Featured President wants to replace government fleet with EV's.

Harder to gather revenue without a functioning postal system, never mind what that loss would do to commerce itself.

 

Funny how when it comes to government services we all depend on it's too expensive... But when it comes to tax cuts for billionaires that make them way richer, or bailing out Wall Street when they profit off of investments tanking, or spending more than the rest of the world combined on a military that murders, destroys and occupies foreign countries in the name of "fighting for our freedom" to again make a small number of billionaires richer, there never seems to be any limit to how much money we can spend and not one person stops it because "we can't afford it."

Point being the long term savings in no longer buying gasoline, combined with the savings in a reduction of climate change related natural disaster makes $24 Billion pennies on the dollar compared to what we're currently spending on an outdated 15mpg fleet and an out of control greenhouse effect.

 

The USPS should begin by buying a few hundred modified golf carts and deploy them in a few ideal locations (good weather and low daily range) just to set a baseline for costs.

Mike

 

GASP. Are you saying that the meat ax that Trump took to the Postal Service might have been a bad idea ????
Surely not.

 

The article at USPS Long Life Vehicle | Clean Fleet Report has some really good information about the LLV.
One of the reasons to upgrade is that the LLV is really bare bones. No AC. No airbags. No modern safety equipment like backup cameras.


One of the most interesting (to me) was the test conditions that were used in approval of Gruman as the provider of the LLV.
Imagine: 960 miles of driving over cobblestones. 11,000 miles of gravel at 30 mph. 2880 miles of stopping every 250 feet.

https://www.greatbusinessschools.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/USPS-LLVs.jpg

 

Going back to the title of this discussion. The President can have agencies under his purview favor plug in models when the time comes to replace cars currently in the fleet. The majority are just the same models you can get from the local dealer, and not some speciality vehicle. The additional procurement costs for the plug in and local charger could likely be met within a site's budget. The obstacle is more a lack of choices in plug ins; more so if you want to limit it to domestic brands or content.

Biden can call for EVs for the USPS, but they aren't under is control. Their quasi-separate nature means Congressional involvement.

One of the companies with a truck applicant is a descendant of Grumman, but keeping the old platform simply isn't going to work far many of the same reasons Ford let the small Ranger finally die in 2011. The LLV simply won't meet current safety standards, and a new design would be cheaper than trying to retrofit the current one. Then there is the fact that the LLV isn't being made anymore for a conversion to be added during production. Another factor is that the USPS is looking for a bigger truck for the replacement. They are delivering more boxes now, so need more space in the truck.

Grumman did make an EV mail truck at one time.
KurbWatt - Wikipedia

 

Usps should get Jeep Wrangler 4xE

SM-N986U1 ?

 

They'd be MUCH better off with them than trying to re-invent/invent an LLV-e

This whole thing kinda reminds me of Lucy Van Pelt and the football.


Dot.gov has a nearly 100-percent perfect record of financial irresponsibility when it comes to forecasting how much it will cost to DO something, and an equally spotty record when it comes to the efficacy of a procurement....
A person or agency's myopia is strongly related to their belief, however sincere, that "their" programme is the wise path forward.


UNfortunately, this is not limited something as mundane as the G-cars that everybody with a CAC card are so familiar with, or the lumbering mail-trucks that city folk are used to seeing. The USAF has the F35. My own beloved Navy has the LCS program.
In each......ESPECIALLY the LCS project, which is even WORSE than the F35 fiasco, a combination of over-spending and a reliance on immature technology led to buying something that under-performs, AT BEST....at a beyond premium cost.


I drive a fleet vehicle.

Every working day, and for a while my beloved company spent large coin on hybrids, some FCEVs, and (I'm told) even some very few BEVs.

Now?
They're doing what all of the OTHER smart companies do - which is to lease when and where they can, and use LOW COST, US sourced rides for vehicles that are not well suited for leasing which accounts for all of the small "Hello-Kitty" vans that you see.
Canada does that with THEIR postal system.
Seems to me that a "smart" government would use leased vehicles for some applications and buy when and where they have to with a life cycle focused on being wise stewards of the money that they tax us for.........for once.

"Science and data."

Somebody used that to "prove" that the F35.....or the LCS programmes were the "smart way to go"
-oops.

Littoral combat ship - Wikipedia

 

Mandates more mandates. I can't wait for the articles about how BEV's are flying off the shelves. I have trouble seeing how driving around with 2000-lbs lithium and cobalt etc is net better. I like hybrids. If it is correct this {Mail) is superior niche where BEV saves resources, then further mandates over what we already have is not needed. It's just BEV makers want mandates to force sales of their product. Like corn ethanol mandates to me. with questionable net positive.

