Why the energy transition in material handling is more complex than many people think

The energy transition is clearly visible within warehouses and production environments too. Diesel trucks are slowly disappearing from view, lead-acid batteries are being replaced by lithium-ion and more and more organisations are exploring alternatives such as hydrogen.

On paper, the direction seems clear. Electrification is increasing and new technologies are becoming ever more readily available. Yet in conversations with organisations I notice that practice is often considerably more complex than the discussions being held about it.

The infrastructure matters at least as much

A great deal of attention goes to the choice between different types of power sources, for example, while the underlying infrastructure is at least as important. An organisation may decide to switch entirely to lithium-ion, only to find it lacks sufficient grid capacity to charge all trucks at the same time. In other situations, the existing way of working with lead-acid batteries still functions perfectly well operationally, making the business case less self-evident than initially thought.

Lithium-ion is not a single technology

Within lithium-ion, too, there are major differences that receive relatively little attention in practice. Many organisations mainly compare purchase prices, while the composition of the battery can be at least as decisive for performance, safety and lifespan. Different battery chemistries have been developed for different applications and respond differently to intensive use, fast charging, temperature fluctuations and the number of charge cycles.

What strikes me is that the market often talks about lithium-ion as if it were a single technology, while the underlying differences can be considerable. Two batteries can look virtually identical on the outside, but be built completely differently inside.

The chicken-and-egg problem of hydrogen

You see the same with hydrogen.

Every few years, hydrogen is mentioned again as a promising solution for material handling. Technically, there is a lot to be said for it. Fast refuelling, no long charging times and an availability that fits intensive multi-shift operations well.

Yet we still see very little hydrogen in the logistics sector.

That usually has little to do with the trucks themselves.

The biggest challenge often lies in the availability of the fuel and the infrastructure around it. Without enough users, there is little reason to build new filling stations. Without available filling stations, organisations in turn do not choose hydrogen equipment. The result is a classic chicken-and-egg problem that slows down development.

Permit procedures, safety questions and investment costs also play an important role. As a result, large-scale application remains difficult for many organisations for the time being, even though several successful practical examples exist.

The right solution for a specific situation

That is exactly why I find that the energy transition in material handling rarely revolves around one technology replacing all others. Far more often, it is about finding the right solution for a specific situation.

An organisation with a single shift and sufficient grid capacity often makes different choices than an operation running 24 hours a day. A distribution centre has different requirements than a production environment. And a fleet that has to last ten years calls for different considerations than an investment with a much shorter horizon.

The discussion is therefore not only about batteries, hydrogen or charging infrastructure. Ultimately, it is about which power supply best fits the operation, the infrastructure and the future plans of an organisation. Just as with purchasing new equipment, that choice starts with the operational need, not with the technology.

And that is exactly why, in practice, the energy transition often turns out to be far more complex than the choice between two different types of trucks.