Or trolleywires on corridors, like Streatham High Road, for buses to operate like trolleybuses. Then when off the corridor, they operate as battery buses.
Why I bring them up?
Power losses.
------------------------ Problem
Range
Some bus types have advertised ranges of up to 150 miles, however fail very short of that. Manufacturer issue rather than operator issue, though this is worth keeping in mind in our current state, as technology will be better with time. How much time? Six/seven years is a gamble.
Batteries have a temperature range they work good at, about 15 Celsius to 35 Celsius or so.
Anything outside of those temperatures they operate a lot less efficiently.
We're in the northern hemisphere where temperatures will drop that low in the winter.
With global warming there are instances where temperatures have hit as high as 40 Celsius, the occasional heatwave, being more common as years go by.
Comparatively a diesel engine will have issues starting at lower than -9 Celsius. Engines operate fine at around 100 Celsius, with overheating issues at 200 Celsius.
Wide temperature range clearly.
Recharging anxiety, not range anxiety
It takes 5-10 minutes to fill a diesel tank, though it takes several hours to reach 50% charge
Power loss
We've had a few instances of garages losing power, at Merton (AL) for a few hours, Croydon (C) for an evening (meaning hybrids on 264, and more hybrids than normal on 119, no service on 450). Brixton (BN) for an entire day with no power - meaning freshly spared 242 HVs had to hastily transfer south, with electrics using Camberwell (Q) to charge up.
We're not new to the electric game but we plan on being fully zero emission - mostly electrics.
We'll have even more power issues to come.
No doubt the technology will improve, so will the batteries. Many battery technologies have already been sprung up, but most are yet to achieve mass production, so for now are more expensive.
Lithium already experienced that roughly 20 years ago and is the main staple now. Lead acid was the staple 20 years ago, now it's a very poor battery by our standards.
The same happening to Lithium-ion will happen, just when.
Sodium batteries exist in the wild, (positive: very safe, they don't burn) (negative: less energy dense than Lithium)
------------------------ Solution-finding
Pantograph charging
 |
| Transdev described for me better than I could |
It'd be too simple if I suggested pantograph charging. Something we've attempted and failed on route 37 at Peckham Bus Station and Putney Heath Green Man.
The project costing £4 million pounds, the failure meant the dedicated Volvo B5LHC (c for charging) couldn't actually be used as electric buses. They had larger batteries for this purpose.
Instead these operated as normal B5LHs until the batteries needed to be replaced, but costs too high (you could buy a brand new diesel Enviro200 MMC for the cost of replacing the batteries of one VHP!)
Next year in 2019, fully electric double deckers; BYD E400EV and Optare Metrocity were bought to test on routes 43 and 134 respectively. With that context, the B5LHC project felt not only late, but also a monumental waste.
We've brought this back for the fully-electric Irizar Trams.
Crystal Palace Bus Station has had it's pantograph built and ready for use for a year pretty much.
Orpington, this was the sticking point. Many months of getting the owners of the land to cooperate and have a date set for digging up, to install cables/upgrade utilities.
Assuming the project started in 2022, we're 2 years deep into adding 1/2 the charging required for one bus route - 358.
Meanwhile in many places in Europe where there is less "red-tape" (difficulty translating bureaucratic paperwork into reality and construction) there's many instances to be found of the exact same charging pantographs.
Harrogate also has the same pantographs, done a few years prior, using Volvo 7900E buses.
Bexleyheath (BX) has one pantograph charging on it's forecourt, with their BYD E400EV type on route 132 aptly coded "EP", the P standing for pantograph.
It's usage is seldom reported, if at all known, however it is there.
Even route 319's "EA" coded BYD E400EVs have pantograph charging capability, though neither Brixton tramshed or Brixton (BN) bus garage have pantograph as of typing this post in 2024.
Ensuring better availability no matter the weather conditions (extra heat, extra cold; both affect battery), having pantograph charging capability at each garage would be ideal.
Or at least, one ideal method. Look at how far you've read in to this post, you scratched the surface.
----------------------------------- Solutions (expense) -----------------------------------
Trolleybus-wiring
Slightly inspired by the Class 230s being battery powered and using a third-rail-like pickup to rapid charge the batteries in 4 minutes.
