Wow, the second study has so many inconsistencies with reality, I'm baffled.
First, the second study is more to accommodate LCVs, not tractor-trailers. LCVs are doubles and triples in excess of the current statutory limitation of roughly 73'. Basically saying if there were truck only lanes, there'd be more opportunity for LCVs to operate, thereby eliminating the need for more trucks (these LCVs are also called Turnpike Doubles). I would greatly believe they'd need their own entrance exits if they were to drive in the median.
The other two points I want to point out in this guys study:
He suggests one lane each way. With passing lanes every few miles. As I've said, MANY trucks are governed as slow as 60mph. Just depends on the carrier. Passing lanes just aren't feasible. Especially in a state where the speed limit is 70mph (Missouri and Iowa, the state of the study). They will slow down the shipment of goods, no speed them up or make it more efficient.
Secondly, please note he feels 6 feet (next to a jersey barrier) is enough room for a breakdown lane in each direction. A standard tractor-trailer is 8'6 wide. So, they're suggesting the truck driver should bring his truck to a stop alongside a jersey barrier and have his truck stick 18" into traffic. As mentioned about oversize loads, will they be allowed through here? What about a 14' wide load that comes across a disabled truck? Just stop and let hundreds of trucks backlog? Or, would oversizes still only access the car lanes?
Secondly, if a truck does break down, road service would need to access the vehicle in a 6' wide breakdown lane. If a truck needs to be towed, the tow-truck operator would then need to get out of his truck INTO TRAFFIC in order to access the truck, secure it, hoist it, and start driving.
Either that, or you suggest backlogging trucks up to the previous cross-over in order to facilitate breakdowns.
Also, another point in the study is he states the New Jersey Turnpike has truck-only lanes. That's false. Cars are still allowed in truck-only lanes. Even the 'truck only' lanes on I-5 north of Los Angeles through the mountains allow cars.
And, the crux of the matter, it comes down to tolling. And as pointed out, would require a transponder. This is about LCVs, not trucks. LCVs should never have to get outside the rightmost lane. True, the federal government would have to allow them again on all interstates (or even some specific interstates) that won't affect what trucks do.
A trucker will not, I repeat, will NOT pay for a toll road if their is a free alternative. So, unless they pass a law that they MUST enter the toll lanes (which would require a lot of changes to already existing laws and rules), they will not be used.
As for the first study you posited, it's the one the second study is based on. Again, it regarding LCVs, not tractor-trailers. LCVs are much more dangerous. As for LCVs that are heavier (as mentioned in the study) they still would need to get that truck on and off the road and to a terminal of some kind. The current limit is 34,000 pounds on a dual axle. If these truckways (as they're called) allowed heavier weights, they'd still be doing a lot of wear and tear on other roads. Unless, of course, they went immediately to a terminal where they were offloaded onto smaller trucks. But, as with railroads, they'd need more trucks to still make the shorter trip.
And short-haul drivers make a LOT more than long-haul drivers. In fact, any savings in fuel (minus the toll) for overweight LCVs that get offloaded into small (standard 80,000 pound tractor-trailers), would mean you'd be paying a lot more local and regional drivers to continue with the freight onto its final destination. And that would cost a LOT more.
Anyways, if this is only for LCVs, this is fraught with incompetence. If this is for all trucks, you'll have to dig a little deeper for any research that backs up the need for truck-only lanes.