 

ETC(SS)

Enjoyed your comments in post #28. My brief experience as a Repairman for 6 years in the Air Force acquainted me with how the Government does business and the cost of it. Some of the regulations on who and how you must do business with cause cost to skyrocket.

I don't know if it is anyone's fault. When entities get so large as the Federal Government oversight and Management become extraordinary hard.

Many suggest competent privatization is the way to go. These companies will find ways to optimize service and business for economics and customer satisfaction.

Tesla has proven that they can do space missions equally if not better than the Government can with better results and better economics.

I wonder if we would turn UPS, FedEX, and Amazon as well as a few others loose on the Postal Markets with Post Master General oversight in select areas to make their case to take over mail delivery and compete for the contract, what the results might be

 

It's a multi-faceted problem....
With military procurement, it's decentralized production touching as many congressional districts as possible, which is why you have some of the LCS ships being built in places like Wisconsin, and pieces/parts of the F35 being built in, literally, dozens and dozens of districts.

The USPS has the additional (liability?) ....er.....characteristic that they're a union shop.
One of the reasons that getting shanked over the cost of an LLV-e MIGHT be "statistically" cheaper is that you wouldn't be paying union mechanics six figures a year to beat and bang on outdated products from the Grumman Iron Works.

Agencies like the USPS, and the USCG, are 'shape-shifters.'
The USPS IS a government entity....until it's not.
And...it's NOT........until it is.
They weave a fantastically complicated tapestry of half-truths, obfuscation, and out and out falsehoods when it comes to "statistical analysis" which is why you have "fun facts" with the USPS that either include - or do NOT include things like contractors and POVs or privately owned vehicles.
I know (and THEY know) that you actually have to burn a few lumens of brain energy to suss all this out and get your head all the way around it.....but my comparisons of a new LLV-e with the Navy's LCS really do complement each other.

Think about it.
A government agency needs to replace a vehicle originally procured in large volume, in the 1970s, with something newer and more capable, Sorta like: The Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigate needed to be replaced.
AND....this new vehicle needs to fit a changing mission brought about by a new global climate.
Maybe even throw in some new drive train components that will be bio-fuel friendly (this was before JP was greened-up.)

Fun Fact:
There are still 30-something "Fig-7's" in service because, as it turns out, our trash is somebody's treasure!

So....you do what smart people do, which is to fund some studies and build some prototypes.
USS Freedom (LCS-1) - Wikipedia
USS Independence (LCS-2) - Wikipedia

Then?
You have an honest competition between them to see which one is better.
IF the "competition" is rotten and rigged, you wind up picking the lesser capable and more expensive of the two.....sorta like the USAF did with the F35........because it was "prettier" than the F32....but they BOTH at least fly and shoot---MOST of the time........ right?

However.....(comma!!!)
The Navy wasn't quite that smart.
AND they have to prostrate themselves before Congress Critters.....who control their budgets.
SO......
Instead of getting stuck with the lesser of two platforms that were "almost" mission capable.....the Navy chose to buy and build BOTH of them in 2010, and because of the vagaries of government procurement funding ......YOU, the humble taxpayer have already bought and crewed 20 of them and have paid for 18-20 MORE of them.

These boats are so bad that the USN is already planning on decommissioning the first 4 - the youngest of which was commissioned in 2015!!!
AND YES.......they're still building them.




LLV-e?
Heeeeere's your sign.....

 

here in the OC soCal, you go in for servicing your car, & often see the sheriff's vehicles up on a rack. No reason the feds couldn't do similarly. Outsourcing is the new norm.
.

 

Even behind the Tinsel Curtain, they have to make some passing attempt to be "statistically" fiscally sound.

This is because they cannot print their own money, and the bond market has not collapsed yet.

 

While the governments record on millitary purchases is truly bad, the last bid for these postal vehicles (pv) erred on the side of lower cost for vehicles that get more and more expensive as years go by. Each pv only cost $12,000 ($26,000 adjusted for inflation) but now costs over $3000/year to maintain.

