Victoria Kickham started her career as a newspaper reporter in the Boston area before moving into B2B journalism. She has covered manufacturing, distribution and supply chain issues for a variety of publications in the industrial and electronics sectors, and now writes about everything from forklift batteries to omnichannel business trends for DC Velocity.
Robotic technology has been sweeping through warehouses nationwide as companies seek to automate repetitive tasks in a bid to speed operations and free up human labor for other activities. Many of those implementations have been focused on picking tasks, a trend driven largely by the need to fill accelerating e-commerce orders. But as the robotic-picking market matures and e-commerce growth levels off, the robotic revolution is shifting behind the picking lines, with many companies investing in pallet-handling robots as a way to keep efficiency gains coming.
“Earlier in this decade and the previous decade, we [saw] a lot of [material handling] transformation around e-commerce and the handling of goods to order,” explains Josh Kivenko, chief marketing officer and senior vice president at Vecna Robotics, which provides autonomous mobile robots (AMRs) for pallet handling and logistics operations. “Now we’re talking about pallets—moving material in bulk behind that line.”
Kivenko explains that whether items are being packaged and shipped directly to a customer’s home address or moved as finished goods to a shipping bay for store delivery, those items are first moved in bulk in some way, often by human hands and with human-operated equipment. He describes warehouses as chaotic environments in which humans move pallets and cartons in multiple ways—up and down, side to side, from receiving to storage, from storage to shipping, or via cross-docking. Automation can help bring order to that chaos.
“What we’re trying to do is relieve some of the pressure [on the] humans [doing] this work,” Kivenko says of companies that develop pallet-handling robotic technologies. “At the end of the day, we’re trying to automate some of those flows, relieve labor pressure, save costs, and keep the goods flowing.”
But automated pallet handling isn’t right for every situation, so it’s important to understand the warehouse conditions required and the protocols and best practices needed to make it a win. Here are some guidelines for applying pallet-handling robots and gaining the most from your investment.
FIRST, UNDERSTAND THE TECHNOLOGY
Pallet-handling robots fall into four general categories, explains Rich O’Connor, vice president of storage and automation for Raymond West Group, a business unit of lift truck manufacturer The Raymond Corp. They include:
Palletizing/depalletizing robots, which are used to load or unload items onto and off of pallets, usually with the use of a robotic arm for picking and placing. Today, these systems are being increasingly integrated with automated storage and retrieval systems (AS/RS) to further streamline pallet handling in the warehouse, O’Connor explains.
Autonomous guided vehicles (AGVs) and autonomous mobile robots (AMRs), which are used to transport pallets within the warehouse. Often outfitted with lift decks or conveyors, or designed to tug or tow items, these robots move pallets from point A to B within a facility. AGVs, which often follow a marked guide-path or wire in the floor, have been around for many years, but the advent of high-performance guidance and vision systems is allowing them more flexibility today, O’Connor says. AMRs are self-guided vehicles that use software and sensors to navigate their way through the warehouse.
Forklift AGVs and AMRs, which can move products both horizontally, from place to place, and vertically, into and out of storage racks. They come in various styles—including stackers, counterbalanced trucks, reach trucks, and even very narrow aisle (VNA) vehicles for use in densely packed warehouses. These vehicles are more complex than those used only for horizontal transport, O’Connor explains. They must be “highly integrated” into the facility’s warehouse management system (WMS) or warehouse execution system (WES) so that they know precisely where to retrieve and deliver pallets within the facility.
Robotic pallet shuttles, which move pallets into, out of, and within dense storage racking. The Raymond Corp. describes such a system as “a standalone, automated deep-lane pallet storage system that utilizes self-powered shuttle carriages to move pallets toward the back or front in a racking channel. Shuttles are motor driven and travel along rails within a storage lane.”
O’Connor and others say that no matter which of these technologies you’re investing in, it’s important to remember that they are all part of a larger system designed to optimize operations throughout the warehouse.
