Electric Road Systems: cost‑effectiveness examined in detail
If cost‑covering tariffs are charged for using the ERS network, a sufficiently large group of transport operators would find it attractive to invest in ERS‑equipped trucks, not only compared to battery‑electric trucks (BEVs), but also to diesel or hydrogen trucks.
The per‑kWh tariff for using the ERS network is competitive with that of BEVs, diesel trucks and hydrogen trucks. As a result, investing in ERS trucks can be appealing for a large share of the market. This is particularly true for medium‑distance daily operations (180–300 kilometres), and even more so for long‑distance transport (over 300 kilometres per day). For international ERS freight transport, the availability of an international ERS network is, of course, a key requirement. The study also shows that ERS is not financially viable on a single corridor alone.
A large‑scale Electric Road Systems network is needed
The major drawback of ERS is that a substantial network must be built from the outset, and it only becomes economically viable if it is used sufficiently. The biggest threat to the success of an ERS network is the rapid improvement of battery technology, increasing range, reducing weight, and lowering purchase and charging costs. If battery‑electric trucks become significantly more attractive, ERS usage may fall short of expectations, making the system no longer viable. These uncertainties make decision‑making challenging.
Read the report
The full report on the cost‑effectiveness of ERS can be found here.
