A surge in the popularity of electric lift trucks means DC managers now must cope with the 3,000-pound acid-filled batteries that power them. That's sparked a lot of interest in safe battery handling equipment.
Beer lovers might cringe at the thought. But Fort Sumter, S.C.-based beer distributor Yahnis Co. has strict instructions to keep brew stored in its distribution center at room temperature—70 degrees. That requirement prompted the company to swap out its 15 heat-generating internal combustion engine (ICE) lift trucks for new Toyota electric models a few years ago. A drastic move, perhaps, but banishing the ICE engines brought benefits well beyond temperature control, says Tommy Parnell, the company's operations manager. It's cut down on noise and dissipated the clouds of evil-smelling engine exhaust that hovered over the site.
Yahnis's story is not that unusual. Riding the clean-air wave, manufacturers of electric trucks have marketed their way into distribution facilities across the country. In 2001, electric vehicles accounted for 61 percent of all U.S. industrial trucks, according to Toyota Material Handling U.S.A.
Though electrics may be clean and quiet,they still require a power source—in this case, batteries. That's big, heavy-duty batteries that typically cost between $1,900 and $5,000 apiece, according to Roger Clark, vice president of sales and marketing at BatteryTest Inc. of Easton, Pa.
Yet that high price tag doesn't always guarantee that batteries receive the attention and maintenance they require. "Battery handling is one of the most overlooked areas in the DC," says Tony Amato, vice president of sales and marketing for Battery Handling Systems (BHS) of St. Louis. That can be an expensive mistake: Neglect both shortens battery life and compromises performance.
Battery basics
How do you protect that investment and keep your batteries in good working order? It starts with buying the right batteries."If a battery is too small for the truck,it won't be able to sustain the charge long enough to complete a job you want to do on a shift," says Bill Gilroy, area manager, Northeast, Mideast and Midwest for Yale Material Handling. "If it's too large, you're overpaying, getting more power than is necessary or than can be used by the truck."
Because batteries are expensive, some are tempted to buy just enough to get by. That's a temptation you should resist. "Companies often get into trouble because they don't have enough batteries per truck ," says Rick Hoff, vice president of operations for Industrial Battery Products of St. Louis. " If you don't have enough batteries, you'll be able to produce, but the potential for electric component failure is there. "For trucks that are operated a round the clock, Hoff recommends buying three batteries per truck. "For every hour you discharge," he says, "you want to have about the same amount of time to charge and then cool your battery."
The charging and cooling operations often take place in a special room set aside for battery-related tasks. Isolating the operati ons makes it easier to address fire protection and ventilation issues as well as flush out and neutralize spilled electrolyte, if necessary. These rooms typically house an array of specialized handling equipment—battery storage racks (which can reach up to six levels high), chargers, watering systems and in some cases, automatic battery changing systems. "Ba tteries weigh from 2,000 to 3,000 pounds and are filled with acid," says Amato. "The right equipment is essential to limit the handling dangers."
How a battery is changed out varies greatly from one DC to the next and from one truck to the next. Reach trucks, for instance, require handlers to roll the batteries out sideways on rollers. New automated systems are making the job easier. "The operator simply pulls the truck up to the system, opens the battery restraint, unplugs it, and the system selects the best battery and swaps it out," says Glenn Johnston, grocery and logistics specialist/national accounts manager for MTC in Temple, Texas. "The entire process takes two to three minutes and doesn't require manual handling."
That convenience carries a price tag. A sophisticated system that handles a 100-truck fleet with 200 batteries, for example, will typically run about $225,000, says Johnston. "Still, you can usually achieve payback in about two years," he says. "People like the idea, and we're seeing a lot of interest in these systems."
Once the battery is off the truck, it must be charged. "All managers overseeing lift trucks, whether they have one or 1,000, should equip their facility with a proper (and wellventilated) battery charging station," says Gilroy. Charging is typically an eight-hour process.However, new fast-charge systems are now available that can cut that time down drastically, reducing the number of batteries required for your operation. (See sidebar.)
