the Environmental Defense Fund and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, say that technological advances, especially in battery size, mean that electric trucks are becoming more viable and can have long-term economic advantages over diesel. Reaping those benefits, however, will require government support, the reports said.

Limited Delivery Distance

The IMF project, which is designed for the company’s 7-acre yard in the port, was conceived with truck manufacturer Daimler Trucks North America, in part, because IMF’s typical cargo run fits in with the range and limitations of an electric truck fleet. The main business of the 45-year-old company, which has about 145 diesel trucks, is “drayage” trucking, the pickup and drop-off of containers at port terminals and client warehouses and distribution centers.

In February, the project drew support from Gov. Phil Murphy, who awarded $5.9 million from the state Volkswagen settlement to IMF for the purchase of 16 electric trucks and two yard tractors for moving cargo inside the port. The grant was part of $100 million in awards given by Murphy, who aims to position the state to reach zero emissions by 2050. (See NJ Gov. Unveils Green Transportation Plan.)

The IMF project will use Freightliner eCascadia trucks, about 20 of which are in use in test programs in California and collectively have driven 750,000 miles, Daimler consultant Markus Schwenke told the New Jersey Transportation Planning Authority in a February presentation. One of those trucks will be brought to New Jersey for a test in the second half of this year. The truck goes into production next year, he said. The manufacturer expects to deliver the trucks for the project in late 2022 or early 2023.

Several elements in IMF’s business make it a good fit for an electric vehicle project with Daimler, including the fact that customers are asking IMF to lower its emissions, Schwenke said. IMF trucks typically run trips of 100 miles to 150 miles a day, five or six times a week on the New Jersey Turnpike, he said. They include stops in New York, Elizabeth and the Port of Philadelphia, about 90 miles from the Port of New York and New Jersey, which fits easily within the 250-mile range of the eCascadia, Schwenke said.

“One hundred to 250 miles fits what IMF is doing as of today for minimum 50% of their operation,” he said. Trucks parked in the IMF yard could be recharged between about 4 p.m. and 2 a.m. to 3 a.m., he said. IMF plans to install 50 charging stations in the yard, with a combined 4 MW of energy and is considering 30,000 square feet of solar panels in the yard to feed power into battery storage, Schwenke said.

“Those batteries in the end can shave peaks during peak hours,” Schwenke said. “We want to be very cautious with withdrawing power from the grid when it’s most needed.” The truck’s 475-kW battery could be charged in two hours if need be, he said.

Adrian G Stewart, a member of Daimler’s electric mobility team, added that the project may include a charger at the Port of Philadelphia to provide “opportunity charging,” even though the port is an easy round trip for the eCascadia from IMF’s home depot.

“Trucks can sometimes have to wait for extended periods of time in the port to collect cargo,” Stewart said. “To make productive use of this time, trucks can be connected to a charger and would then require a shorter, quicker charge when they return home.”

Government Policies

Government support will be key to the advancement of electric trucks, according to the two reports published in March, which suggest that although electric trucks are viable, they have some way to go to before becoming routine players in the market.

A study prepared for the Environmental Defense Fund by consultant Gladstein, Neandross & Associates looked at the delivery demands of two trucking fleets in California and concluded that even under existing range and charging limitations, most of their required trips could be done with electric trucks.

The study analyzed 12-months of trip data from two trucking companies, NFI of New Jersey and Schneider of Wisconsin, from their yards in California. It found that 71% of the 20,500 truck trips begun from NFI’s yard in Chino, many involving the movement of cargo containers to and from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, could be completed by electric trucks fitted with 500-kWh batteries, which are available today. The study found that figure would rise to 93% of trips if a not-yet-available 1,000-kWh battery were used.

The report also concluded that the operating cost over the life of an electric truck was about 60% cheaper than for a diesel truck. However, without government subsidies or other supporting policies, the advantageous costs for the electric truck would be minimal, the report said. “Programs that provide support to reduce infrastructure costs are still needed.”

Of particular importance is California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program, which enables clean energy users, including electric truck users, to sell credits to emission producers that want to offset their carbon footprint, the report said. Without LCFS credit sales, “the positive results compared to diesel are erased,” the report concluded.

Long-term Cost Benefits

The Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory report found that the lifetime total cost of ownership (TCO) of a Class 8 truck, the largest cargo-hauling truck, would be about 13% lower for an electric truck than a diesel truck. While upfront costs of buying an electric truck are greater — about $210,000 compared to $125,000 for a diesel truck — the fuel and maintenance costs are lower for the electric truck, the report said.

That calculation of 13% lower lifetime costs is based on a truck with a 300-mile range, which is about 50 miles longer than the longest range of most electric trucks currently available. But EV costs will fall as battery costs do, from about $135/kWh at present to an expected $60/kWh in 2030, the report said. That would make the TCO for an electric truck 40% lower than that of a diesel truck, the report said.

Key to the sector’s ability to reap those benefits will be government policies to encourage the use of electric trucks, said Nikit Abhyankar, a scientist at the laboratory and one of four authors of the report. Such policies should include incentives for truck purchases, measures that open the way for the creation of heavy-duty charging infrastructure and an effort to set electricity rates for charging at industrial levels, rather than the higher residential rates, Abhyankar said. “All three of them are equally important.”