“The expanding role of all these different styles working together is what’s amazing today,” O’Connor says.
SECOND, ENSURE THE TECHNOLOGY IS A FIT
Kivenko, of Vecna, also emphasizes the importance of pallet-handling robots working in concert, particularly AMRs and AGVs.
“The magic isn’t just that the robots are autonomous and driving by themselves. The magic is multiple robots—when you have a [whole integrated] system [in place],” he says. “[It’s] how the fleet operates autonomously and optimizes itself for continuous improvement. That’s where the exponential gains are. [It’s] not just about automating what a worker does; it’s about automating a system.”
But you can’t install these systems in just any warehouse and expect magic. Kivenko and others point to certain conditions that enable the best robotic pallet-handling outcomes, especially when it comes to transportation-based and forklift-type AMRs and AGVs.
“The robots that I sell are large-load machines with very expensive technology,” Kivenko explains. “They move material, generally, in larger facilities. And in order for them to produce a return [on investment]—because that’s the name of the game here—they have to be higher-velocity facilities.”
He says pallet-handling robots work best in large facilities running multiple shifts, usually more than five days a week. Wider aisles allow the equipment to move more freely through the facility and at higher speeds, to optimize efficiency and productivity. Strong Wi-Fi networks and clean, dry environments also help keep equipment running at top performance.
O’Connor agrees that pallet-handling robots are best suited to facilities with multishift operations, where they can ease labor constraints and boost productivity. And he says many customers are willing to extend the typical two- to three-year ROI period to five years in order to achieve those gains. But there is even more to it than that. O’Connor’s colleague John Rosenberger says customers must first step back and analyze their processes to ensure that, even if they have the right facility for pallet-handling AMRs or AGVs, they are moving material in the most efficient way to begin with.
“Many times, we find that the processes in place [are inefficient],” says Rosenberger, who is director of iWarehouse Gateway and global telematics for The Raymond Corp. He emphasizes the importance of analyzing existing data—from an equipment telematics system or similar—to determine the best path toward automation.
“Do you have congestion zones now?” he asks. “They’ll still exist if you automate [those processes exactly].”
THIRD, MAKE SIMPLICITY A PRIORITY
Another basic rule of thumb when implementing pallet-handling robotics: Keep it simple.
Andy Lockhart, director of strategic engagement for global warehouse and logistics process automation company Vanderlande, says that when designing a pallet-handling robotics system, “you want to minimize the processes you [automate]. When you can create [an automated system] that focuses on one task—for example, AMRs delivering pallets from a high-bay [storage rack] directly to the palletizing cell—you can do that efficiently and effectively. When you ask the AMR to do this and this and this … you are adding risk of failure.”
Lockhart’s colleague Jake Heldenberg advises customers to first test their target processes via pilot programs within the warehouse or DC. Heldenberg is Vanderlande’s head of solution design, warehousing, North America.
“If AGVs or AMRs for pallet handling are interesting [to a customer], the best thing to do is pilot one or two in an existing DC,” he says, explaining that the process can help companies troubleshoot, understand integration timelines, and gauge ROI. But pilot programs can add expense to a project, making it unaffordable for some.
“If that’s the case, then the best advice is work with a vendor who has experience integrating [the technology],” Heldenberg says. “Use their experience to benefit your business. You won’t have the same hiccups and challenges you would with a less-experienced vendor.”
Mega-retailer Amazon says its newest fulfillment center, located in Shreveport, Louisiana, uses 10 times more robots than previous warehouse designs, and relies on artificial intelligence (AI) to direct the eight different models deployed in its bustling operation.
“Over the years, we’ve built and scaled the world’s largest fleet of industrial robotics that ease tasks for employees and improve operational safety while creating hundreds of thousands of new jobs along the way,” the company said in a blog post Wednesday. “For the first time, we have introduced technology solutions in all key production areas at the site, meaning our employees will work alongside our growing fleet of robotic systems seamlessly in a way that wasn’t possible until now.”
