Emerging technologies may be the future of lift truck propulsion, but the lead acid battery will remain the dominant technology in the DC for some time to come.
George Weimer has been covering business and industry for almost four decades, beginning with Penton Publishing's Steel Magazine in 1968 where his first "beat" was the material handling industry. He remained with Steel for two years and stayed for two more when it became Industry Week in 1970. He subsequently joined Iron Age, where he spent a dozen years as its regional and international machine tool editor. He then re-joined Penton Publishing as chief editor of Automation Magazine and in 1993 returned to Industry Week as executive editor. He has been a contributing editor for several publications, including Material Handling Management, where his columns and feature articles regularly generated lively discussion in the industry. He has won various awards from major journalism organizations. He has covered numerous trade shows here and abroad and has spoken to various industrial and trade groups on the current issues and events of the day as they impinge on business. He remains convinced that material handling technology and logistics are two of the major sources of productivity improvement today and in the future for all industries.
In an era of spiking energy prices and mounting "green" imperatives, it's not hard to understand the industry's fascination with the technology of tomorrow—the fuel cells, hybrid power packs, and such that will someday be used to run lift trucks. And there seems little doubt that those technologies will have an important role in the DC of the future.
But right now, lead acid batteries, and the related charging and handling tools, still dominate, and it looks like they won't be going away anytime soon. The technology is proven and reliable, and many experts believe it will remain the standard in warehouses for at least another decade.
It's cost effective as well. Jim Lane, vice president of sales for MTC Worldwide, a Temple, Texas-based manufacturer of battery handling equipment, says that when it comes to technologies for powering industrial trucks, batteries have the clear cost advantage. "Overall, lead acid batteries' cost per kilowatt [makes them] the lowest-priced form of energy available for lift trucks."
And they're becoming more cost effective all the time. The last few years have seen a big push to improve battery efficiency and economics, as well as to simplify maintenance. The emergence of AC technology, for example, has allowed lift trucks to run for longer intervals between charges. Developments like fast charging, improved handling and charging systems, and advanced battery management tools provide DC managers with a host of options to get the most out of their batteries, and thus, their lift truck fleets.
In fact, lead acid batteries and their handling systems are a very much improved technology com- pared to just a decade ago. "Today, battery handling systems are more precisely engineered," says Terry Orf, vice president global sales and marketing for St. Louis-based Battery Handling Systems. Manufacturers have adopted modeling techniques to reduce production issues and improve tolerances, he explains.
On top of that, today's systems make greater use of automation— including tools like lasers for precise battery placement—than their predecessors did. "We see automation playing an increasing role in battery changing," says Dan Dwyer, vice president and general manager for Sackett Systems of Bensenville, Ill.
Among other advantages, automation promises to ease what is fast becoming one of the top challenges for DC managers: finding skilled labor. "The biggest commodity problem facing the industry will soon be a shortage of employees with the right skill sets," says John Pratt, president of Multi-Shifter, a Charlotte, N.C.-based maker of battery handling equipment. "We're going from a people-looking-for-jobs economy to a jobs-looking-for-people economy."
Charge it!
Today's DC managers also have choices when it comes to battery-charging technologies. Traditional battery changing systems have been challenged in recent years by developers of fast-charging and park-and-charge systems.
As for what managers should consider when choosing a technology for their operation, factors include changeover and operational costs, as well as the demands on trucks used in multi-shift operations. Battery diagnostics, maintenance, and life cycles are other issues that come into play.
"The advent of operation-embedded charging has shifted the accountability of battery management from people to the chargers themselves," says Lisa Horiuchi Heiberg, director of marketing and venture development for Monrovia, Calif.-based AeroVironment, whose PosiCharge systems are among the market leaders in fast charging. "The best of these chargers are intelligent rather than just fast, because a high-current charge without sophisticated controllers will result in damaged batteries and compromised run time."
Fast charging, with its sophisticated controllers and high-powered chargers, allows opportunity charging—that is plugging a battery in to charge during breaks, lunch, or other opportunities.
The last few months have seen a flurry of new product introductions in this area. In May, for example, Portsmouth, N.H.-based On Board Solutions introduced a line of multi-stage commercial and industrial grade battery chargers, the ProTech-C Series for 24- and 36-volt DC applications.
On Board Solutions president Bob Unger notes that this new series of chargers reflects another developing trend in the industry. "These new products are what we call global in design; they fit lots of different kinds of equipment used all over the world," he says.
Also in May, Sackett Systems introduced its Centurion Elite Automatic Changing System, a follow-up to its Northstar System, an automated one-minute battery changing, storage, and management system that it launched in 2007. The system allows forklift drivers to change their own batteries, reducing the need for trained specialists, who are in increasingly short supply. "The benefits of this system are labor savings, reduced equipment damage, and improved battery efficiency," says Dwyer.
What the future holds
Though they're certainly not abandoning their traditional battery research and development programs, a number of manufacturers have expanded their programs to include alternative or hybrid technologies. Several of those technologies have already shown great promise. For example, East Penn Manufacturing Co. Inc., maker of the Deka brand industrial batteries, has conducted several successful trials of a new hybrid fuel cell/battery unit, ReadyPower (see "all charged up," DC VELOCITY, June 2008).
Hawker, a major battery maker with a manufacturing plant in Warrensburg, Mo., is developing what it calls the Thin Plate Pure Lead (TPPL) technology for use in forklifts. "TPPL offers great energy densities, accepts higher recharge rates, and ... could make an enormous impact in the future," says Dean Portney, national accounts manager for Hawker, which is an EnerSys company.
In the meantime, Portney says, Hawker has seen growing demand for its high-frequency chargers from energy-conscious DCs. The company says the chargers, which it has sold for 25 years, are able to use a greater percentage of incoming electricity than other charger technologies.
In fact, there's evidence that the nascent green movement is boosting interest in electric lift trucks in general, since electric models are significantly cleaner than their internal combustion counterparts. Lift truck fleet managers face mounting regulatory pressure to reduce emissions, particularly in California. There, rules imposed by the California Air Resources Board last year require reductions in emissions for fleets of four or more vehicles, with the first phase of the regulations taking effect on Jan. 1 of next year. "Actually, we are receiving more calls from customers with LP (liquid propane) fleets who are trying to convert to electric lift trucks for environmental reasons," says Dwyer. "We see this change as a growth opportunity."
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."