Batteries need watering, too—but only after the recharging process is complete. "If you water a battery before a charge, you're going to have water and acid rising up over the top and acid will end up on the floor," says Hoff. "Not only that, but your capacity will be down."
How you water isn't nearly as important as simply ensuring that it gets done, but there are automated systems today that can save time and effort. An automatic system consists of an electronic control that delivers water to the battery, along with a vent cap installed on the battery cells to control the flow of water to each cell. The operator plugs the system into the battery when plugging it into the charger, and the system delivers the water and then automatically shuts down.
Even after charging and watering, a battery still may not be ready for duty. "You also want to check voltages and electrolyte specific gravities," says Ken Sanders, director of motive power engineering at East Penn Manufacturing in Lyon Station, Pa. It's important to keep batteries clean, too. "Rinse off any acid build-up to prevent it from dropping the voltage," recommends Johnston. "Also check your cables periodically."
Testing, 1-2-3
Even the most scrupulous maintenance program can't keep batteries going forever. So at least twice a year, batteries should be tested. "Batteries dropping below normal voltage can cost you a lot," says Amato. "Testing eliminates surprises," adds Clark. "If you find a failing cell and replace it, it will run you $200 to $300, much cheaper than replacing an entire battery."
Testing can be done manually or with new automated systems. These systems typically run upwards of $20,000, but ROI can be achieved within a year, says Clark. "An automated system is passive and doesn't require labor," he adds, "so you can test more often than you would manually."
When your batteries finally have reached the end of their lifespan, usually after 1,500 charge cycles, you need to look for safe, responsible ways to recycle them. That can be as simple as returning them to the dealer. "Most battery dealers will take them back and pass them on to a smelter,where the lead is removed and reused," says Amato.
To be on the safe side, ask for documentation proving that the battery has wound up in an EPA-approved smelting facility. "Your biggest concern should be where the battery is going," says Hoff. "All too often, it's sold to the local scrapyard and you don't know where it will end up."
make it quick
No question today's batteries represent a giant step up the evolutionary ladder—technological advances have brought a 25-percent improvement in watt-hours per pound over the past 20 years, says Brett Wood, national product planning and marketing manager at Irvine, Calif.-based Toyota Material Handling U.S.A. But most electric truck batteries still can go for only one work shift before they need to be recharged. That means an unwelcome halt to the truck's operations in multi-shift operations.
Hard-charging DC executives don't always have patience with slow battery charging operations. So it's not surprising that companies are sprouting up to offer fast-charging technology. Available for industrial truck batteries for about four years now, fast chargers can return battery e n e r gy while the battery is still inside the truck, eliminating the need for battery changes. "Lift truck operators can use their idle time for recharging," explains Peter Michalski, director at Edison Minit-Charger of Irvine, Calif. "When a driver is on a break or taking lunch, he can hook up the battery to the fast charger without having to take the battery out. Any time the truck's not in use, the battery gets charged."
How much charge a battery receives during one of these breaks depends on how low the charge is and how hot the battery is. "Typically, a battery is only down to about an 85-percent charge by the first break of the day," says Lynda Stephens, marketing manager of Aerovironment in Monrovia, Calif. "As the day goes on, it will drop to a 40- to 50-percent charge, and will get about 25 percent back at these later breaks."
Another advantage to the fast-charge approach is that batteries don't need to be watered as often. "Fast chargers require less water, so instead of having to water the battery after each shift, you can water on a Monday and be done for the week," says Michalski.
Some proponents of traditional charging claim that fast charging leads to shorter battery life. Not true, says Stephens. "If you're running one battery per truck, as opposed to two or three, the battery will chronologically run down faster than through traditional charging," she says. "But you will still get the full amp hours (typically 1,500) out of the battery."
Another downside is the cost—around $10,000 to $15,000 per lift truck. But Michalski says that the initial ROI can be achieved within two years because with fast charging, fewer batteries and less space are needed.
Still in its early days with industrial trucks, fast-charging technology has yet to experience widespread adoption. But several large companies—Ford and Nestle, for example—have bought in. At least we know that low batteries won't be responsible for delays in filling the American public's endless appetite for cars or chocolate.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."