Boldness is a prerequisite for success, whether in life or in business. And it's the one word that Charles McMillan, a former advisor to prime minister Brian Mulroney and one of the architects of the Free Trade Agreement, believes summarizes what Canada needs to be succeed in a future dominated by global competition.

I listened to what the entertaining Maritimer had to say while waiting my turn to speak at the 21st Annual Transportation Innovation and Cost Savings Conference held earlier this Fall in Toronto. McMillan explained that “incremental thinking” and a “silo mentality” just won’t cut it in a world bent on “going big”.

As I sat there listening, I was also thinking "hey, I couldn’t agree more."

Being a trading nation, transportation -- this may come as a surprise to much of the public and many of our politicians -- plays a huge role in driving our competitiveness. As Kelly Winters, general manager of Alliance Shippers, also pointed out at the conference, transportation and logistics are the “strategic glue that binds all functions in a company together.”

Unfortunately, we don't get to make the rules of the game. Even in a deregulated market, the direction of transportation practices are dictated to a great degree by government legislation. And after almost 20 years of covering transportation issues in Canada, I must admit to being completely fed up with transportation legislation that is rife with the same incremental thinking and silo mentality that McMillan warned against.

The way Ottawa and the provinces allowed our infrastructure to crumble for a good 20 years is testament to that, although to their credit many polticians are finally waking up to their negligence. All the petty provincial disagreements over sizes and weights and load securement legislation are more good examples.

Ottawa’s handling of greenhouse gas reductions, one of the most significant issues Canada and the transportation industry will face, is the latest example of government negligence in the place of leadership.

Global concern about the impact of global warming will make for a carbon-constrained future. The countries, industries and companies that understand and react to that reality best, will prove the most resilient to the changes it will bring. Canada is a definite laggard in this regard:

We currently produce about 14 tonnes of CO2 per capita. In comparison, Sweden produces just 5 tonnes of CO2 per capita while China, often fingered as a major polluter due to its fast industrial growth, actually is responsible for only 2 tonnes of CO2 per capita.

Despite two national emission reduction “plans” – “wishful thinking” would be a more appropriate word considering all the effort that went into them – dating all the way back to Jean Chretien’s Liberal government and Brian Mulroney’s Conservative government, all we’ve done over the past 20 years is watch our GHG emissions climb relentlessly.

Transportation activities by the way generate more than one quarter of Canada’s GHG emissions and have accounted for 28% of the growth in total GHG emissions from 1990 to 2004.

Overall, we are on track to be about 30% above the Kyoto Protocol target for 2010. Yes, our booming economy is part of the reason why, but the other reason why is Ottawa’s failure to lead.

What’s the response of Stephen Harper’s “new” Conservative government? Declare the Kyoto Protocol and its emissions targets dead in the recent Throne Speech.

They have a new plan of course. Aside from the message that sends to the world about Canada’s willingness to stick to global treaties, I wouldn’t have a problem with this approach were it not for the fact that the Conservative “plan” to reduce total GHG emissions 60-70% by 2050, with a 20% reduction by 2020, had already been panned by the government’s own advisory group as badly flawed. The advisory body actually accused the government of “cooking the numbers” for the reductions by overestimating and double counting.

Global corporations already understand that in a carbon-constrained future, low carbon producing countries and companies will outperform high carbon producing countries and countries. But they need a policy environment that encourages innovation and investment in green practices and technology.

Why isn’t the Conservative government in Ottawa showing the leadership needed to deliver such policy?

Where’s the boldness?

Permalink | Comments (0)

“Don’t cause a crash, just bash your dash.”

That’s the tag-line for a new product developed by a Vancouver company aimed at combating road rage. The Dash Basher is a polyurethane foam-constructed club that drivers are encouraged to carry with them in their cars.

When confronted with a stressful situation, such as an inconsiderate driver, drivers can grab their Dash Basher and wail away on the dash or steering wheel to their heart’s content. The makers of the Dash Basher say their product will reduce road rage and stress among drivers.

"Don't cause a crash, just bash your dash! No one wants physical confrontation with fellow motorists, even of they are driving like an idiot," said Dean McMaster, sales manager for manufacturer D&H Industries.

The company’s Web site is www.dashbasher.com. I can see it now. Hundreds of drivers stuck in rush hour traffic banging away on their vehicle’s dashboard in unison. Well, I guess it beats some of the alternatives, such as engaging in fisticuffs or ramming into other vehicles.

Permalink | Comments (0)

At the American Trucking Associations (ATA) annual management conference in Orlando this morning, the American Transportation Research Institute (ARTI) released the results of an annual survey exploring the most critical issues facing the industry.

More than 5,000 trucking industry executives across the US were surveyed as part of the research. This year, unlike in the two past years, HoS topped their list of concerns. The driver shortage ranked #2. Also cracking the Top 10 list was: fuel issues; congestion; government regulations; tolls and highway funding; tort reform and legal issues; truck driver training; environmental issues; and on-board truck technology.

