Stepping on the gas: interview with T. Boone Pickens
Boone Pickens' great quest is under way. If it succeeds, the U.S. heavy-duty truck fleet will be burning natural gas instead of diesel, and the nation's dependence on Mideast oil will be forever reduced.
Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
No one needs to prove themselves at 84 years of age, and T. Boone Pickens is no exception.
Over the past 50 years, few have strode so visibly as Pickens across America's energy stage. But at a time when he could step back to savor a life well lived, Pickens has instead embarked on a project that will dwarf anything he or any other energy titan has ever done.
Pickens' mission—born from his now-famous 2008 "Pickens Plan"—is to convert the nation's 8 million heavy-duty trucks from diesel fuel to cheaper, cleaner-burning natural gas. It is a multiyear effort that calls for persuading U.S. fleet owners to commit to investing in more expensive vehicles that run on natural gas. It also requires the development of an extensive infrastructure to provide fuel and maintenance to over-the-road truckers. Pickens sits on the board of a California-based company, Clean Energy Fuels Corp., that is involved in such an endeavor.
If the conversion program works, it will change the global energy game in profound ways, with the impact being felt long after Pickens and most of us are gone.
Pickens spoke recently with DC Velocity Senior Editor Mark B. Solomon about the project and its challenges and implications.
Q: Do you have a realistic number for the size of the conversion potential? A: Eight million trucks out of 250 million vehicles in America. Heavy-duty trucks use 20,000 to 30,000 gallons a year. That totals 3 million barrels a day. We import 4.4 million barrels a day of OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) crude. So you can knock out 70 percent of OPEC oil by going to domestic natural gas for heavy-duty trucks.
Q: The biggest challenge at this point is building out a robust natural gas fueling and maintenance infrastructure. Can this network be developed without some form of government assistance? A: What you want to get from the government is a tax credit to offset the $24,000 cost differential between diesel and natural gas trucks. That differential will be there for a while because of the size of the engines. Eventually, the differential will disappear because you can otherwise build natural gas engines as cheaply as you can build diesel engines.
Because natural gas is cheaper than diesel, the fuel savings will be such that you won't need federal money for the infrastructure. The conversion is going to happen without government help. What you want from the government is the help to make it happen faster.
Q: What is your time frame for this conversion? A: Five years with government leadership, 10 years without leadership.
Q: As we talk, oil prices have come off their highs, while natural gas prices have begun climbing from historic lows. Do you have projections as to where these prices will be a year from now? A: About $115 a barrel for Brené North Sea crude (world oil prices), and $95 to $100 a barrel for West Texas Intermediate crude (domestic). Natural gas prices will probably be at $3.50 to $4 per million BTUs (British thermal units).
Q: Many natural gas producers have scaled back production because prices are not compensatory for their investments. That could explain why prices have been rising lately. What would be a good price point for natural gas that would encourage production but not choke off demand? A: $5 [per million BTUs] would put producers back to work.
Q: What's it going to take to maintain the industry momentum to convert from diesel? A: The fuel is cheaper. That's the bottom line. If I am competing against you and you can cut your fuel bill by a third, I have to do the same thing to be competitive with you. That's where the industry is. It's happening right now.
Q: Does it require shipper buy-in, or is this something truckers will do independent of shippers? A: Shippers are asking for this. They want to get away from the diesel surcharge. There is no surcharge on natural gas. Shippers are asking for two prices for shipping, natural gas and diesel.
Q: How much will it cost to modify each station to accommodate natural gas refueling? A: About $1.5 million to $2 million a station for liquefied natural gas. The exact figure would depend on site improvements, which include driveway ingress/egress, retention ponds, landscaping, lighting, and street and curb improvements. If stations add compressed natural gas, special equipment and dispensers would add about $750,000 to the cost.
Q: You've said you support Mitt Romney's candidacy because he has a credible energy plan, whereas President Obama has had three and a half years to deliver one and has not. Have you discussed your conversion plan with Gov. Romney? A: I've talked to Romney, and I've talked to Obama. Obama has talked about a 100-year supply of natural gas. But I haven't seen anything come out as a plan. I was in Denver in 2008 [for Obama's nomination acceptance speech] when he said that in 10 years, we wouldn't be importing oil from the Middle East. I've never heard him mention it again, and I've never seen a plan to accomplish this.
Q: Several people, including you, have raised concerns about U.S. producers' being able to export natural gas supplies overseas to obtain a better price for their products. Do you think there should be quotas, or even an outright ban, on U.S. natural gas exports so the product stays in domestic hands? A: I'm not big on that. I think what should be done is to increase the demand in the United States and take advantage of it. I understand the economics. Producers are trying to get into a global market because natural gas prices here are at $2.78, and in Europe it's $14, in Beijing it's $14 to $16, and in Japan it's $18.
The United States has the cheapest fuel in the world. Natural gas is a fraction of the cost overseas, our domestic oil is $15 a barrel cheaper than world oil, and pump prices are much lower than in Europe and Asia. But when it comes to natural gas, you have to give your producers a chance to get a getter price. Either let them do it or move to develop demand in the United States. If your leadership would do it, you could develop demand right here.
Q: The core of the 2008 Pickens Plan was to make wind power a primary source of energy and convert natural gas from a primary energy source to a transportation fuel. Yet the plan never really gained traction largely due to resistance to wind power investment. What happened? A: Wind power is priced off the margin, and the marginal price is set by natural gas. When the proposal came out, natural gas was fluctuating in the $7 to $13 range. But when you get below $6, which is where we've been, you can't finance a wind deal.
Q: Do you still believe in the concept? A: When natural gas gets above $6, you can use wind.
Q: How much of the overall problem rests with elected officials and the federal bureaucracy? A: In Washington, they need to understand the portfolio of fuels—and opportunities to use the fuels—better than they do.
Q: They don't understand the economics of it? A: You can start there. People think it's a free market for oil. It's not a free market for oil. OPEC sets the prices. Twenty million barrels come through the Strait of Hormuz every day. Only 7 percent of that goes to the United States. But we have our military over there to protect that. According to a study by the Milken Institute, we spent $7 trillion from 1978 to 2010 on Mideast oil. A great part of that was military spending, but it's still connected to the price of oil.
In the last 10 years, we have transferred $1 trillion of wealth to OPEC oil producers. That's the largest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind. If this continues for the next 10 years, assuming a price of $100 a barrel, it will cost $2.5 trillion. This is not sustainable.
What we need to know is what's in the energy portfolio, how we deploy it, what's available in the United States, and what could be available in a North American energy alliance. That goes a long way toward getting us where we need to be. The resources here are adequate and available, and you don't need the cost of oil from the Mideast.
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.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.