 |
Re: Electric over gasoline buses to replace streetcars
Author: BOB2
Date: 07-05-2016 - 08:00
Electric trolley buses were tried on only a few routes in LA where they replaced the LA Railway trollies I believe on the old 3rd and 4th street lines.
Diesel buses were the real breakthrough that eliminated the need for rail trollies or trolley coaches in the 1930's. Diesel buses overtook gas buses, and the inter-urbans and rail trollies were toast, in most places. This was less about the efficiency or attractiveness of the "alternative" bus service people hated them by an large compared to rail and the ridership numbers showed this). But this primarily due to the fact that no one was willing to reinvest (several failed public votes to take over private systems and modernize them were defeated at the polls, even on in LA)in maintaining, upgrading, or operating these then mostly still "private sector" rail systems. Most remaining surviving rail and even electric bus systems survived, like muni and Seattle metro, because they were publicly owned already.
A handful of cities have kept their electric buses, mainly Seattle and San Francisco, due to steep hills and heavy loadings, and popular local support. Electric trolly buses were even expanded in a couple of cities SF and Seattle in the late 70's and early 80's. A handful of cities in the 80's and early 90's looked at trolley buses to replace diesel buses, as a TCM (transportation control measure) for improving air quality.
I managed one such study and was involved in looking at bus electrification in Southern California for air quality improvement in the late 80's and early 90's. The cost per mile of overhead infrastructure was very high, and the introduction of lower emission Tier II, Tier III, and now Tier IV diesel, natural gas, and CNG, or diesel, hybrid buses have since achieved much lower emissions, on a much lower cost per ton basis, than bus electrification could for the taxpayer "dollar spent". And, I am aware of no new systems were ever actually built for that reason.
Bus versus rail transit in most of the 20th century was related to return on investment and the cost of rail infrastructure versus bus (gasoline and later diesel), and that included the brief period of replacement by trolley bus. It still is today, as well.
Diesel buses were the real breakthrough that eliminated the need for rail trollies or trolley coaches in the 1930's. Diesel buses overtook gas buses, and the inter-urbans and rail trollies were toast, in most places. This was less about the efficiency or attractiveness of the "alternative" bus service people hated them by an large compared to rail and the ridership numbers showed this). But this primarily due to the fact that no one was willing to reinvest (several failed public votes to take over private systems and modernize them were defeated at the polls, even on in LA)in maintaining, upgrading, or operating these then mostly still "private sector" rail systems. Most remaining surviving rail and even electric bus systems survived, like muni and Seattle metro, because they were publicly owned already.
A handful of cities have kept their electric buses, mainly Seattle and San Francisco, due to steep hills and heavy loadings, and popular local support. Electric trolly buses were even expanded in a couple of cities SF and Seattle in the late 70's and early 80's. A handful of cities in the 80's and early 90's looked at trolley buses to replace diesel buses, as a TCM (transportation control measure) for improving air quality.
I managed one such study and was involved in looking at bus electrification in Southern California for air quality improvement in the late 80's and early 90's. The cost per mile of overhead infrastructure was very high, and the introduction of lower emission Tier II, Tier III, and now Tier IV diesel, natural gas, and CNG, or diesel, hybrid buses have since achieved much lower emissions, on a much lower cost per ton basis, than bus electrification could for the taxpayer "dollar spent". And, I am aware of no new systems were ever actually built for that reason.
Bus versus rail transit in most of the 20th century was related to return on investment and the cost of rail infrastructure versus bus (gasoline and later diesel), and that included the brief period of replacement by trolley bus. It still is today, as well.