The Shreveport site spans five floors and more than 3 million square feet—equivalent to 55 football fields—making it one of Amazon's largest sites. It will employ 2,500 employees once it’s fully ramped up.
The technology at the center of the huge building is called Sequoia, a “multilevel containerized inventory system” that can hold more than 30 million items, making it five times bigger than Amazon’s first deployment of that system in Houston, Texas.
As inventory and packages move through the facility, Robin, Cardinal, and Sparrow—an AI-powered trio of robotic arms—sort, stack, and consolidate millions of items and customer orders. The latest version of Sparrow uses computer vision and AI systems that give it the versatility to handle over 200 million unique products of all different shapes, sizes, and weights.
And Proteus, which Amazon calls its “first fully autonomous mobile robot,” navigates carts of packages to the site’s outbound dock so they can be loaded into trucks, while safely moving around employees in open spaces. The remaining three robot models include larger AMRs called Hercules and Titan and a packaging automation system that creates custom-sized packages to fit each order’s dimensions.
Although the increased automation allows the facility to handle more orders than older sites, Amazon insists it is not replacing workers’ jobs. “As we deploy this new generation of robotics across our network, we expect our headcount to continue to grow and we’re really excited by how this technology also creates more opportunities for skilled jobs. In fact, our next-generation fulfillment centers and sites with advanced robotics will require 30% more employees in reliability, maintenance, and engineering roles,” the company said.
According to Amazon, it trains workers for skilled jobs by helping them earn certifications through a corporate “Career Choice program” and a “mechatronics and robotics apprenticeship” that provides hourly wages up to 40% higher than entry-level roles.
The British logistics robot vendor Dexory this week said it has raised $80 million in venture funding to support an expansion of its artificial intelligence (AI) powered features, grow its global team, and accelerate the deployment of its autonomous robots.
A “significant focus” continues to be on expanding across the U.S. market, where Dexory is live with customers in seven states and last month opened a U.S. headquarters in Nashville. The Series B will also enhance development and production facilities at its UK headquarters, the firm said.
The “series B” funding round was led by DTCP, with participation from Latitude Ventures, Wave-X and Bootstrap Europe, along with existing investors Atomico, Lakestar, Capnamic, and several angels from the logistics industry. With the close of the round, Dexory has now raised $120 million over the past three years.
Dexory says its product, DexoryView, provides real-time visibility across warehouses of any size through its autonomous mobile robots and AI. The rolling bots use sensor and image data and continuous data collection to perform rapid warehouse scans and create digital twins of warehouse spaces, allowing for optimized performance and future scenario simulations.
In 2021, DC Velocity reported on a proposed California state regulation that would require most forklift fleets to switch to zero-emission (ZE) trucks over a period of years. Three years later, in a public hearing on June 27, 2024, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) unanimously approved a revised version of that proposal. The regulation will require most fleets to phase in ZE forklifts between 2028 and 2038. Restrictions on the purchase and sale of certain new forklifts with internal combustion (IC) engines kick in much earlier, in 2026.
The forklift mandate is designed to comply with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Executive Order N-79-20, which requires off-road vehicle fleets in California to transition to zero-emission models by 2035 “where feasible.” The 70-page regulation approved in June applies to certain categories of large spark ignition (LSI) forklifts fueled by propane, natural gas, or gasoline (diesel-powered forklifts are exempt). They include all Class IV forklifts, and Class V forklifts with a rated capacity of 12,000 pounds or less. CARB estimates that some 89,000 LSI forklifts will be phased out under the new rule.
The regulation includes some exemptions, deadline extensions, and limitations aimed at mitigating its short-term impact on fleet costs and productivity. But while support for the ultimate goal—reducing greenhouse gas emissions and associated health hazards for California residents—is widespread, forklift makers, dealers, end-users, and fuel suppliers remain worried about the mandate’s consequences for their businesses.
