Re: HGV Fuel Efficiency
- From: Doug Baiter <doug-baiter@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:12:45 GMT
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 10:31:05 GMT, NM <never.opened@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Doug Baiter wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2007 09:58:02 -0000, "Gizmo."
"judith" <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in messageWell in a word, yes :o).
Just caught an item on the BBC TV news about the price of fuel.I saw that ... and still can't understand how their economics or logic work.
There was an interview with the head of a haulage firm who I believe
said that they had got rid of their HGVs and replaced with smaller
vehicles as they were much more economical to run.
Is this the case?
To simplify my thinking:
Even if they downsized to 17t lorries, they'd still need 3 qty to carry the
"same" amount of load as a 44t HGV.
I doubt very much if a 17t returns 3 times or more mpg than a 44t ! Plus the
overheads would pretty much treble.
Or am I looking at this the wrong way ?
The problem with your logic is that it assumes maximum density where
available, and if that were the case then yes, you'd be right in
thinking that the bigger truck is 'better'. I'd be *fascinated* to see
the RHA publish some statistics on how much transported volume is
Very little, it's too expensive to run empty.
You'd _think_ that applied to planes (and to an even greater degree)
but we're hearing more and more of 'ghost flights' to move freight
capacity around. Obviously RH operators would prefer vehicles to be
fully laden, but can you see them turning down a lucrative load simply
because they dont have a vehicle in the right place? I freely admit
its a bit of a leap to assume that road freight suffers from a problem
simply because we know air freight does, but I think its a
- Prev by Date: Re: HGV Fuel Efficiency
- Next by Date: Re: HGV Fuel Efficiency
- Previous by thread: Re: HGV Fuel Efficiency
- Next by thread: Re: HGV Fuel Efficiency