Future of Matting (Pt. 2) Using TCO

The Future Of Matting? (Part 2 – Using TCO) – was revised on December 31, 2025

Why TCO Matters More Than Ever for the Future of Matting

Previously, we explored “Is A Thinner Mat The Future Of Matting?”, looking at how thinner, strength‑adjusted mats can reduce freight without sacrificing performance. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) takes the next step by asking how those thinner mats actually perform financially over their full life, and why Eucalyptus timber mats typically deliver the lowest TCO. That’s the future of matting.

When this series was first written, diesel in the United States was hovering near $5/gallon during the 2022 energy spike. Diesel prices have eased from those peaks, but they remain high by historical standards, and freight continues to be a major driver of overall mat cost.

What Total Cost Of Ownership Really Means For the Future of Matting

Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is a structured way to evaluate the true cost of owning and using timber mats over time. For Eucalyptus timber mats, TCO is significantly lower than for typical mixed hardwood, CLT, or bolted alternatives because strength, freight, and lifespan all work in your favor.

For mats, a practical TCO formula is:

Purchase price
Plus lifetime transport and handling cost
Plus timber mat lifespan cost (including replacements and failures)

Lifespan is usually the biggest driver, especially when freight is expensive. A mat that lasts longer and moves efficiently can deliver a dramatically lower TCO even if its initial purchase price is slightly higher.

For a general overview of how TCO works in construction and asset decisions, this explanation of what Total Cost Of Ownership means in construction aligns well with the purchase + transport + lifespan model used for mats.

Why TCO Is Critical For Thinner Mats

Thinner mats often look attractive because they clearly reduce freight. You can put more mats on each truck, cut diesel burn, and shrink per‑mat trucking cost.

However, thinner mats built from weaker species or inconsistent manufacturing may not deliver the longevity you expect. That is where TCO keeps you honest:

Freight savings may be large and obvious.
But if lifespan drops, TCO can actually go up.
And if failures increase, you also add unplanned downtime and safety risk.

TCO is especially important when comparing thinner Eucalyptus mats with thinner mixed hardwood or hybrid designs. Eucalyptus’ strength and lifespan often overwhelm small differences in purchase price or nominal thickness.

Three Main Drivers Of TCO

The three primary drivers of timber mat TCO are: purchase price, lifetime transport cost, and mat lifespan. Among these, lifespan usually dominates, but the other two still matter.

Purchase price: What you pay up front for each mat.
Lifetime transport cost: All the yard‑to‑yard, yard‑to‑site, and site‑to‑site moves over the mat’s life.
Timber mat lifespan: How long the mat stays in service before it needs replacement, including the cost of extra mats needed to match longer‑lived alternatives.

Depending on your average truck cost and how often you move mats, transport can become a large share of total ownership cost. But when mats fail early, lifespan costs—buying and hauling replacements—quickly dwarf any initial savings.

The What’s My Total Cost Of Ownership For Eucalyptus Mats? article walks through these drivers in more detail using real examples.

The following examples illustrate TCO for 16’x4’x8″ dimension mats. Later we’ll look at thinner mats and why TCO analysis will help you in the future of matting.

Step 1: Confirm Strength Equivalence

To compare a Eucalyptus 14′ x 4′ x 4″ mat with a Mixed Species 14′ x 4′ x 4.5″ mat, start by checking whether their strength characteristics are equivalent. Dimension alone is a poor predictor of performance; bending and shear strength are what matter in the field.

Eucalyptus is significantly stronger than typical mixed hardwood blends. In many comparisons:

A 4‑inch Eucalyptus mat is roughly equivalent in bending strength to about a 7.5″ mixed‑species timber mat.
Inch for inch, Eucalyptus usually delivers a freight advantage of about 20%.
But comparing a 4″ Eucalyptus to a 7.5″ mixed hardwood delivers almost double the amount of mats/truck.

Once you are comfortable that the two mats are strength‑equivalent, you can move on to cost.

Step 2: Gather Price, Freight, And Lifespan Inputs

The next step is to gather the key inputs for each mat type: purchase price, mats per truck, and lifespan.

For each option, collect:

Purchase price per mat (for example, assume 345 dollars for the mixed‑species mat if that reflects your market).
Average mats per truck over the mat’s life (for example, X mats per truck for Eucalyptus vs. Y mats per truck for mixed species).
Expected lifespan expressed in months or years based on your actual equipment, soils, and handling.

These numbers will feed directly into your Total Cost of Ownership model, like the ones shown on the TCO and What’s My Total Cost Of Ownership For Eucalyptus Mats? pages and in the TCO videos.