A COMPLICATED TIMELINE
A detailed timeline for phasing out the targeted forklifts can be found in the transcript of CARB’s presentation at the public hearing, but the following summarizes the most important dates:
Beginning in 2026, manufacturers cannot make or sell targeted categories of LSI forklifts in California, and end-users cannot purchase or lease them. There are some exceptions: For instance, dealers and manufacturers may sell model year (MY) 2025 inventory through the end of 2026; they can sell MY 2026, 2027, and 2028 Class V trucks to rental agencies; and they can sell LSI models to customers whose trucks have been exempted or who have obtained a deadline extension from CARB.
From Jan. 1, 2028, through Dec. 31, 2037, existing targeted forklifts must be phased out by model year and can be replaced only with zero-emission equipment. According to CARB staff, no forklift will have to be phased out before it is at least 10 years old. The compliance deadlines are staggered based on fleet size, truck class, capacity, and application:
For large fleets (more than 25 forklifts, including ZE trucks), phaseout of Class IV trucks with capacity ratings of 12,000 pounds or less begins in 2028 for MY 2018 and older. Additional deadlines based on model year occur in 2031, 2033, and 2035. For small fleets (25 forklifts or less) and trucks used in agricultural crop preparation, the deadlines run from 2029 to 2038. Phaseout of Class IV forklifts with capacities exceeding 12,000 pounds begins in 2035 for large fleets and in 2038 for small fleets and crop-prep applications.
For all fleets, Class V trucks rated for 12,000 pounds or less begin phaseout in 2030 for MY 2017 and older. Additional deadlines based on model year are 2033, 2035, and 2038; the 2038 deadline also applies to rental agencies for some model years. The required phaseout does not apply to Class V forklifts rated for 12,000 pounds and above, but fleets that voluntarily replace them with electrics of the same or greater capacity may postpone the replacement of an equal number of other LSI forklifts until 2038.
To limit the financial impact on end-users, the required turnover of targeted LSI forklifts on the first compliance date only is capped: for large fleets, at 50% of their total number of targeted trucks, and for small fleets and trucks used in crop prep, at 25%.
The rule includes several exemptions in addition to that for diesel-powered models. Businesses can run low-use trucks (those operated for fewer than 200 hours per year) until 2030, and a “microbusiness” can keep one low-use forklift indefinitely. Dedicated emergency equipment and forklifts being held for out-of-state delivery are also exempt. Importantly for California’s agriculture-heavy economy, CARB set exemptions for in-field use for agriculture and forestry, where building a charging infrastructure generally isn’t feasible.
Fleets may apply for a deadline extension if they encounter “significant delays” in the delivery of ZE forklifts, in electrical infrastructure construction or upgrades, or in site electrification, or because no ZE forklifts currently available can meet their needs. In the last-mentioned case, an LSI truck that has reached the end of its useful life well before its phaseout date may be replaced with a newer LSI model, which then inherits the older forklift’s phaseout date. The onus is on fleets to apply for and justify exemptions and extensions, most of which must be renewed annually. If circumstances have changed—for example, if new ZE models could meet an end-user’s performance requirements—then the exemption would not be renewed.
STAKEHOLDERS AIR THEIR CONCERNS
Over the past three years, CARB sought stakeholders’ input through public workshops; meetings with fleet operators, forklift manufacturers and dealers, rental agencies, fuel providers, and related industry groups; and site visits. In addition, two rounds of public comments elicited hundreds of submissions.
Among the groups providing ongoing feedback was the Industrial Truck Association (ITA), which represents industrial truck manufacturers and suppliers of parts and accessories in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. In a series of discussions with CARB staff and in written public comments, ITA focused on five major problem areas, according to ITA President Brian Feehan. The group’s key points can be summarized as follows:
1. The organization asked CARB to replace the model year-based ban on sales and phaseouts with a more flexible “fleet average” approach that would allow fleet owners to determine how best to reduce emissions over time and to decide which trucks to eliminate when.
