IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/fisisi/285361.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Requirements of German logistics companies for charging battery-electric trucks: Results of a combined survey and interview study

Author

Listed:
  • Scherrer, Aline
  • Helferich, Marvin
  • Speth, Daniel
  • Link, Steffen

Abstract

The electrification of heavy-duty road transport and logistics operations presents a significant challenge in meeting CO2 reduction goals. Despite increasing attention to battery-electric trucks (BETs) as a primary strategy among manufacturers, their market share remains limited in Europe and Germany. Logistics companies, as primary users of heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs), face various challenges such as tight budgets, time constraints, and diverse operational needs, which significantly influence the adoption of BETs. Previous studies have identified general key obstacles including purchase price, charging infrastructure availability, vehicle range, payload limitations, total ownership costs, technology perception, and operational adaptations. However, further investigation is needed to understand company-specific requirements and operations of different logistics segments, especially regarding charging infrastructure limitations. This study employs a mixed methods approach to explore logistic companies' perspectives on charging infrastructure and BET adoption. A survey of German logistics companies, followed by semi-structured interviews, provides insights into current fleet operations, attitudes towards BETs, and motivations for electrification. The survey findings highlight the diverse vehicle types and driving profiles within logistics fleets, with a focus on identifying most readily electrifiable trucks (RETs) based on usage patterns. Analyses of survey data, conducted mainly through descriptive statistics, reveal the complexities of trip planning, on-site charging infrastructure, and public charging implications for BET adoption. Interviews with selected respondents further delve into company characteristics, daily operations, usage intentions, and barriers related to BET adoption and charging infrastructure. The results indicate that the regularity and plannability of trips differs across tour types and distances, impacting the potential integration of BETs in operations. Tour regularity varies greatly for individual vehicles beyond urban applications, impacting the flexibility needed for charging. The longest coherent parking time is predominantly spent on private property, with home depots being more important than client locations. Challenges for establishing and using charging infrastructure include the lack of medium voltage grid connections for fast charging at home depots, heterogeneous conditions at client waiting and loading areas, and uncertainties regarding the availability and operational integration of public charging infrastructure. Companies in the sample operating a large number of RETs also hold the most positive attitudes towards BETs, with some already deploying such vehicles. Factors influencing the engagement of logistics companies in fleet electrification include personal motivations, growing customer demands for decarbonised transport, and regulatory requirements. Methodological limitations of the study include a bias towards large fleets in the sample, limiting extrapolation of findings to the broader market. Key recommendations include addressing barriers to at-home and client location charging to support fleet electrification efforts effectively. The findings provide insights into the operational considerations and motivations driving charging infrastructure deployment and fleet electrification. Furthermore, they offer implications for policymakers and industry stakeholders aiming to accelerate the transition to electric HDVs.

Suggested Citation

  • Scherrer, Aline & Helferich, Marvin & Speth, Daniel & Link, Steffen, 2024. "Requirements of German logistics companies for charging battery-electric trucks: Results of a combined survey and interview study," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S03/2024, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:fisisi:285361
    DOI: 10.24406/publica-2615
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/285361/1/1882989775.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.24406/publica-2615?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hellsmark, Hans & Hansen, Teis, 2020. "A new dawn for (oil) incumbents within the bioeconomy? Trade-offs and lessons for policy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    2. Geels, Frank W. & Kern, Florian & Fuchs, Gerhard & Hinderer, Nele & Kungl, Gregor & Mylan, Josephine & Neukirch, Mario & Wassermann, Sandra, 2016. "The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 896-913.
    3. Kattirtzi, Michael & Ketsopoulou, Ioanna & Watson, Jim, 2021. "Incumbents in transition? The role of the ‘Big Six’ energy companies in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 148(PA).
    4. Joana Ramanauskaitė, 2021. "The Role of Incumbent Actors in Sustainability Transitions: A Case of LITHUANIA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-19, November.
    5. Chun Xia-Bauer & Florin Vondung & Stefan Thomas & Raphael Moser, 2022. "Business Model Innovations for Renewable Energy Prosumer Development in Germany," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-17, June.
    6. McMeekin, Andrew & Geels, Frank W. & Hodson, Mike, 2019. "Mapping the winds of whole system reconfiguration: Analysing low-carbon transformations across production, distribution and consumption in the UK electricity system (1990–2016)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1216-1231.
    7. Andersen, Allan Dahl & Markard, Jochen, 2020. "Multi-technology interaction in socio-technical transitions: How recent dynamics in HVDC technology can inform transition theories," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    8. Anca Gabriela Ilie & Marinela Luminita Emanuela Zlatea & Cristina Negreanu & Dan Dumitriu & Alma Pentescu, 2023. "Reliance on Russian Federation Energy Imports and Renewable Energy in the European Union," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 25(64), pages 780-780, August.
    9. Epicoco, Marianna, 2016. "Patterns of innovation and organizational demography in emerging sustainable fields: An analysis of the chemical sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 427-441.
    10. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    11. Smith, Göran & Hensher, David A., 2020. "Towards a framework for Mobility-as-a-Service policies," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 54-65.
    12. Engwall, Mats & Kaulio, Matti & Karakaya, Emrah & Miterev, Maxim & Berlin, Daniel, 2021. "Experimental networks for business model innovation: A way for incumbents to navigate sustainability transitions?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    13. Geels, Frank W., 2020. "Micro-foundations of the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions: Developing a multi-dimensional model of agency through crossovers between social constructivism, evolutionary economics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    14. Leitch, Aletta & Haley, Brendan & Hastings-Simon, Sara, 2019. "Can the oil and gas sector enable geothermal technologies? Socio-technical opportunities and complementarity failures in Alberta, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 384-395.
    15. Allan Dahl Andersen & Tuukka Mäkitie & Markus Steen & Iris Wanzenböck, 2024. "Integrating industrial transformation and sustainability transitions research through a multi-sectoral perspective," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20240206, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    16. Rosenbloom, Daniel & Berton, Harris & Meadowcroft, James, 2016. "Framing the sun: A discursive approach to understanding multi-dimensional interactions within socio-technical transitions through the case of solar electricity in Ontario, Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1275-1290.
    17. Magnusson, Thomas & Berggren, Christian, 2018. "Competing innovation systems and the need for redeployment in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 217-230.
    18. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    19. Lenfle, Sylvain & Söderlund, Jonas, 2022. "Project-oriented agency and regeneration in socio-technical transition: Insights from the case of numerical weather prediction (1978–2015)," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    20. Novalia, Wikke & McGrail, Stephen & Rogers, Briony C. & Raven, Rob & Brown, Rebekah R. & Loorbach, Derk, 2022. "Exploring the interplay between technological decline and deinstitutionalisation in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:fisisi:285361. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isfhgde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.