The full report can be viewed on the ATRI Web site at www.atri-online.org. It’s worth the read, because not only does the survey reveal the most pressing concerns for trucking industry executives, but also some potential solutions.

For example, the survey suggests the following plan of attack for addressing the driver shortage: research the relationship between driver compensation and driver retention; expand image campaigns to attract an expanded pool of applicants; and redesign new entrant driver training program to increase driver satisfaction/retention.

While the driver shortage ranked second on the list of Top 10 critical issues, it was ranked first by 32% of respondents. That’s a higher percentage than HoS (22%), but a puzzling ratings system relegated the issue to second spot. Nonetheless, it’s a report worth reading. ATA has announced it give serious consideration to the survey when deciding which issues it should be most aggressively pursuing.

Perhaps most surprising was how low environmental issues ranked among fleet managers. Only 1.1% said they ranked the environment the number one issue facing the industry. Three per cent ranked it the second most important issue and 5.1% placed it third. For an industry that’s doing as much as it is to help the environment, it’s curious that the issue is barely a blip on the collective radar screens of the industry’s decision-makers.

Permalink | Comments (0)

In my last blog I argued that the greatest threat to retreading comes from cheap offshore tires. Our research this year found that 18% of fleet managers and owner/operators are experimenting with the new offshore brands (products such as Double Coin, Triangle, Woosung, Double Diamond and Aeolus). But 71% of fleet managers and 79% of owner/operators that are using offshore tires also said they are not bothering to retread them.

With this blog I wanted to dig a little deeper to see if attitudes towards offshore tires are changing and if there are differences in those changes among fleet managers and owner/operators.

Now, those who have heard me speak about industry research and statistics, know that I am purposely conservative in my observations and prefer to err on the side of caution. I always point out that a change over one year does not make a trend – I would need to see the same pattern repeated over three years or more before I can call it a trend with confidence.

The information I am about to present here falls under that category. I’ve seen interesting changes in the numbers in this year’s research compared to last year’s when we also tackled the offshore tire issue. It’s too early to call these changes a trend; but they certainly bear watching.

The first interesting change I saw in the numbers was in the general perception among owner/operators when it came to the quality of offshore tires. Although owner/operators scored no offshore brand higher than a 2 out of 5 on the quality perception scale, they did give four out of the five major offshore brands included in our survey higher marks for quality than in last year’s survey. Conversely, fleet managers scored each offshore brand lower this year than last year. And no offshore brand was scored higher than a 2 out of 5 among fleet mangers

In keeping with their improved perception of offshore tires, I also found that the percentage of owner/operators using offshore tires almost doubled this year compared to last year’s survey – from 10% last year to 18% this year. In comparison, fleet use has remained steady at around 18%.

I found the same pattern when owner/operators were asked if they would replace their brand name tires with offshore tires. The percentage of owner/operators willing to do so has more than doubled since last year’s survey, climbing from 7% to 18% this year. The fleet managers’ willingness to do likewise actually declined slightly – down to 10% this year from 12% the previous year.

Now, remember that 79% of owner/operators are not retreading the offshore tires they use. When asked if they would be willing to replace their tires with offshore tires instead of retreading their brand name casings, we saw the same trend among owner/operators. The percentage willing to do so almost doubled this year compared to last. While 11% of owner/operators last year were willing to forgo retreading their brand name casings in favor of buying offshore brands, that percentage was up to 20% with this year’s survey. And again, that change was not mirrored on the fleet side where the percentage of fleet managers willing to undertake such a strategy has remained basically the same at around 15%.

If these numbers continue in the same direction over the next couple of years, it will be obvious that the entry of offshore tire brands into the North American market will be through the owner/operator ranks.

Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the first things I learned when I started writing about the transportation industry almost 20 years ago is that retreading is a damn smart strategy. Back then the main concern was with getting the most out of your tire investment. Added to that today is the environmentally friendly aspect of retreading.

For most of the past two decades the main threat to retreading growth has been persistent ignorance among some in the industry about just how safe and reliable retreading products can be. For some reason some people just wanted to believe that all the “gators” on the road had to do with retreads, even if that wasn’t the case, if you’ll pardon the pun.

Today, the greatest threat to retreading I think comes from cheap offshore tires. As I mentioned in my previous blog on the subject, our latest research, completed this summer, found that use of offshore tires is on the increase. This year we found that 18% of managers said their fleets had experimented with the new offshore brands (I’m talking products such as Double Coin, Triangle, Woosung, Double Diamond and Aeolus). The same percentage of owner/operators said likewise. Both fleets and owner/operators that use offshore tires use them predominantly in the trailer position, which is a popular position for retreaded tires.

Yet 71% of fleet managers and 79% of owner/operators surveyed said they did not bother to retread their offshore tires.

