Fuel efficiency
September 1st 2008 The total cost of operations – how better fuel
efficiency can directly improve your bottom line
says David Bowen sales and service training
manager at Linde Material Handling
While supply chain optimisation
planning takes significant note of
fuel costs on the deep sea
transport of goods, the costs of moving
goods through manufacturing operations,
warehouses and storage yards have been
traditionally overlooked. Too often,
managers base purchase decisions on the
initial equipment cost without taking into
account that over the equipment's lifetime,
the total cost of operating a forklift truck
varies considerably between manufacturers.
Independent tests have shown that the
differences in fuel consumption alone
between two of the leading forklift
manufacturers can be over 30%. Based on
a standard operating environment, this
translates to over 1 litre of extra fuel per
hour. In times of high energy prices the
difference between one manufacturer and
another can therefore amount to thousands
of pounds per year in fuel costs.
"Whether materials handling specifiers
choose diesel, gas or electric powered
trucks, improved operational efficiency and
performance will generate significant cost
savings, lower emissions, less noise, and
reduced wear and tear on the engines,"
explains David Bowen sales and service
training manager at Linde Material Handling.
Linde is one forklift manufacturer that
has invested heavily in developing new
technology to improve fuel efficiency and
reduce maintenance costs. One of the key
features on all the company's fork lift
trucks is the Hydrostatic Transmission
system. By directing power through a
hydraulic pump directly into hydraulic
motors, Linde has eliminated the need for
a clutch, gearbox and
differential. In so doing, the
company has eliminated
many components that
traditionally require high
maintenance and regular
replacement. As Bowen points
out, "What isn't needed can't
wear out, fail or otherwise cost
money."
Efficiencies that are
achieved with a hydrostatic
transmission include direction
change on the move,
automatic brake performance,
lower engine RPM, controlled
speed over rough ground,
driving without stalling,
millimeter accuracy of
positioning, minimum
wear and a
correspondingly long
life.
Dutch materials
handling magazine
Transport +
Opslag, ran
independent tests
on a number of
leading forklift
manufacturers and
found notable
differences in fuel
consumption between them. Based on a
comparison of 2.5 tonne capacity diesel
trucks, the researchers found that the
Linde 39X series used 3.79 litres of fuel per
hour moving pallets through a standard
operating circuit, compared to 4.07 litres
and 5.07 litres for similar competitive
trucks.
Based on annual operation of 1000
hours, the difference in fuel consumption
between leading manufacturers can
amount to over £1000 per truck. Over the
life of the equipment, this is a major cost
difference and something buyers need to
consider from the outset. Add to this the
maintenance and service costs and the
total cost of operating a forklift clearly
varies significantly between manufacturers.
"If we focus on the overall total cost of
ownership, our hydrostatic trucks are easy
to operate, easy to maintain and they
ensure maximum operating reliability,
productivity, comfort and the best fuel
efficiencies," Bowen explains.
Choosing the right fuel for any given
situation is also key to reducing material
handling costs. At present, the three major
power sources for materials handling
equipment are diesel, LPG and electric.
Traditionally engine trucks have been used
for outside and electric for inside. However
nowadays, the distinction is much more
blurred.
More efficient battery cells and chargers
can help companies cut costs and carbon
emissions without sacrificing performance.
Some of the newest batteries provide over
25% more power than previously and have
a longer operating life. Newer designs of
charger also consume less energy during
the charging process.
Hybrid vehicles, employing diesel
engines in addition to electric motors, are
a good option for obtaining long-term cost
savings and environmental improvements.
While the initial cost is obviously more
than a standard truck, by combining
internal combustion and electrical
technologies, fuel consumption can be
reduced by up to 25%. A further
advantage is that emissions are
significantly reduced and performance
potential is increased.
Other alternatives for cost efficient and
environmentally friendly materials handling
equipment include hydrogen fuel cells and
direct injection hydrogen internal
combustion engines. Both systems are
currently under development and
prototypes were exhibited recently at the
CeMat 2008 intralogistics fair in Hannover.
However the primary barrier to
hydrogen fuel today is cost. There is a lack
of an economically priced supply of
hydrogen gas or fuel cells – fuel cells are
approximately 4 times more expensive
than traditional lead acid batteries.
Exactly when manufacturers will launch
the first commercial hydrogen powered
product is difficult to determine. Linde
Material Handling believes that hydrogenpowered
trucks could be economically
viable from 2015. Until then, the company
says it will continue to conduct thorough
research, develop further enhancements
and complete comprehensive truck field
tests.
Until these alternative technologies
become more widely accessible, the
emphasis is on making the most out of the
fuel sources in use today. As energy prices
show no sign of dropping, the cost of
moving goods will continue to increase
and manufacturers must pay closer
attention to the long-term costs associated
with their materials handling fleet. Put
simply, increased fuel efficiency leads to
increased profits. More articles from Linde Material Handling (UK) Ltd: | 