Step 3: Standardize Around The Longer‑Lived Mat

When two mats have different expected lives, standardize your comparison around the longer‑lived mat so you are comparing like with like.

In this example:

Eucalyptus 14′ x 4′ x 4″ mat lifespan = 54 months.
Mixed hardwood/softwood 14′ x 4′ x 4.5″ mat lifespan = 18 months.

To match 54 months of Eucalyptus service, you must “buy” an extra 36 months of mixed‑species life. That extra life is:

Extra months = 54 months – 18 months = 36 months.
Fraction of another mixed mat = 36 months ÷ 18 months = 2 mats.

If the mixed mat costs $350, the longevity cost to match Eucalyptus life is:

Longevity cost = 2 mats x $350/mat = $700

That $700 longevity cost is the additional spend you must make on mixed‑species mats to equal a 54‑month Eucalyptus timber mat lifespan.

Putting The TCO Pieces Together

Now combine all three TCO drivers for each mat type:

Purchase price per mat.
Lifetime transport cost per mat (using your mats‑per‑truck numbers and average truck cost).
Longevity cost (for the shorter‑lived mat, calculated as extra months ÷ base life × mat price).

For example, if:

Mixed‑species mat price = $350.
Longevity cost to match 54 months = $700.

Then the effective ownership cost of the mixed mat for a 54‑month comparison window becomes:

Effective mixed‑species “life‑equivalent” cost = $350 + $700 = $1050, before adding its share of transport cost.

You then compare that $1050 life‑equivalent figure (plus mixed‑species freight) to the Eucalyptus purchase price plus its own freight over the same 54‑month window.

In most realistic scenarios, Eucalyptus ends up with:

Slightly higher or comparable purchase price.
Lower freight cost per mat due to more mats per truck.
Lower longevity cost because of longer life and fewer replacements.

Those pieces together are why Eucalyptus timber mats typically deliver a lower Total Cost of Ownership than mixed‑species mats at similar strength and why Eucalyptus mats are probably the future of matting.

Total Cost of Ownership Analysis 14’x4’x4″ Eucalyptus vs. 14’x4’x4.5″ mixed hardwood and/or pine. Eucalyptus mats have lower purchase price and deliver greater transport and longevity savings.

See the next article on thinner mats and strength!

Putting The TCO Analysis Together

When you combine purchase price, freight, and longevity on a like‑for‑like basis, the TCO story usually favors Eucalyptus timber mats:

Purchase price: Eucalyptus may be similar or slightly higher per mat.
Transport: Eucalyptus typically delivers more mats per truck and lower freight per mat due to lighter weight and standard sizing.
Lifespan: Eucalyptus mats often last longer, so you buy and move fewer replacements over time.

In the example above, the longevity cost alone ($1050/mat) can wipe out any apparent savings from cheaper mixed‑species mats. When you add freight savings and other operational benefits, the TCO advantage for Eucalyptus becomes hard to ignore.

The TCO page and What’s My Total Cost Of Ownership For Eucalyptus Mats? article include detailed examples and visuals that mirror this analysis.

How This Fits Into The Matting Series

This article follows “Is A Thinner Mat The Future Of Matting?”, which introduced the idea of thinner, strength‑adjusted mats for modern infrastructure work. The next part, often framed as a strength‑focused follow‑up, dives deeper into how to specify Eucalyptus mats and right‑size thickness using strength instead of habit.

Together, the series helps you:

Understand when thinner mats make sense.
Compare options using Total Cost of Ownership rather than just upfront price.
Design and select Eucalyptus timber mats that deliver both performance and lower TCO.

For more on the broader benefits, see the benefits of Eucalyptus timber mats for ground protection and the learning center resources on TCO and strength‑adjusted designs.

Next Steps: Use TCO On Your Next Mat Buy

Using TCO to evaluate mats is one of the simplest ways to lower risk and cost across transmission, pipeline, and renewable projects. When you quantify purchase, transport, and lifespan for Eucalyptus and mixed hardwood options, Eucalyptus timber mats usually provide the lowest Total Cost of Ownership.

To apply this to your next project:

Review the TCO and TCO videos pages to see how the model works with real mat sizes and freight assumptions.
Use the Eucalyptus timber mats essentials page to align strength, thickness, and applications. Or call us for help.

For project‑specific TCO comparisons between Eucalyptus and your current mat mix, request a quote with your typical spans, crane loads, and freight assumptions. If you prefer to discuss TCO scenarios or mat mix strategy first, contact us to talk through how Eucalyptus timber mats can lower your Total Cost of Ownership on upcoming projects.

The Future of Matting? (Part 2 – Using TCO)