LCV’s, Still Some Controversy!

There I go again being the devil’s advocate with my ideas. A study requested by the Canadian Trucking Alliance and Energy Mines Resources Canada shows the advantages about letting LCV (Long Combination Vehicles) and how they could reduce the GHG, the fuel needed to move the same tonnage of freight. The study, which is available on the web site of the CTA (www.cantruck.com), also shows that LCV’s are safer on the road then regular single trailer trucks. There are many forms of LCV

• Turnpike Doubles that are of two long trailers (48’)
• Rocky Mountain Doubles that are one long trailer (48’) and one short (28’)
• Triples that are of three short trailers (28’)

The points that I don’t understand in the study, maybe because I’m a driver not a scientist, is the data for the comparison that have been taken. Currently in Quebec, LCV are allowed only in the corridors of Rivière du Loup/Montreal on the south shore and Quebec/Montreal on the north shore of the Saint Lawrence. They are not allowed in the winter months. Considering the slippery roads of winter that would change the accident numbers, the data on safety is not quite accurate.

Another point to look at. The CTA would like to see these LCV’s run in the Halifax/Windsor corridor. Whoever has driven in the Maritime Provinces knows that this is not the flattest place. It’s almost 40% of thT road is in hills between the two furthest points. The data was taken on the actual corridors of Quebec and in the Prairies where most LCV’s are Rocky Mountain Doubles.

Another pilot project is going on in New-Brunswick for LCV’s. The route between Saint John and Dieppe is used there to measure the impact. Again that road is much flatter then the Fredericton/Edmundston on the Trans-Canada where most LCV’s will be running.

A study of the California DOT made in 1984 shows different results then the one requested by the CTA and EMR. That study also considers the infrastructures that are not adapted to these types of trucks such as rest areas, weigh station, shoulders and ramps. The state of California also has many grades. The speed was also measured and compared to regular single trailer trucks.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/traffops/trucks/trucksize/lcv-op-test.pdf

I’m no scientist, only a driver, but looking at the deterioration of the road network in Quebec, I really don’t know how it could support the extra stress of LCV’s all year round. The ones in favour of them will say that they are not as heavy per axel compared to a 5 axel single trailer truck rolling on the American road network but, to move the weigh, there is more torque put on the wheels and this will cause more wear and tear on upgrades and ramps. Simple physics will explain. If you put a carpet on a wood floor and you try to push a 25Kg load with your feet on the carpet, this one will be slipping under you. Now try it again with a 50Kg load. It will definitely slip and the load won’t move. Under an LCV, there is the same amount of drive wheels then under a single trailer truck. They just have to work harder to move the load.

There are some advantages for the carriers using LCV’s

• Reduction of fuel costs to move the same freight
• Helps with the driver shortage

There are also some advantages for the governments

• GHG reductions

There are also some disadvantages for the governments

• Accelerated road deterioration
• Less revenues from registrations
• Less revenues from fuel taxes
• Less revenues from income taxes on drivers
• More unemployment

However, even with all the studies available for now, the highway network of Quebec and Ontario is not ready for LCV’s. Autoroute 85 has only 15 of the 100Km required, there is no belt way around Montreal, route 2 in New-Brunswick has some two lanes stretches and the 407 is not completed around the GTA.

Well look at that! One company operating the 407 is also one of the companies retained for the extension of Autoroute 30 in Quebec. Funny coincidence!

Jean Catudal