Visalia staff recommend one‑truck electric garbage truck pilot to test CARB compliance and costs
Loading...
Summary
City public works staff proposed a pilot of a battery‑electric residential side‑loader trash truck to test range, maintenance, and charging needs as Visalia moves to meet California Air Resources Board zero‑emission rules; staff highlighted grant opportunities but warned of funding and operational uncertainties.
Public Works Director Nick Barge and Public Works Manager Jason Serpa recommended that Visalia start with a single battery‑electric solid‑waste truck pilot as the city adapts to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) requirement for heavy‑duty vehicle zero‑emissions. The presentation outlined why compressed natural gas (CNG), which makes up roughly 75% of Visalia’s solid‑waste fleet, does not qualify as a zero‑emission technology under CARB rules and why the city is evaluating battery electric as the practicable near‑term alternative.
Barge told the council the pilot would allow staff to test actual route performance, charging logistics and total cost of ownership before committing to multiple purchases. “We feel it would be pertinent for the city to venture into a pilot program where we try out one truck and have the opportunity to see how it works and functions in our capacity,” he said.
Serpa described the staff’s demo program that evaluated multiple manufacturers and models, including Mac, Battle Motors, Peterbilt and the purpose‑built McNeilis Volterra, which staff identified as the most capable based on demo range, payload and a local dealer for warranty/service support. He said the Volterra demo returned with 50–63% battery remaining after a typical route run and that payload and axle configuration on some electric models compared favorably to the city’s current units.
Staff presented assumptions used in the financial comparison: a 10‑year truck life, roughly 90 miles per route per day, and off‑peak electricity at about 22¢/kWh. After factoring in grant incentives (including a cited $150,000 HVIP grant) and lower estimated maintenance and fuel costs, the electric demo model’s lifetime outlook approached parity with a CNG truck; a used/demo electric unit in staff’s example was roughly $726,000 after incentives versus $527,000 for the CNG baseline in their model. Staff cautioned, however, that long‑term data on battery life and repair patterns remain limited and that some assumptions (electricity price, grant availability, battery degradation) are uncertain.
Council members asked about battery warranties and technician training; Serpa said batteries carry an 8‑year warranty and the dealer proposal includes training and optional ongoing maintenance support. Barge confirmed a portable 50 kW charger (quoted at roughly $28,000) would be part of early deployment to provide interim charging access while transit charging infrastructure is improved.
On funding, staff said they are coordinating CARB and HVIP funds and exploring whether grants can be stacked to reduce net cost; they warned that Valley Air Board and other program dollars are limited. “Worst case…we would be about $65,000 more than the existing CNG truck purchase,” Barge said; stacked grants could make the electric option cheaper on a lifetime basis.
A member of the public urged the council to keep refuse service public and supported buying a demo truck. The staff recommended proceeding with a single‑truck pilot to collect local data before larger purchases or policy commitments.
Next steps: staff will return with specifics if the council wishes to authorize procurement steps; no binding purchase was requested that night.
