It should also be noted that motorways and A-roads represent only around 3% of road miles, so the vast majority of miles driven are on local roads. The worst infrastructure costs of HGVs could be avoided if HGVs stayed on motorways, but they need access to off-motorway depots. Also, the road haulage industry consistently opposes any restrictions on HGV access.
- Collisions: The cost of road collisions involving HGVs are undervalued in the Government’s MSB rates and need to be updated as they do not reflect the DfT’s own statistics.
MSB uses a low value for accidents at 2.8p on average, which is slightly lower than the old values the Government used to use - Sensitive Lorry Miles value (2.9p), and much lower than another study by Mckinnon that had a value of 7.4p.
It is important not to use average figures for accident costs, because the pattern of HGV accidents is different from other vehicles. This is an area where older figures appear to have been updated, rather than refreshed, and further work is required to check the current values.
One important factor is that HGVs are five times more likely to be involved in fatal accidents (which have a far higher cost compared with non-fatal) on minor roads. Additionally, the graph on page 43 shows that HGVs are involved in more than half of the fatal collisions on motorways, even though they only make up 11% of miles driven.
All of these figures need to be analysed in the context of latest Government statistics, which reported a 3% increase in road fatalities that translates into 47 more deaths on the roads than in 2012.
- Congestion: Congestion is not properly calculated as government analysis uses undervalued, simplistic and outdated figures to calculate the cost of delays imposed on others. This factor is hugely important, as congestion imposes significant costs to UK plc and is used to justify road building projects - the Freight Transport Association claimed that road congestion cost businesses £24bn per annum in 2011.
Some in the road haulage industry try to claim that congestion costs should not be associated with HGVs. But if that is their argument, they cannot then lobby for more roads to solve congestion.
The passenger car unit (PCU) seeks to define the road space occupied by different vehicles, with the average car as 1. When there is an impact on other traffic, it is clear that this has two elements (Actual length of traffic lane occupied + Time that the lane is occupied), and these two elements need to be calculated.
HGVs are considered to take up almost four times the space of an average car when stationary (PCUs). Then one has to allow for the fact that HGVs are slower to negotiate junctions and need longer front and rear headway than cars as their braking distances are greater.
However, this complexity is not reflected in government analysis. Currently the road space occupied by HGVs measured is only 2.9 PCUs, but it could be at least 4 CPUs on motorways and even higher on local roads.
- Pollution: There is a pressing need to review some impacts such as air pollution. However, we understand that the provisional revised values being considered by the DfT could put air quality costs at zero, which is very worrying, as a TRL report confirms that Euro VI HGV engines will not solve the problem of particulates.
- Climate change: The impact on climate change is also undervalued, with a carbon charge unrepresentatively low because an earlier version of carbon costs was used. The revised values that are being evaluated by the DfT and which are likely to be around 6p per mile, should correct this.
A Government Mode Shift Benefits revision is now being carried out by the DfT, in advance of the new grant regime. Once all these factors are reviewed and re-calculated using updated values, the likelihood is that the real subsidy to HGVs will be shown to be even greater than this research calculated. It would also show that modal shift to rail is even more beneficial to society and the economy.
Without comprehensive HGV distance-based charging, there is a rationale for balancing grants in favour of modes that have lower marginal external costs.
