A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels for heavy-duty vehicles
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0798-6418
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3278-6488
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-0415
Abstract Despite the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) being one of the promising measures to reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, AFVs still represent a very small share in the heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) sector. Understanding HDV fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels is critical to developing effective demand-side strategies to facilitate wider and more rapid adoption of heavy-duty AFVs. This study explored California HDV fleet operator perspectives on viable alternative fuel options in the next 10–20 years, along with motivators for, and barriers to, such adoption. Eighteen in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted, after which thematic analysis was employed to analyze the interview data. Electric, hydrogen, compressed natural gas (CNG), and hybrid options were commonly perceived as viable in the 2030s by the participating organizations. Various optimistic aspects were addressed, including advanced technologies and emission reduction benefits (electric/hydrogen), continued fuel commitments due to their fleet or infrastructure investments already made (CNG), and lower complexity in fleet routing along with favorable driver acceptance (hybrid options). However, many concerns and uncertainties were also reported, including functional unsuitability (electric), uncompetitive upfront costs (hydrogen), unready infrastructure, perceived unavailability of vehicles, uncertain return on investment (electric/hydrogen), and unpromising support from state government (CNG). The study findings help fill a key knowledge gap in AFV fleet adoption research regarding HDV fleet operator perspectives, and contribute to developing demand-side strategies to aid the success of AFV diffusion throughout the HDV market.
Highlights Electricity, hydrogen, CNG, and hybrid options were perceived as viable to some extent. Various positive or negative remarks were identified across diverse fuel technologies. Motivators included advancing technologies, emission benefits, and continued commitments. Concerns included functional unsuitability, unready infrastructure, unavailability, and costs. Recommendations were suggested for policymakers seeking to accelerate the adoption.
Fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels for heavy-duty vehicles
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0798-6418
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3278-6488
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-0415
Abstract Despite the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) being one of the promising measures to reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, AFVs still represent a very small share in the heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) sector. Understanding HDV fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels is critical to developing effective demand-side strategies to facilitate wider and more rapid adoption of heavy-duty AFVs. This study explored California HDV fleet operator perspectives on viable alternative fuel options in the next 10–20 years, along with motivators for, and barriers to, such adoption. Eighteen in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted, after which thematic analysis was employed to analyze the interview data. Electric, hydrogen, compressed natural gas (CNG), and hybrid options were commonly perceived as viable in the 2030s by the participating organizations. Various optimistic aspects were addressed, including advanced technologies and emission reduction benefits (electric/hydrogen), continued fuel commitments due to their fleet or infrastructure investments already made (CNG), and lower complexity in fleet routing along with favorable driver acceptance (hybrid options). However, many concerns and uncertainties were also reported, including functional unsuitability (electric), uncompetitive upfront costs (hydrogen), unready infrastructure, perceived unavailability of vehicles, uncertain return on investment (electric/hydrogen), and unpromising support from state government (CNG). The study findings help fill a key knowledge gap in AFV fleet adoption research regarding HDV fleet operator perspectives, and contribute to developing demand-side strategies to aid the success of AFV diffusion throughout the HDV market.
Highlights Electricity, hydrogen, CNG, and hybrid options were perceived as viable to some extent. Various positive or negative remarks were identified across diverse fuel technologies. Motivators included advancing technologies, emission benefits, and continued commitments. Concerns included functional unsuitability, unready infrastructure, unavailability, and costs. Recommendations were suggested for policymakers seeking to accelerate the adoption.
Fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels for heavy-duty vehicles
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0798-6418
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3278-6488
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7881-0415
Abstract Despite the deployment of alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs) being one of the promising measures to reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions, AFVs still represent a very small share in the heavy-duty vehicle (HDV) sector. Understanding HDV fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels is critical to developing effective demand-side strategies to facilitate wider and more rapid adoption of heavy-duty AFVs. This study explored California HDV fleet operator perspectives on viable alternative fuel options in the next 10–20 years, along with motivators for, and barriers to, such adoption. Eighteen in-depth qualitative interviews were conducted, after which thematic analysis was employed to analyze the interview data. Electric, hydrogen, compressed natural gas (CNG), and hybrid options were commonly perceived as viable in the 2030s by the participating organizations. Various optimistic aspects were addressed, including advanced technologies and emission reduction benefits (electric/hydrogen), continued fuel commitments due to their fleet or infrastructure investments already made (CNG), and lower complexity in fleet routing along with favorable driver acceptance (hybrid options). However, many concerns and uncertainties were also reported, including functional unsuitability (electric), uncompetitive upfront costs (hydrogen), unready infrastructure, perceived unavailability of vehicles, uncertain return on investment (electric/hydrogen), and unpromising support from state government (CNG). The study findings help fill a key knowledge gap in AFV fleet adoption research regarding HDV fleet operator perspectives, and contribute to developing demand-side strategies to aid the success of AFV diffusion throughout the HDV market.
Highlights Electricity, hydrogen, CNG, and hybrid options were perceived as viable to some extent. Various positive or negative remarks were identified across diverse fuel technologies. Motivators included advancing technologies, emission benefits, and continued commitments. Concerns included functional unsuitability, unready infrastructure, unavailability, and costs. Recommendations were suggested for policymakers seeking to accelerate the adoption.
Fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels for heavy-duty vehicles
Bae, Youngeun (author) / Rindt, Craig R. (author) / Mitra, Suman Kumar (author) / Ritchie, Stephen G. (author)
Transport Policy ; 149 ; 36-48
2024-01-25
13 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Fleet operator perspectives on alternative fuels for heavy-duty vehicles
| Elsevier | 2024
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2011
Transitional Alternative Fuels and Vehicles Model
| British Library Online Contents | 1997