2. Late in the regulatory process, CARB had asserted that electric forklifts can replace Class IV (cushion-tire) trucks with capacities above 12,000 pounds. ITA disagreed, arguing that those forklifts should be excluded because very few or no viable electric substitutes exist for many of the applications where they are used.
3. The proposed rule said no new LSI trucks of any model year could be sold in California after Jan. 1, 2026, which would potentially leave dealers with unsold prior-model-year inventory.
4. OEMs will be required to annually report detailed information for each LSI forklift sold into the state. ITA said that would unnecessarily duplicate much of the information CARB already receives from forklift dealers and fleet operators.
5. ITA and other industry groups argued that a provision prohibiting end-users from purchasing a diesel forklift to replace an LSI truck was illegal because it in effect regulated diesel forklift emissions—something the federal Clean Air Act prohibits states from doing.
At the June 27 board meeting, meanwhile, fleet operators said the rule would add excessive cost because two to three high-priced electrics would be needed to replace each LSI model eliminated. They also questioned the feasibility of providing battery charging infrastructure on construction sites and in agricultural fields, and whether utilities will be able to meet demand for increased capacity. Agriculture and small-business representatives asked for more generous caps on the percentage of trucks that must be replaced by the first compliance deadline, or for caps to apply to every compliance deadline, not just the first one.
Providers of propane fuel—most of them family-owned small and medium-sized companies—were vocal, well-organized, and passionate. They warned of job losses and potentially having to close their businesses altogether. They reiterated their longstanding argument that propane is a low-emission fuel, and therefore propane-powered forklifts should be considered “part of the solution, not the problem.” Following the board’s decision to approve the regulation, the Western Propane Gas Association (WPGA) issued a statement slamming it as “costly, infeasible, and flawed.” WPGA charged that CARB’s estimates of the number of forklifts and businesses that would be affected—as well as its estimates of the costs of adding electrical infrastructure and replacing existing equipment—are too low. The group is instead supporting an alternative proposal that it says will meet the state’s air-quality goals with less disruption and expense.
CARB RESPONDS
During the public hearing, CARB’s staff pushed back at some of those criticisms. First, they said, the propane industry’s estimate of the number of affected forklifts relies on an incorrect methodology and is much too high. Staffers and two of the board members also said that, in their view, enough high-performance, battery-powered forklifts are now on the market that replacements are technically feasible for most applications. And they calculated that over the long term, the total cost of ownership for electric models will be lower than for their lower-priced IC counterparts.
CARB staff further reminded attendees that the exemptions and deadline extensions built into the final regulation were designed to address some of the very concerns being raised in the meeting. While that is true, nobody got everything they asked for. For example, CARB agreed that dealers could sell MY 2025 forklifts through Dec. 31, 2026, but it rejected ITA’s “fleet average” concept and denied ITA’s request to exclude Class IV trucks with capacities over 12,000 pounds. The agency dropped its prohibition against replacing LSI trucks with diesel-powered models but retained a requirement that fleet operators and rental agencies report that activity.
GET READY FOR THE FUTURE
The approved regulation will now move through state and then federal administrative and legal checks. Because the regulation relates to emissions from off-road vehicles, which are covered by the preemption provisions of the federal Clean Air Act, CARB must seek authorization from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to fully implement the rule. Without that authorization, California will not be able to enforce the law. While authorization is likely, the timing is uncertain—meaning it’s possible the regulation could become effective but not yet enforceable.
Once the regulation is in force, almost everyone who touches a forklift in California will be affected in some way. Many fleet operators’ costs, and potentially their productivity, will change as they replace their LSI forklifts with a larger number of electrics and retrain their employees on the new equipment. The small and medium-sized businesses that make up much of the propane service industry may have to find new markets to replace forklift customers. Battery makers and distributors will profit from increased demand for their products.
