The New Year will be an exciting one that will likely be shaped by the financial talks currently taking place in Washington.  Here are some of the key trends to watch for in the coming year.

1. The “Fiscal Cliff” Crisis may determine the level of the Economic Recovery in 2013

As the year comes to a close, America is facing a number of economic headwinds (e.g. high unemployment and underemployment, mismatch between job skills required/positions available) and tailwinds (e.g. possible rebound in the housing sector, potential revival of domestic manufacturing, boom in energy production, improving household balance sheets). Senior government leaders in Washington are trying to solve America’s so-called “fiscal cliff” that is casting a dark shadow over the economy. The resolution of this crisis may go down to the wire and will likely set the tone for the economic recovery, or lack thereof, in 2013.  Should America’s leadership come to a good understanding on tax increases and spending cuts, this will place the United States and probably Canada on a more solid path to an economic recovery, even if 2013 is not expected to be a year of robust growth. This will help shippers and carriers in all sectors of the economy.  A failure to reach an agreement, a weak agreement or an agreement to push the problem down the road, will put a damper on discretionary spending, consumer confidence and possibly shove North America and much of the world into recession.

2. America’s Energy Renaissance/ Fracking comes to the USA

America is going through an energy renaissance.  Induced hydraulic fracturing or hydrofracking, commonly known as fracking, is a technique used to release petroleum, natural gas (including shale gas, tight gas, and coal seam gas), or other substances for extraction.  Fracking is allowing America to produce increasing supplies of energy just as the Middle East, the world’s leading source for petroleum, has become increasingly volatile. 

The decision by Wal-Mart to conduct a pilot of a 60 foot high cube tractor-trailer in Ontario, Canada caught the transportation industry off guard.  The surprise is not so much that a newer and longer piece of trucking equipment is being trialed.  This was inevitable.  The surprise is that the initiative was driven by a large shipper and not by a Trucking Association or trucking company in Canada or the United States.    

The arguments in support of the trial are compelling and are the same arguments that were made when 53 foot trailers and every other innovation in transportation occurred.  A 60 foot tractor-trailer that offers 30 percent more cubic space promises to make the North American economy more efficient.  It places fewer trucks on the road, thereby reducing congestion and lessening the need to refurbish our existing highway infrastructure.  It reduces the impact of a driver shortage.  It would reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.  It permits drivers to accomplish more under HOS restrictions.  It would allow trucking companies to derive a better return on their investment.

The arguments against Wal-Mart’s pilot are the same as those made each time there is a proposed change of this nature.  The most frequently mentioned reservation is that this will make our roads less safe.  It will result in more highway fatalities.  The prototype trailer is not in compliance with existing laws in various jurisdictions.  There will be problems in backing up a tractor-trailer combo of this nature into many existing loading and unloading docks.  Longer high cube equipment will contain heavier payloads that will speed up the damage to our roads and highways.   It will require infrastructure changes to accommodate vehicles of this length.

While all of these comments deserve discussion, it must be pointed out that the transportation industry has dealt with all of these issues before.  Laws can be amended.  Loading areas can be reconfigured.  Bridge crossing can be modified.  Weight configurations can change.  It wasn’t that long ago that Ontario ran a trial on long combination vehicles (LCVs).  What makes a 60 foot tractor-trailer so different?

Perhaps the biggest issue is the impact that the widespread standardization of 60 foot equipment would have on the capital budgets of trucking companies and shippers who have their own fleets.  The industry has billions of dollars invested in 53 foot equipment.  With an economy that is less than robust, trying to “keep up with the Jones” by having to convert part of a fleet to 60 foot equipment is certainly not what the industry is looking for at this time.  This issue alone explains why longer tractor-trailer lengths have not been driven by the trucking industry.  A change of this nature would cost enormous amounts of money.  The cost alone creates a certain amount of inertia and resistance.