Print 14 comment(s) - last by GotThumbs.. on Oct 5 at 8:59 AM

The HHVs have 35 percent greater fuel efficiency and 30 percent CO2 reduction compared to conventional diesel-powered vans

UPS made a green effort recently by adopting 40 new hydraulic hybrid vehicles (HHVs) to its fleet in two U.S. cities. 
The new HHVs, which are developed by Freightliner Custom Chassis Corporation (FCCC) and Parker Hannifin Corporation, will be deployed in Baltimore, Maryland and Atlanta, Georgia. Twenty vehicles will be sent to each city. 
The HHVs have 35 percent greater fuel efficiency and 30 percent CO2 reduction compared to conventional diesel-powered vans. The HHVs run on a fuel-efficient diesel combustion engine and an advanced series hydraulic hybrid. The action of braking creates energy, and this energy is stored in the hydraulic high-pressure accumulator. There is an option to turn off the engine and use the energy stored in the accumulator, which can lead to 90 minutes less of engine run time on a trip. 
"Our long-term goal is to minimize our dependence on foreign energy, and one way we will get there is through the deployment of a wide variety of technologies and designs in our fleet," said Mike Britt, UPS director of alternative fuel vehicle engineering. "As early adopters of this technology, we are very pleased with the significant fuel economy and emission reductions that come from the HHVs."
The deployment was partially funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program. UPS employees in Baltimore will receive their HHVs immediately while those in Atlanta will get their vans sometime before the end of 2012. 

Source: UPS

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Why arent all of them hydraulic hybrids?
By quiksilvr on 10/3/2012 9:30:34 PM , Rating: 2
Seems like its win win.

RE: Why arent all of them hydraulic hybrids?
By fredgiblet on 10/3/2012 10:01:35 PM , Rating: 4
Why arent all of them hydraulic hybrids?


By jeffkro on 10/4/2012 12:34:19 AM , Rating: 2
There is always a trial and transition period

RE: Why arent all of them hydraulic hybrids?
By kwrzesien on 10/4/2012 9:11:24 AM , Rating: 2
It is a development effort, they don't have the production capacity to make 1000's yet. When they are ready we will by them.

By kwrzesien on 10/4/2012 9:34:23 AM , Rating: 2
"buy" - or more "procure" to be more precise. These are long term contracts.

RE: Why arent all of them hydraulic hybrids?
By Chemical Chris on 10/4/2012 12:08:14 PM , Rating: 2
Trial period, and it would be silly to replace a vehicle with lots of life left for just a bit more gas mileage. When its time for replacement, or the cost benefit of ditching it after x amount of miles will be made up by fuel savings.
They may also want to try different tech in lots of different ways, to find out what works best

By kwrzesien on 10/4/2012 1:51:14 PM , Rating: 2
We have many different vehicle initiatives underway. Already have a huge CNG fleet and are rolling out LNG heavy trucks from LA to Las Vegas. Also have already rolled-out several fleets of other new technologies like gas-electric hybrids and full electric vehicles. Recently announced was this new plastic truck to save weight and reduce fuel usage:

The key is finding the right usage patterns for these technologies and helping them mature to the point where they make business and financial sense to make a larger rollout.

By GotThumbs on 10/5/2012 8:59:58 AM , Rating: 2
"partially funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Clean Cities program"

How much of this has been funded by US Tax Payers? While I do think it's a great move on UPS's part, I would like to know how much of the costs have been subsidized by the Federal Government.

Why couldn't UPS have done this all on their own? They could have, but Hey, I know any business should/will take advantage if anyone is willing to pay some of their operating costs and its good PR for them.

Makes sense, but still don't like government paying part of the companies bills with borrowed money.

It's like the US Government is taking out loans to pay its CC'd bills. That's a clear indication that we will be approaching the financial cliff soon.

Best wishes,

By espaghetti on 10/3/2012 9:01:44 PM , Rating: 2
Our long-term goal is to minimize our dependence on foreign energy, and one way we will get there is through the deployment of a wide variety of technologies and designs in our fleet

Another way would be to buy "energy" from domestic suppliers.
Oh wait...

RE: Right...
By bcwang on 10/3/2012 11:59:32 PM , Rating: 2
Except that you have to think of it as a global economy.

Even if we purchase soley from Canada and the United States it doesn't always drive the price of oil down, we are already mostly doing just that, reducing our overall consumption makes a much larger effect.

