Diesel Price Pressure: Experts Explain Where Shippers Can Reduce Waste
A carrier can increase its fuel surcharge and still leave part of its fuel exposure unresolved. The price of diesel affects which loads are worth accepting, how valuable a return journey becomes and how much waiting a vehicle can absorb before the work becomes less profitable. For shippers, that means the fuel bill can influence both the quoted rate and the availability of transport. An outbound load with an attractive return opportunity may present a different commercial proposition from an otherwise similar movement that leaves the truck searching for its next job.
There is another part of the calculation inside the facility. A truck waiting for paperwork consumes time before it begins the next revenue-generating movement, and unnecessary idling can add fuel consumption to that delay. Responses to The Supply Chainer from Hellmann Worldwide Logistics and EAIGLE address these two pressures. Hellmann describes how fuel costs influence carrier selection and rates; EAIGLE focuses on reducing the administrative stop at the gate.
Return Loads Become Part of the Capacity Decision
AJ Tarantino, Director of US Road Freight at Hellmann, said fuel costs are affecting the work carriers prioritise. His response identifies backhaul opportunities as an increasingly important consideration alongside available capacity. That creates a planning issue for shippers whose freight does not naturally fit a carrier’s preferred return journey. Tarantino told The Supply Chainer:
“California diesel prices remain well above the national average, driven by supply constraints and state-specific regulations. As fuel is one of the largest operating costs for carriers, many are prioritizing loads that provide strong backhaul opportunities. Combined with tightening capacity, this is putting upward pressure on rates, particularly on outbound California and long-haul freight. At the same time, shippers are facing higher transportation costs and revisiting fuel surcharge agreements, resulting in increased reliance on the spot market and further rate volatility.”
The implication is that procurement cannot assess fuel exposure solely through the surcharge attached to an accepted load. Carrier willingness to take the work is also relevant. A shipment may require a different collection window, a different transport provider or a revised commercial arrangement when its lane becomes less attractive. Tarantino’s response describes those pressures qualitatively; it does not quantify the rate increase or establish how much of it comes from fuel rather than capacity.
The Gate Adds a Cost the Surcharge Cannot Remove
Amir Hoss, CEO of EAIGLE, argues that operators also have opportunities to reduce fuel waste within their own processes. His response concerns the time spent checking vehicles into facilities, rather than route selection or fuel purchasing. The company’s BlueGate system uses computer vision to capture information during that process. Hoss said:
“Carriers can’t control the price of diesel, but they shouldn’t have to burn fuel waiting on paperwork. When a driver spends 10 minutes checking in at a gate, that’s time and money lost before the truck even gets into the yard. And much of that delay comes from manual processes that no longer need to be manual.
“At EAIGLE, we use AI-native computer vision to capture more than 25 data points in under 30 seconds, compared with roughly 10 minutes using traditional processes. Based on customer case studies, a typical facility using EAIGLE’s BlueGate sees a reduction of 110,000 pounds of CO2 emissions, along with corresponding fuel savings.
“The goal is simple: get drivers through the gate faster, reduce unnecessary idling and keep freight moving. When margins are tight, removing that friction can make a real difference.”
The processing-time comparison and emissions figure are EAIGLE’s claims. The response does not specify the measurement period for the emissions reduction, the number of facilities assessed or the corresponding quantity of fuel saved. Those omissions prevent a like-for-like calculation of savings for another site. They also make it important to distinguish the time needed to capture gate information from the truck’s total time at the facility.
A Faster Check-In Needs a Ready Next Step
Earlier Supply Chainer coverage identified a related limit in yard and dock operations. Austin Percifull, Global Key Account Manager at Körber Business Area Supply Chain, said: “From a labor and congestion standpoint, most dock pain comes from clustering, not total volume.” His observation concerns the timing of arrivals and receiving work. Removing a gate delay therefore has the greatest operational value when the truck can proceed to an available location or activity.
For a shipper assessing these pressures, the useful distinction is between the fuel price it must accommodate and the vehicle time its operation can influence. The first affects transport purchasing and lane economics; the second involves appointments, paperwork, receiving readiness and release procedures. Measuring both helps prevent a faster check-in from being mistaken for a completed improvement in turnaround. A truck that clears the gate quickly but waits elsewhere still carries a delay into its next movement.
