RHA the voice of the industry - Geoff Dunning
With growing concern about climate change – despite doubts in some quarters as to man’s impact – the haulage industry is under pressure to address its carbon footprint.
Fair enough, everyone must play their part, but I am concerned that the poor truck is being singled out as the villain, when much more can and should be done in other areas of UK PLC’s supply chains. Let’s start at the end, with the consumer. In road haulage, we move products because people want to buy them, so it seems invidious to me that the general public criticises trucks when they are so keen to buy the commodities that we carry. Having said that, if everything was labelled with a carbon cost, as well as a cash cost, consumers could then make a choice: do they want to save money or save the planet?
In today’s global consumer markets, products are sourced internationally with ‘trade-offs’ being made between transport and production cost. Economically, it makes sense to reduce prices by these means, and the low unit cost of shipping products around the globe makes such practices possible. There is a growing sense of a public perception that this is a ‘bad thing’, but only by comprehensive analysis of the carbon footprint of the product in question can valid judgements be made. This is particularly true where transport is involved, because it can be a very low percentage of an item’s total carbon footprint, with energy used in production being far more substantial. So perhaps our carbon labels should identify transport as a separate element?
It is impossible to talk about freight and carbon footprints without getting into modal issues: why not send it all by train? Shippers – consciously or not – use six criteria in selecting a mode: availability, reliability, flexibility, security, speed and cost, with the latter encompassing total supply chain cost – not just the transport element. Unless and until politicians understand that process, policies that might influence such decisions are doomed to fail. It is also a great pity that rail freight interest groups seek to promote their cause by vilification of the truck – despite the fact that a large amount of rail freight is actually shipped by road hauliers! Perhaps the railway should concentrate on getting people out of cars, and leave freight to us?
Once the truck has been chosen as the mode of transport, it is important to maximise utilisation of the capacity – it is a statement of the obvious, but a full truck is a profitable truck, so no-one runs empty or part loaded willingly. But, again, who is the villain of this piece? We are told that the haulage industry should improve its performance, but customers make that very difficult. There are many examples of RDCs that will not accept double deck trailers, customers who will only accept single stacked pallets, and order sizes that have declined so vehicles are not fully loaded. Don’t blame the truck!
Finally, the truck sets off on its journey – full or not – and given that we pay 30p-35p per mile in tax alone, no-one wastes fuel. OK, there might be some room for improvement – as demonstrated by Freight Best Practice, but we don’t need fuel duty increases to encourage economy. Clever hauliers know that saving fuel puts cash straight on to the bottom line. We’re doing what we can to save the planet, but our customers could do more.
Geoff Dunning is Chief Executive of the Road Haulage Association. For further information, visit: http://www.rha.uk.net/
Published: 15/01/2010