I'm not sure about the infographic above but it includes this information
USPS Long Life Vehicle | Clean Fleet Report

Delivery vehicles are specialty vehicles and with this large of an order you can get things cheaper. No reason for a 300 mile battery when 98% only need a 100 mile battery or less. you don't need back seats. you do need easy to access storage. Rivian, GM, Ford, Dymler, etc are all investing heavily to build design and build delivery vehicles. Compared to many government programs that spend millions of dollars for each job created, granting a contract to domestic manufacturers will likely have a big multiplier effect.

Remember maintenance costs and labor are extremely high for the current fleet. Retraining some of the current mechanics instead of laying off all of them makes sense. One big reason to go BEV is maintenance will be much lower than the current 30 year old vehicles. The bulk of maintenance is going to be on repairs after crashes and brakes and tires, you know the things these mechanics already do.

 

The government already does this for many fleet cars. The USPS might even do so for some remote locations. But we aren't talking about a few dozen cars with the bulk of the USPS fleet, but hundreds to thousands being supported be a service facility. the maintenance costs of the LLV's comes from the fact that they are being used past their expected lifespan. Throwing parts at an old car gets expensive, and some parts may not be in mass production anymore. It uses a 3 speed automatic without overdrive for Glob's sake.

Going to contractors could save some money, but it generally comes by cutting pay and benefits to the individual workers, with a middle man eating the savings for profit.

And outsourcing isn't new at all. It's how China got so powerful.

Unless they could choose those select areas, none of those companies would chose to participate. They are profitable by not servicing routes that would lose them money. The USPS is already carrying many of their packages the 'last mile', because it is cheaper for them. A mail system that services the entire country isn't possible when profit is the priority, and a mail system that reaches everyone is needed for a healthy country and economy.

Government can do things the business world can't, because it isn't beholden to profit. If left to the private sector, the countryside would still be without electric power; the government is still helping with that cost through the Farm Bills. Spending on research hasn't changed much with the feds cutting back, but it has shifted from basic to development. Companies can profit from developing an idea for the market, but without the basic research that government was paying for, there will be less ideas to develop in the future.

The Model 3 LR battery is under 1500 pounds. I don't know if that includes the structural case or not, but even if not, that is 1500#, minus the weight difference in ditching the ICE drive train for EV, that moves the car over 300 miles. An EV delivery will have worse efficiency on the highway, but will spend the majority of its miles on surface streets. While it would see more daily miles than a typical Model 3, its required range would be far less than 300 miles.

The Kia Niro EV has a 64kWh pack that can provide 239 miles of range. A bigger, heavier truck would get less on the EPA, but that should be plenty for mail truck duty. The battery is just 1008 pounds.

A BEV delivery truck will save resources. Test fleets of converted trucks have shown the potential, and costs for EVs have dropped since then. Amazon has ordered trucks from Rivian, UPS from Arrival, and FedEx has turned to a GM start up. Germany's postal service went so far as to buy StreetScooter back in 2014 when it couldn't find any EV truck for their needs on the market.

These new USPS trucks can be on the road for decades. Calling for a BEV option makes sense in order to have a future proof fleet. The USPS can't simply go out order the truck in their quasi-government state. Calling for a plug in option smacks of a mandate, but it is far less transparent than writing the bid proposal in such a way that a non-plug in would be impossible, say by a really high MPG/e requirement. One of the finalist for the previous contract was a plug-in with Workhorse on the team.

The Ford team one was a Transit van with the doors and bumpers the USPS wanted. It is now available with a mild hybrid in Europe. Fitting it with the hybrid system, with smaller engine, from the F150 is possible. From there, a PHEV is easy. The platform is not ideal for a BEV, but putting an adequate battery between the frame rails will be easier than on a unibody chassis. So a USPS truck with multiple drive train options is possible to do for a reasonable cost.

 

In dot.gov and dot.mil....we call that COTS, or Commercial Off The Shelf.

Right now?
The shelves are bare, and while EVs are gaining in real-world viability, I'm thinking that the USPS would be wise to use a "hybrid" solution....(lease/PHEV purchases, etc) and....FOR ONCE......let the dot.coms pay for all of the developmental costs.
When UPS.....FedEx....Amazon.....et al,.....you know.....PROFITABLE companies(!!) all go all BEV, then maybe Jane and John Q Taxpayer will not get sodomized by cost AND inefficiency.
When an ALL GREEN....ALL THE TIME entity like Amazon stops delivering my packages with U-Haul vans and starts using some of these napkin drawing LLVe rides.......I'll be prepared to mash the "I Believe" button.

