2018 FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT for DRAYAGE TRUCKS MARCH 2019 UPDATED WITH ADDENDUM MAY 2020 Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates i | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates ii | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks Important Notes: 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks The San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan 2017 Update (CAAP) established the need to prepare feasibility assessments to evaluate the status of technology and supporting infrastructure that will be required to achieve the various CAAP strategies. This 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks is the first of the series to be released. It is intended to evaluate the current state of zero-emission (ZE) and near-zero-emission (NZE) fuel-technology platforms suitable for drayage trucks – including infrastructure readiness to fuel and service them. The Assessment’s overarching objective is to characterize feasibility for near-term (2018 to 2021), large-scale deployments of drayage trucks using such platforms. This Assessment is not meant to be a policy document, nor to inventory emission reductions that could be realized through the use of ZE and/or NZE drayage trucks, nor to characterize the associated health benefits. It is not meant to establish timelines for meeting various CAAP goals, or forecast commercialization (especially beyond 2021). It provides a snapshot about which ZE and/or NZE drayage truck platforms are feasible today, or will likely be feasible by 2021 – for widespread deployment across the SPBP complex. Please refer to the Framework for Clean Air Action Plan Feasibility Assessments (2017) document (see report text) for the overall process and intent as laid forth in the CAAP. This Assessment uses tables to summarize ratings about the relative degree to which various drayage truck fuel-technology platforms are deemed to be “feasible” today. This is done for four key feasibility parameters: Commercial Availability, Operational Feasibility, Infrastructure Availability, and Economic Workability. For each main feasibility parameter and the individual criteria that define it, the tables provide pie ratings in quarter increments, which range from “little/no achievement” of a given feasibility criteria, to “fully achieved” today. The use of pie ratings is not meant to represent precise percentages of achievement for a given feasibility criteria. Rather, these ratings summarize the relative degrees of progress towards full or near-full achievement. This Assessment does not include end user monetary incentives when calculating feasibility for every parameter. Incentive sums fluctuate, have uncertain long-term availability, and are not necessarily available to all end users. Thus, some costs calculations presented in this Assessment were calculated based on non-incentivized totals. The Ports intend to prepare updated drayage truck feasibility assessments at least every three years. This will be done more frequently if warranted by new, relevant information. For example, the ports may decide to annually update portions of this Assessment if new ZE and/or NZE technologies become truly commercially available, and/or if there is a breakthrough development with infrastructure. Please Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates iii | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks refer to the Framework for Clean Air Action Plan Feasibility Assessments (2017) document (see text) for the overall process and intent, as laid forth in the CAAP. This Assessment was developed over many months based on significant outreach, research and stakeholder feedback. A draft assessment was released in December 2018 for public comment period, and the report was revised significantly, as deemed necessary. This 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks – as well as the public comments that were received – will be reported to the respective Boards of Harbor Commissioners and posted at www.cleanairactionplan.org. Note: This report was amended with a TRL status update May 2020 as an Addendum. Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates iv | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks Authorship and Uses This report was prepared by a consulting team consisting of individuals from Tetra Tech and its subcontractor, Gladstein, Neandross & Associates (GNA). Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply endorsement, recommendation, and/or favoring by the Ports or the report authors. Acknowledgements Front and back cover photos: Provided by the Port of Long Beach The following Tetra Tech team members prepared and/or edited this report: Patrick Couch, (Gladstein, Neandross & Associates) Jonathan (Jon) Leonard, (Gladstein, Neandross & Associates) Eleanor Johnstone, (Gladstein, Neandross & Associates) Rodger Lueras, (Gladstein, Neandross & Associates) Eddy Huang, Ph.D. (Tetra Tech) Charng-Ching Lin, Ph.D. (Tetra Tech) Individuals from many organizations provided important inputs for this report, and/or generally assisted to gather information. These organizations included, but were not limited to, the Port of Long Beach, the Port of Los Angeles, the California Air Resources Board, the California Energy Commission, the South Coast Air Quality Management District, and the North American Council for Freight Efficiency. In addition to staff from the Port of Long Beach and the Port of Los Angeles, the following individuals served as peer reviewers for this report. In this role, they provided edits/comments/augmentations that the authors incorporated into the report. Names of Peer Reviewers Organization / Affiliation Lauren Dunlap and Ray Gorski Starcrest Consulting Group, LLC Kenneth Kelly National Renewable Energy Laboratory The authors gratefully acknowledge all the valued inputs from the contributing individuals and peer reviewers. Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates v | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks List of Terms ACRONYM DEFINITION AQMP Air Quality Management Plan ARB California Air Resources Board (Also “CARB") AB Assembly Bill BAT Broadly Applicable Truck BATS Broadly Applicable Truck Specification BEV Battery Electric Vehicle BE Battery Electric CBEV Commercial Battery Electric Vehicle CO2 Carbon Dioxide CI Carbon Intensity CAA Clean Air Act (Federal) CEC California Energy Commission CNG Compressed Natural Gas CWI Cummins Westport Inc. DPM Diesel Particulate Matter DTNA Daimler Trucks of North America EGR Exhaust Gas Recirculation EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FC Fuel Cell g/bhp-hr Grams per Brake Horsepower-Hour gCO2e/MJ Grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per mega Joule g/mi Grams per mile GHGs Greenhouse Gases HDE Heavy-Duty Engine HDV Heavy-Duty Vehicle HHDV Heavy-Heavy-Duty Vehicle HHDT Heavy-Heavy-Duty Truck ICCT International Council for Clean Transportation ICE Internal Combustion Engine Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates vi | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks ACRONYM DEFINITION LNG Liquefied Natural Gas NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NG Natural Gas NOx Oxides of Nitrogen OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer OLNS Optional Low NOx Standard NZE Near-Zero-Emission PDTR Port Drayage Truck Registry PM Particulate Matter PEMFC Proton Exchange Membrane Fuel Cell RNG Renewable Natural Gas ROI Return on Investment SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District SCAB South Coast Air Basin SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction TCO Total Cost of Ownership TTSI Total Transportation Services, Inc. ZE Zero-Emission Tetra Tech / Gladstein, Neandross & Associates vii | P a g e 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks Table of Contents Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................................... viii Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 10 1.1. Background: Clean Air Action Plan and Clean Trucks Program .................................................. 10 1.2. Origin and Framework for CAAP Feasibility Assessments .......................................................... 10 2. Overview of 2018 Feasibility Assessment for Drayage Trucks ............................................................ 11 2.1. Overall Methodology and Anticipated Outcomes ...................................................................... 11 2.2. Timeline, Applicability, Scope and Limitations ........................................................................... 11 2.3. Selection of Credible Information Sources ................................................................................. 13 3. Overview of the Existing San Pedro Bay Ports Drayage Fleet ............................................................. 14 3.1. Late-2018 Snapshot by Key Fuel-Technology Types ................................................................... 14 3.2. Drayage Fleet Size ....................................................................................................................... 16 3.3. Drayage Operational Requirements ..........................................................................................