There’s a simple reason it might cost more to hang wire and run electric buses than diesels- you’re buying more. You’re buying clean air and less noise, both of which have been proven to improve health, and you’re hedging against future energy costs, something you have to do with diesel also if you depend on diesel to perform your task.
Probably most importantly, you’re buying community, in providing a clear commitment to maintaining quality service in the corridor. The real question becomes whether it is a proper role of the transit agency to budget for building community, and the answer is an obvious “YES”. We already have a large investment in transit that does not make a profit at the farebox. We already expect transit to play a role in solving planning and transportation problems. We already know this will continue into the future.
Peering into the crystal ball then, we can ask the next questions- which type of transit, electric or diesel, will work better in the future? Again, the answer is plain- if the price of diesel fuel falls, and carbon emissions become unimportant, two things nobody believes will happen, the diesel wins. If not, it’s electric.
And if the answer is electric, the electric bus of today helps build the infrastructure, ridership, and community for the streetcar route or light rail of tomorrow.
In a sense, the recent auditor’s report highlights the chilling disparity between electric and diesel, suggesting that money could be found to maintain the far-flung diesel routes that have created a budget crisis by taking down the wire on the in-city electric runs. Yes, we could do that- but it would be wrong.
Agreed!
In fairness, some of trollies short-comings should be examined in a future segment. Several areas should be discussed:
1. Mainenance, both shop and overhead electic crews, along with supervisory assistance is much higher for trolley buses than for diesel due to problems with de-wiring, broken overhead wire, “FrankenBreda” buses and lack of system flexability for street detours.
2. When Metro decided to ‘upgrade’ to Kiepe poles and shoes, it resulted in slower performance of trollies. Speed limits were cut in half through ’special work’ (line sections with switches or crossovers), and operators were forbidden from using reverse (the paper thin poles break when snagged)which cause a loss of operational manuvering.
3. Operator skills are much higher for trolley drivers than for regular buses (IMHO). Yet there is no system in place to retain experienced trolley drivers, but all the dis-advantages remain with driving the busiest routes in the system. Therefore, the turnover in drivers at Atlantic Base (trollies)is pretty high, and experience rate going down, leading to even more breakdowns.
This is where we get to the real question of how much commitment the society has to providing the service.
WRT the overhead and the buses, we need to remember they are just part of the expense, which also includes the street, the street furniture, and, of course, the labor. Taken in context, it may make sense to spend more at the outset to buy quality equipment that works better.
In theory, driving the electrics should be quieter and have less vibration and fumes. It should be simple enough to direct traffic and parking enforcement to concentrate on the streets with the overhead wires. It would make sense to keep those streets in top condition and improve those streets first because of the transit traffic. Drivers should get pay upgrades for each type of equipment they qualify to operate. Keeping the trolley on the wire will always be a challenge, but it doesn’t need to be as bad as it is in Seattle today.
It seems the present fleet of electrics is near the end of their service lifespans, and the agency will have the opportunity to really upgrade their equipment. Let’s hope they do it.