I respect it a little more when the EVangelists and the Greens tell me "we gotta" for sincerely held beilefs, like AGW, and economics.
Those beliefs just sound a little more sincerely held when you do not have to lie with the numbers and tell us junk like "if you LIKE your postal vehicles, then you can KEEP your postal vehicles."
Oh.
Wait......wrong lie.

This is exactly why you do NOT want EVangelists to make decisions like this.
You wind up getting most of the disadvantages of staying ICY, and all of the disadvantages of doing a lift-and-lay of one transportation method for another.
If you're using in-house (Unionized) labor to swing wrenches on incredibly simple vehicles (no A/C, air bags, simple drivetrain, sheet medal construction, etc) then much of that $3000 per vehicle-year are being spent on labour, meaning that.....there will be zero dollars saved on at least a significant portion of that $3000 per vehicle-year if you use the same people with the same hammers on whatever LLVe they get their paws on.
I say this from the sad standpoint of having to defend my then-beloved, new Prius from the "Beat and Bang Body shop" back when we were buying cars and servicing them in-house.

A kindler-gentler method would be to institute a hiring freeze and let the vehicle maintenance folks age out, or perhaps be retrained in delivery, electronics, sorting, etc....
Since a ANOTHER significant portion of the vehicle operating costs lie in consumables (breaks/tires, etc) and since these items are fairly straightforward to replace - outsource those and actually BENEFIT some local economies.

You cannot have it both ways.
EVs are either durable and reliable in things like braking (for example) or they're not.
If military contracts that benefit engineers and technicians making six-figures are white collar welfare, corrupting the system with nine-figure political bribes - how much do postal mechanics make, and how much do their unions contribute to politicians?

Me?
I think BEVs ARE the better way forward.........

However (comma) moving forward is best done with both eyes (and nostrils) open and proceeding at a prudent pace.

One of the first things that they teach you about driving ships is that even if you THINK you know where you are....if you can't see where you're going, it's very prudent to SLOW DOWN.

It's an inertia thing.
Sorta like government spending in new product development......

Edit:
@ "future-proof"
yeah......heard that one a LOT in the LCS briefings.
They used it in the F35 program too.....

 

UPS, FedEx, and Amazon are all under contract to buy bev delivery vans for routes that are similar to USPS. UPS has put in an order to Arrival. FedEx put an order to GM's BrightDrop. Amazon is custom designing one with Rivian. Amazon's order is for 100,000 delivery vans. I think these companies should be allowed to bid. DHL/German post office bought a company to make their 30,000 mail vans.

I have had packages delivered by an amazon electric vehicle. It was not the better future custom van that they will buy 100,000 of. There are no good commercially available phev delivery vans that fit the pv. Sorry. You need to actually look at what those profitable companies are doing and not assume that it does not make sense.

The costs went up from $1000/year to over $3000/year because they are working on vehicles past their useful life. There are a lot more government jobs to cut than these. How many times do you rebuild a 1980s era engine and transmission before you replace the vehicle. That is where the maintenance costs come from. I do think postal workers deserve a dependable van with air conditioning and modern safety devices. Its crazy that you are buying into the government cost cutting by keeping obsolete vehicles on the road, and then blaming union labor. Look at the real figures and not your politics. Can you imagine a successful company keeping obsolete vehicles on the road?

These things should have been replaced with hybrids years ago.

 

I see a lot of assertions that the USPS can use the same vehicles that the UPS, Amazon, etc use. I suspect that the requirements are not close to each other. The post office services every single address in the US. In some neighborhoods they use community mailboxes and other have one mailbox per house.

I've watched the UPS, Fedex and Amazon trucks as they deliver to my neighborhood. They often go many blocks without stopping (except for traffic signs/signals) sometimes going for miles. By comparison the post office truck parks several times per block.

Which brings us to the question: What percentage of the energy is recaptured by regenerative braking when a truck with 1 ton of mail accelerates to 15 MPH and comes to a complete stop again after driving only 250 feet? The majority of a postal van's energy will be expended during acceleration. If it can't be recaptured,then the battery will deplete more quickly than expected.

Dan

 

dbstoo you make some good points.

For actual mail delivery a simple vehicle like a retrofitted for the task Prius might work.

For package delivery the Post Office could use another platform.

 

irony - that some may not be able to wrap their head around a company that specializes in profiting from efficient EV transportation (already known to be cleaner then anything burning gas) / especially compared to wasteful fed's notion of economic mail carriers ....... even though that same company (different branch) has already eaten NASA's lunch, big time - due to their ability to transport at a FAR less expensive rate.
.