Industrial truck manufacturers and dealers, meanwhile, will need to prepare for a decline in the number of LSI trucks sold and concurrent growth in demand for ZE trucks. While there are bound to be some costly burdens—they might, for example, have to move inventory out of California, revise the product mix on production lines and in showrooms, and retrain employees—they say they are up to the challenge.
One such company is Mitsubishi Logisnext Americas, which encompasses five brands serving a wide range of applications: Mitsubishi forklift trucks, Cat lift trucks, Rocla AGV Solutions, UniCarriers Forklifts, and Jungheinrichwarehouse and automation products. Some of those brands will be impacted more than others. Mitsubishi and Cat, for instance, are widely known for their heavy-duty, IC engine models favored by industries like construction, lumber, and manufacturing. Both brands have developed rugged, heavy-duty electrics that are already in service. “We have worked closely with our Cat lift truck and Mitsubishi forklift truck customers to transition their fleets to electric trucks,” says Mike Brown, director of energy solutions. “While the applications they serve and the loads that they are handling may not be changing, these customers do need to contend with significant changes in how they power their fleets.”
Brown expressed confidence that zero-emission equipment will increasingly be able to handle difficult jobs. “Options do exist in the market and will continue to expand to include features and performance historically reserved only for engine-powered trucks,” he notes, “but it will take some time before the industry can meet the full range of requirements for these tougher applications.” As part of that evolution, forklift providers, customers, and utilities will have to work together to ensure sufficient power capacity is available when and where needed, he adds.
On the dealer side, there’s Raymond West, which operates Raymond Corp. Solutions and Support Centers in California and several other Western states plus Alaska. Vice President of Sales Juan Flores believes the new regulation could have a “very positive” sales and revenue impact in California, especially for Class I electrics.
Raymond West sells and services electric forklifts exclusively, but it currently supports the conveyors, racking, and automated systems for some customers that have LSI trucks in their fleets. Flores says his company is well-positioned to help them make a successful transition to ZE forklifts. “We … can analyze current fuel consumption and then simulate the electric equipment fuel sources that support the application’s energy requirements,” he says. Power studies can generate the data needed to make decisions about which path to take. A dealer, he continues, may be able to demonstrate that the total cost for electrics and associated technology, combined with the reduction in equipment maintenance, is actually lower than for LSI forklifts. And dealers can go “beyond the forklift,” such as by recommending renewable energy sources in the warehouse to mitigate any increased demand on the grid or by helping eligible customers take advantage of carbon and energy credits.
Implementation of CARB’s forklift mandate is just a couple years away. For fleet managers wondering how to comply without breaking the bank, collaborating now with forklift dealers and OEMs who can help them understand the regulations, plan for change, and manage their fleets for compliance may be the smartest move they can make.
“Unrelenting labor shortages and wage inflation, accompanied by increasing consumer demand, are driving rapid market adoption of autonomous technologies in manufacturing, warehousing, and logistics,” Seegrid CEO and President Joe Pajer said in a release. “This is particularly true in the area of palletized material flows; areas that are addressed by Seegrid’s autonomous tow tractors and lift trucks. This segment of the market is just now ‘coming into its own,’ and Seegrid is a clear leader.”
According to Pajer, Seegrid’s strength in the sector is due to several new technologies it has released in the past six months. They include: Sliding Scale Autonomy, which provides both flexibility and predictability in autonomous navigation and manipulation; Enhanced Pallet and Payload Detection, which enables reliable recognition and manipulation of a broad range of payloads; and the planned launch of its CR1 autonomous lift truck model later this year.
Seegrid’s CR1 unit offers a 15-foot lift height, 4,000-pound load capacity, and a top speed of 5 mph. In comparison, its existing autonomous lift truck model, the RS1, supports six-foot lift height, 3,500 pound capacity, and the same top speed.
The “series D” investment round was funded by existing lead investors Giant Eagle Incorporated and G2 Venture Partners, as well as smaller investments from other existing shareholders.