The point of getting away from "foreign" oil is moreso about getting less dependent on oil overall, making a massive impact on economies of countries that are less than friendly.

Atleast in theory it should drive prices down, but when was the last time oil prices followed anything that made sense. The amount of incidents where production that may be shut down by an event, only to not be affected(hurricanes that miss and so on), and then the price never drops back down after the fake event are staggering.

RE: Right...
By espaghetti on 10/5/2012 12:21:12 AM , Rating: 2
The context for my quote was
one way we will get there

I answered ..
Another way would be

I was simply offering "another way". As in they could maybe do both.

Maybe ???
By Beenthere on 10/4/2012 10:18:28 AM , Rating: 2
We'll need to see how the hydraulic system generates 35% better efficiency. The re-gen system sounds like a possible new design if you can run the vehicle for 90 minutes on it. Obviously to actually obtain the benefits the drivers will need to remember to actully use the stored energy each day.

As far as the statement that these vehicles will help: "free us from foreign oil", that is a laughable fallacy. The U.S. is NOT dependent on foreign oil . The U.S. is being held hostage (like all countries), by the oil industry Cabal. Consumers need to pull their heads outta their arses and get educated or continue to be raped by the oil companies.

The U.S. has more accessible crude oil than any other source on the planet but oil companies import oil from the Middle East because it is more profitable. They could sell U.S. oil for $1./gal. and make great profits but since they have a monopoly, they charge $4/gal. because consumers have not fought back.

RE: Maybe ???
By Basilisk on 10/4/2012 4:50:43 PM , Rating: 2
You can't "run the vehicle for 90 minutes on it", but you can reduce engine running time 90 minutes per route in a highly congested, stop and go environment. Note: in my area UPS turns off the engine when they leave the vehicle with each package -- even when I'm walking towards them down the driveway -- so in an urban environment the engine may only run 5 hours per shift.

Only you have said "drivers will need to remember to actully[sic] use the stored energy each day". The accurate statement is that the controlling computer has the option to use stored energy under conditions it deems beneficial, the same as occurs with hybrids like Prius.

These vehicles are only a big win for urban stop-and-go routes as the hydraulic accumulator only captures braking energy -- there's negligible gain for routes with substantial brake-less driving between deliveries. (No, Tiffany, it doesn't "create energy", it translates kinetic energy into potential energy, hydraulically stored.)

UPS has been running these hydraulic-regen trucks for three years, so this batch of 40 trucks is just augmenting its fleet. The first contract for these was signed in 2008 for 2009 and 2010 delivery, so there have been several few years of testing and refinement. I have to infer UPS is only moderately enthusiastic with an order of just 40 unites: UPS has 2600 "low carbon vehicles" [IIRC] and over 100,000 vehicles, which translates to a vehicle replacement rate of ~4000 trucks per year, of which 40 is but 1%.

We -- the US taxpayers, or as Romney would suggest, the 53% who aren't parasites -- paid for the the developmental study and design of these trucks starting in 2004, and partially subsidized their deployment since 2008. If I understand the Romney initiatives, there will be negligible further R&D budget for DoE should he win, and such projects will be enthusiastically absorbed by the Wonderful World of Capitalism. Or, since he wants to increase military spending, maybe dARPA will continue this research which originated with DoD encouragement towards its goal of reducing fuel consumption by military vehicles. Getting OT....

RE: Maybe ???
By Crash11 on 10/5/2012 7:42:19 AM , Rating: 2
You're right, the previous poster is somewhat misinformed, but so are you. This technology has been developed by the EPA, not DoE. Also, the accumulators don't just store braking energy. They allow the engine to be buffered so it can run at steady-state power points for max efficiency.

An average UPS route where this technology is suitable has an engine run-time of about 4 hours a day. With a properly tuned hydraulic drive system that time could be reduced to just 1 hour. Currently Parker's system can only reduce the engine run-time to 2.5 hours, but this is only their first round of control code that has been deemed worthy enough to put on the road.

"My sex life is pretty good" -- Steve Jobs' random musings during the 2010 D8 conference

Most Popular ArticlesSmartphone Screen Protectors – What To Look For
September 21, 2016, 9:33 AM
UN Meeting to Tackle Antimicrobial Resistance
September 21, 2016, 9:52 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM
5 Cases for iPhone 7 and 7 iPhone Plus
September 18, 2016, 10:08 AM
Update: Problem-Free Galaxy Note7s CPSC Approved
September 22, 2016, 5:30 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki