s Greater Fuel t.sorage Desirable?
Page 45
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Would Operators Agree to the Installation of Larger Tanks at their Premises, and Would Objections by Fire Authorities Be Forthcoming?
Ask Arthur R. Wilson, M.I.R.T.E.
[ was suggested in The Commercial Motor dated i,eptember 11 in the article entitled " Reducing Fuel )istribution Costs " that it might be desirable for retail pliers and fleet users to increase their storage capacity fuel to enable the oil companies to take full economic rantage in the use of the target road tankers now horized. It is unlikely that fleet users in general uld agree to installations greater than their needs, ;n if supplied for nothing, unless there were strong :uniary interests in the form of higher rebates on the ger quantities taken at One time kssuming that the plant was supplied free it would remain the property of the oil company. . Any ure rift between the fleet user and the oil company uld place the former in an awkward position-. .
Fhere is another aspect of the matter to be considered Lt does not involve capital expenditure on the part of recipient or his dependence on a single oil company. vast increase in the storage capacity of fuel by retail )pliers and fleet users would be an immense strategical erve in any future emergency, dispersed as it must throughout the entire length and breadth of the nary. The first line of attack by an enemy with )derri weapons would undoubtedly he the new ineries and large storage installations, well known and xi on the rivers and ports. Combined with attack on al spots of the railway system, all internal movements this island, which is comparatively small in area, ald be brought to a standstill for long periods.
Defence Needs
As such, a potential increase of storage capacity has just claim for the cost to be met under the defence pgramme where the plant would remain the property the Government. In suitable cases, the storage pacity could be far beyond any requirements of the and, incidentally, underground tanks could be sunk eper than is normally the custom. If and when an iergency occurred, the Government would automaticy take over control of the entire installation.
It must be admitted that_ many existing places are suited for an increase in underground storage. In nse city areas, the ground below is thick with pipes d so on. Many tanks are difficult of access to existing 2kers and would be impossible to larger vehicles. position would he forthcoming from .firemasters and dice to greater fire hazards. That, however, does not tract from the merits of the idea, as many retail ppliers are athwart the main roads and by-passes of iall towns and villages where enemy action is unlikely. It was also mentioned in the article that "To the fleet lerator a fall [in the price of fuel] of even id. a gallon important "—words which have more meaning than apparent to the outsider. At 12 m.p.g., it represents tly 0.04d. per mile in the operating costs, but it adds to money with many vehicles and a substantial mike. By contrast, tax at 2s. 6d. per gallon on the same ckoning means 20.. per mile. When deducting the x from the retail price of fuel, it will be readily obvious at the oil companies do not have a large margin.
Nevertheless, there has been a trend in the past few years which in view of impending denationalization open to questionand chiefly concerns long-distance running. The majority of fleet operators receive a rebate within, limits on bulk purchases of fuel and graded on annual consumption. Long-distance operators who have no depots apart from their base or whose depots are outside the range of the vehicle tanks require to, bunker. en route, supplies being obtained from the oil-company agencies on the roadside. For this bunkering service, the operator was charged in pre-war days his rebated price plus ld. per gallon service charge, and he was free to draw from any Of the depots as well as the agencies.
. Big Drop in Saks
A service charge is, of course, reasonable as it involves a certain amount of paper work. The creation of British Road Services With depots in every town and monopoly in long-distance haulage rendered them independent of bunkering and agency sales must have suffered a big drop. The consequent result has been an increase in service charges, which range at the present time from 21d. to lid. per gallon according to the zone in which supplies are drawn. This figure can be decreased by id. a gallon by paying, cash, but it is not fair to a driver to burden him with a large amount of money for the purpose of buying supplies en route.
Nor is this the only difficulty with which the fleet operator has to contend To obtain his. rebate on bulk purchases he has to sign a yearly contract with one oil company. That in itself is of no concern to the local user but the long-distance man is confined to bunkering at the agencies of that one company unless he pays cash and higher prices. Whilst in the aggregate there are ample agencies throughout the country (the oil-company depots can no longer be used) no single company is sufficiently represented to cover all the needs of the long-distance operator.
To some extent, this was caused by the step taken by the companies in competition among themselves. Many agencies well sited and supplying several brands of fuel becametied to one particular company. This may have suited an individual operator at one place but the reverse could occur at the next bunkering point. An operator running on suitable scheduled routes may surmount the difficulty but to the man who " tramps " the tied contract is a distinct irritation. It is true that the oil companies other than to whom the fleet user is con tracted for bulk will .issue vehicle identity cards for bunkering purposes. That again isa nuisance to the 'driver in handling two of more ,bits of paper. Surely, one vehicle identity card to cover all the oil companies is feasible in the case of the majority of users.
The fuel range of the present-day vehicle commonly used on long-distance work approximates between 180 and 350 miles and the safe maximum lead out would 'be about 160 miles without the need for bunkering. It should be possible for manufacturers to supply optional vehicle tank equipment at .extra cost with 'a range of 800 to 1,000 miles which would cover all but the most extreme cases.