Hybrid buses get worse fuel efficiency than conventional diesel buses.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by Graeme S

I still don't understand why Translink doesn't start phasing out the trolleybusses. I get the nostalgia value and all that jazz, but with the additional maintenance costs for the busses, lines and all that jazz, I don't see why it wouldn't be cheaper to move everyone to diesel.

IIRC, the trolley buses produce next to no pollution at all, so that is certainly a major benefit. I remember reading from the newspaper that defrosting the power lines in the winter was not exactly cheap, but I also seem to remember there being quite a valid reason why Translink chose to keep the trolley buses.

[MindBomber]

Originally Posted by bloodmack

hybrid vehicles are NOT here to stay.. buying one is just a waste of money because it costs less to buy another then it does to get new batteries after they die. They shouldn't even be here to begin with.

It's true, hybrid consumer vehicles are not here to stay. Vehicles like the Chevy Volt have proven that significant enough advancements have been made in batteries that fully electric vehicles are not far from mainstream practicality.

The era of hybrid commercial trucks is probably approaching, imo.

Originally Posted by Graeme S

IIRC translink was doing research on Hybrid and CNG busses and had purchased a limited number of each. If I remember correctly, they determined that CNG may be worth it, but Hybrids wouldn't.

I still don't understand why Translink doesn't start phasing out the trolleybusses. I get the nostalgia value and all that jazz, but with the additional maintenance costs for the busses, lines and all that jazz, I don't see why it wouldn't be cheaper to move everyone to diesel.

Originally Posted by Traum

IIRC, the trolley buses produce next to no pollution at all, so that is certainly a major benefit. I remember reading from the newspaper that defrosting the power lines in the winter was not exactly cheap, but I also seem to remember there being quite a valid reason why Translink chose to keep the trolley buses.

Let me help you with that.. the following all apply to 40" buses.

Vehicle: CNG
Price: $500,000
Fuel/Year: $7605
Maintenance/Year: $46,614
Carbon Credit: $81
Lifetime Costs: $1,420,355
Average Cost/Year: $83,550

Vehicle: Diesel
Price: $430,000
Fuel/Year: $41,235
Maintenance/Year: $42,392
Carbon Credit: $0
Lifetime Costs: $1,420,355
Average Cost/Year: $83,550

Vehicle: Hybrid
Price: $590,000
Fuel/Year: $34,032
Maintenance/Year: $42,392
Carbon Credit: $517
Lifetime Costs: $1,880,423
Average Cost/Year: $110,613

Vehicle: Trolley
Price: $1,000,000
Fuel/Year: $14,284
Maintenance/Year: $37,697 + Trolley Overhead Maintenance/Year: $15,757
Carbon Credit: $2415
Lifetime Costs: $2,306,450
Average Cost/Year: $115,323

A CNG bus costs at least $25,000 less per year to operate; based on those projected savings, Translink is considering replacing the entire current fleet with CNG - there would be a 5-6 year payback period.

The difference in lifetime cost of operating a hybrid bus is effectively negligible, especially given fuel prices are rising and battery prices are falling.

Trolley buses are the most costly to operate, and also the least versatile.

Originally Posted by PetrolHead

Don't forget all the weight of the batteries and motors negates most of the fuel savings they supposedly would provide. This would be especially true on a bus - something that weighs tens of thousands of pounds to begin with would need a massive battery + motor system just to get it moving. I would guess that's why they get worse mileage - the battery discharges faster than it can be charged and it and the motor become dead weight.

First, the mileage was not worse.

Second, as vehicle size and weight increases the feasibility of a hybrid drive system increases. It's the extreme weight and space restrictions that are an issue with consumer hybrid vehicles, because it drives the cost of the batteries way up. Diesel-electric systems are used in commercial ships, submarines, and locomotives, and have been for almost a century.

[Graeme S]

Bomber, if we meet in person I'm buying you a pitcher. The amount of time you spend looking up statistics on stuff I (usually) agree with is amazing.

[MindBomber]

haha, thanks man.

In truth, I don't spend too much time looking everything up.

I just have a good memory, so a bit of time researching six months ago can extend to many posts.

[Traum]

Originally Posted by MindBomber

Let me help you with that.. the following all apply to 40" buses.

Vehicle: CNG
Price: $500,000
Fuel/Year: $7605
Maintenance/Year: $46,614
Carbon Credit: $81
Lifetime Costs: $1,420,355
Average Cost/Year: $83,550

Vehicle: Diesel
Price: $430,000
Fuel/Year: $41,235
Maintenance/Year: $42,392
Carbon Credit: $0
Lifetime Costs: $1,420,355
Average Cost/Year: $83,550

Vehicle: Hybrid
Price: $590,000
Fuel/Year: $34,032
Maintenance/Year: $42,392
Carbon Credit: $517
Lifetime Costs: $1,880,423
Average Cost/Year: $110,613

Vehicle: Trolley
Price: $1,000,000
Fuel/Year: $14,284
Maintenance/Year: $37,697 + Trolley Overhead Maintenance/Year: $15,757
Carbon Credit: $2415
Lifetime Costs: $2,306,450
Average Cost/Year: $115,323

A CNG bus costs at least $25,000 less per year to operate; based on those projected savings, Translink is considering replacing the entire current fleet with CNG - there would be a 5-6 year payback period.

The difference in lifetime cost of operating a hybrid bus is effectively negligible, especially given fuel prices are rising and battery prices are falling.

Trolley buses are the most costly to operate, and also the least versatile.

The numbers may look compelling, but it makes me wonder where they came from. A number of Google searches and some reading turned up articles and feasibility studies with conflicting conclusions -- an Edmonton study pegs the trolley bus as significantly more expensive than disel or hybrid, and a Toronto study recommended against trolley buses as well. On the other hand, a Vancouver studies shows trolley buses are at least cost competitive against disel while bringing on a number of environmental benefits.

So while numbers are good to look at, we have to ask -- what are the assumptions behind the numbers, and where did those numbers come from?

Take the Edmonton study that I read, for example:

http://www.edmonton.ca/transportatio...iveSummary.pdf

seem to make some questionable / not completely accurate assumptions given Vancouver's situation. In that study, the estimated service life was 18 years. Disel buses are supposed to last around 20 years (limited by corrosion, one of the studies says), but trolley buses are supposed to be good for 30 years. And if you factor Vancouver's extremely low levels of corrosion, those numbers could easily change again.

So without knowing those assumptions behind the numbers, I don't really find all those numbers all that meaningful.

[CP.AR]

Hybrids
Stick with Diesel... until you get can pretty much 100% power recovery with the batteries
Hybrids are such a "fad" thing. I say give it another 5-10 years and it'll be a thing of the past