heavy machinery
RISE Robotics

Electrifying construction equipment could reduce operating costs, but cheaper energy does not necessarily mean lower cost of ownership. IDTechEx estimates that a comparable diesel machine can cost around $6,500 a year in fuel, compared with approximately $3,350 in electricity for an equivalent electric machine. Yet electric construction equipment can carry upfront price premiums as high as 50% to 100%. The industry, in other words, risks focusing on the price of energy while overlooking the broader lifetime economics of the machine itself.

That is where the real electrification challenge begins. The question is not simply whether a machine can run on a battery, but how efficiently it turns stored energy into work. If energy is lost along the way, that inefficiency can increase both the operating and capital costs of the machine, from higher energy consumption and charging requirements to larger batteries and reduced productivity. The next generation of heavy machinery should therefore be judged by a more fundamental measure: not just what powers the machine, but how efficiently it puts that power to work.

Hydraulics are a big part of the challenge. Most heavy machines use hydraulics, the fluid-powered systems that move a machine's boom, arm, or bucket, to lift, push, and dig. Those systems are powerful and proven, but they lose energy through pumps, valves, and hoses. A December 2024 assessment by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency found that hydraulic systems in off-road equipment rely on throttling for control, which reduces efficiency. The same report describes charging infrastructure for larger equipment in rural and remote areas as "dramatically inadequate." An electric machine has to do its work reliably within those limits.

For Hiten Sonpal, CEO of RISE Robotics, these considerations point toward a closer examination of the machine itself. His company is developing non-hydraulic electric systems to provide the force and movement heavy equipment requires. He argues that the economics of electrification depend substantially on addressing losses in the systems that lift, push, and move loads.

Sonpal believes battery capacity should be considered alongside the efficiency of the systems it powers. From his perspective, addressing avoidable energy losses early in the design process could create an opportunity to improve the economics of the machine by reducing the amount of energy and infrastructure required to deliver the work. Equipment must still be capable of handling demanding jobs when they arise, which means the machine, battery and charging infrastructure all have to be designed around the work it is expected to perform.

"Reducing those losses could allow many machines to operate with smaller batteries or more manageable charging requirements," he suggests. "Naturally, the potential benefit would depend on the work each machine performs." His concern is that replacing an engine without examining the efficiency of the wider system may leave significant opportunities to reduce the overall cost of the machine unexplored.

For Sonpal, efficiency must accompany the speed, reliability, and force that operators expect. "You need efficiency as a core element of improvement," he says. He believes any alternative should be assessed against those operational needs, alongside the machine's weight, durability, and cost requirements.

Sonpal notes that alternatives such as screw-driven actuators, which convert rotational movement into linear motion, involve trade-offs that depend on the application. In his view, the relevant question is whether a technology can provide dependable performance at an acceptable cost over repeated use.

"We talk about feasible, desirable, and viable," Sonpal explains. His framework considers whether a technology can be built, whether customers would choose to use it, and whether adoption makes financial sense. He believes manufacturers need a sustainable commercial case, while buyers need clear reasons to invest in different equipment.

For construction and agriculture, he recommends evaluating purchase price together with energy consumption, maintenance, charging requirements, and availability. "Lower energy use may offer value, but that value needs to be considered over the machine's working life," he explains. Reliability and the ability to complete scheduled tasks remain central to the business case.

Hiten Sonpal also sees more precise, digitally controlled movement as a potential foundation for remote operation and greater automation. He views these possibilities as further developments in machine design, whose usefulness would depend on consistent performance under practical working conditions.

His broader recommendation is to start with the work a machine must perform and examine how efficiently it uses energy, rather than treating electrification as simply a change in power source. For Sonpal, the case for electric heavy machinery will ultimately be decided by whether it can deliver the performance operators need while reducing the costs of powering, maintaining and operating the equipment.