We also asked fleets and owner/operators if they would replace their brand name tires with these offshore brands. I’m not sure yet what to make of the results on the fleet side. The vast majority of respondents, 90%, said no they wouldn’t. But a 10% potential market share for offshore brands this early in their introduction is nothing to sneeze at either. And on the owner/operator side, 18% said they would replace their brand name tires with offshore brands.

We also asked if they would use offshore tires instead of retreading their brand name casings. Fifteen percent of fleets said they would and 20% of owner/operators said likewise.

When asked for the main reason they would make such a choice, price was given as the primary reason by both fleets and owner/operators.

I realize that offshore tires are cheaper to buy but I have to wonder if the fleets and owner/operators that are no longer retreading because they’re using these tires are not being too short sighted in their thinking. Are all the costs and savings of the brand name tires being taken into consideration or is the sticker price the only thing being considered? At the same time, it makes me think that if the offshore brands are able to improve their casings so that they can be more easily retreaded there could be one heck of a battle for market share in the North American truck tire market in years to come.

Permalink | Comments (0)

Before anyone seemed overly concerned about the state of our planet, Volvo Group made the environment one of its core values back in 1972. Global emissions standards have pushed the company to develop truck engines that are virtually smog-free. However, the company is taking that one step further and attempting to create a truck that can be built, operated and then disposed of with no impact on the environment. It’s a lofty goal, but one the company is aggressively working towards achieving.

Look no further than Volvo Group’s Ghent, Belgium truck plant. The company is aiming to make it the world’s first CO2-free truck plant, and it’s making strides in the right direction. Using wind and solar power combined with bio-electricity, Volvo Group has already achieved a 23% energy reduction at the plant. Its current target is a 50% reduction in C02 emissions and if it wasn’t for a steady increase in production volume, the company would be close to its target today.

Patrick Collignon, managing director of Volvo Trucks Belgium, discussed the company’s progress at the recent European Transport Forum. He admitted he was initially a “non-believer” when Volvo approached him about the project. The target seemed too ambitious, he said, but with the progress that’s already been made he is now convinced it’s an achievable goal. Collignon said Volvo truck plants around the world will be following suit in the years to come and he pointed out Volvo’s New River Valley plant in the US is already experimenting with wind turbines and solar panels.

It still has a long way to go before becoming a completely CO2-free plant, but it’s encouraging to see how much progress is being made at Ghent. CO2 has been largely ignored as truck makers have been focusing their attention on tackling particulate matter and NOx emissions. But it’s very likely that CO2, which is a contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, will be the next substance targeted by the EPA. CO2-free trucks are already in operation today. Volvo showcased seven different types of CO2-free trucks at the Forum and more information on the technology will be in the November issues of Truck News and Truck West. All that’s preventing the widespread use of CO2-free trucks is the availability of bio-fuels, the company insists.

Reducing CO2 emissions while constructing the trucks, and then eventually disposing of them, will most likely pose an even greater challenge to vehicle manufacturers. But the groundwork is already being laid out and Volvo Group deserves a nod of approval for being proactive in this regard.

Permalink | Comments (0)

I recently had the opportunity to attend the European Transport Forum in Brussels, Belgium which explored, among other things, cargo theft prevention practices in Europe. Based on the tone of the discussion, the Europeans seem confident they are well ahead of us North Americans when it comes to implementing anti-theft policies. However, they still admit to having room for improvement. Here’s a quick snapshot of what was discussed:

As it is here at home, cargo theft is a major concern for the European trucking industry. To be more precise, it’s a 8.2 billion Euro problem for the industry. Hanss Persson, manager transport services with Volvo Technology, urged forum delegates to tackle four key challenges: Creating a more reliable statistical database to track cargo theft; harmonize security efforts through various European jurisdictions; develop a European program focusing on theft that incorporates shippers, insurers, carriers and security companies; and to breach the gap between terror security and cargo theft.

Jason Breakwell took the opportunity to raise awareness of the Transported Asset Protection Association. The (http://tapaemea.com/public/) is aimed at exchanging intelligence and best practices in an effort to reduce cargo theft and improve vehicle security. In Europe, TAPA has more than 200 members and shippers are increasingly demanding their carriers are involved in the program. Breakwell said the greatest risk of a cargo loss is while it’s on the road. Road transport is seen as the weakest link in the supply chain, he said.

Also addressing the forum was Magnus Ovilius, head of Preparedness and Crisis Management with the European Union. Ovilius struck some fear into delegates with reports on the advancements being made by cargo thieves and terrorists. “I may sound paranoid but they pay me to be paranoid,” he quipped. He said security measures must be “affordable, sustainable and reliable.” Ovilius discussed technological requirements for helping improve vehicle and cargo security. He said new technology must be: Inter-operable between European Union member countries; easily upgradeable; and data must be protected to avoid privacy invasions. He encouraged carriers to employ GPS tracking capabilities.

Permalink | Comments (0)