Why rapid charge at pantographs in bus stations which somehow cost millions of pounds, which is common-place in European settings, when Britain is known for cheaping out at the best opportunity. Penny wise Pound foolish, anyone?
 |
| Citaro wikipedia page Also; the 21m Capacity L is boasted as the urban bus that uses the least fuel per passenger space |
Thought about 118/250 whom use diesels to have a battery pack that allows trolleybus operation
The easier solution instead is to use existing hybrids which already have a small battery pack, to operate solely on electric power using overhead wires.
The zero emissions from the wires.
The flexibility to operate without wires.
Win-win.
I was thinking about LTs when I came up with the idea of utilising hybrids, however the LTs don't have a lifespan of about 30 years minimum compared to the old trolleybuses that unfortunately had a short life in service due to politicians who happen to be in the same family whom own a tire company.
The upside is electric vehicles can also utilise this, if needed. Hopefully a simple modification. I say hope, because I have little trust in whatever us Brits can achieve.
Think of this along corridors like Streatham High Road, Brixton Road, Uxbridge Road, Romford Road, Barking Road, etcetera.
Maybe even the East London Transit.
It was meant to be operated by trams.
Then trolleybuses.
Then articulated single deckers.
Then hybrid double deckers.
They chose diesel double deckers.
It has hybrid double deckers now. Perhaps go up a notch to "trolleybuses" hybrids!
Or the top 10 busiest bus routes - they definitely make profit.
Thus in a few years will make back the money invested in wires. Our bus contracts are in the millions, the busiest routes easily make more money than their contracts are worth.
In addition, these busy routes serve main roads that are shared by other bus routes that can benefit from this project.
Trolleybuses can charge whilst in motion,
our modified trolleybus contraptions should do the same to our fully-electric buses with overhead wire support, fake-trolleybuses so to speak. Likewise on our hybrid buses with overhead wire support, fake trolleybus hybrids so to speak.
The aesthetics of wires can be ruled out. Once in place, they're almost visible to the surrounding area. Think about trams. Do you actively look for the wires? Or do they happen to be there?
In the case of overhead wires on train lines, they don't blend as much though mostly dependant on station. If you're at a terminus station in London, hard to spot with the canopy above you. If you're in say, Brent Cross West, you can easily see them (until development is more developed)
Even the Elizabeth Line, could you see the overheads in the tunnels? Of course a different story outside the tunnel section.
The nail in this coffin is cost.
The cost of completing the electrified (of an already 90% electrified) Seattle trolleybus was about $14 million for two miles of wiring, this being around 2019.
Even older a 2014 Swedish report for similar, but 3.3 kilometres worked out to $1.2 million per kilometre.
In both cases millions per kilometre, or millions per mile. Millions would be spent on such a project.
Millions have been spent on the renaming of the Overground which is very much needed to give clarity on the lines, regardless of what me and you think about the names chosen, this will be helpful.
About 38% on signage, a total of 18+12+14 on changing maps and trains
Millions spent on wires won't have the same lasting impact on a public perception model but will certainly generate positive press, free at that.
- Environmentalists will be happier about the environment.
- Those conscious of the child labour exploitation of Lithium mining (and excess fresh water being used in non-African mining, ahem America)
- People old enough will find trolleybuses nostalgic, positive reliving memories in a 21st century light
- We'll be happier meeting a 2030 deadline electrification and cementing it for key bus routes.
- We reduce recharging anxiety/issues (and the popular term; range anxiety)
- Redundant emergency power
I'd argue the cost of maintenance would be worth it
Overwhelming power grids to charge multiple dozen or hundred buses whilst everyone at homes/businesses/industries using power simultaneously, even if the same buses can put power back into the grid - is taxing in the short term.
We are having power upgrade networks but is it enough? Assuming people adopt electric cars even more than they currently are, we're aiming for no more combustion engine vehicles being sold thus forcing people onto electric vehicles.
In the case of installing wires on our streets again (ignore the ones for Tramlink in Croydon) for the sake of buses isn't innovation, neither is it a necessity.
Necessity the mother of innovation.
It was $200M to make a road tunnel in the Faroe Islands to connect islands (times two, for two tunnels cost), coming to $7000 per inhabitant. With a bit of British and American pension fund money in addition to the Faorese contributing about €50M euros.
That's a necessity over the 30 mins to an hour of ferry journeys. The ferry journeys disrupted by weather (storm, etc).
The installed road tunnel being much quicker, about 10 minutes. You're encased from the weather
It would've been cheaper for everyone.
Though the necessity was worth the cost.
So, again, I suspect this context of overhead wires isn't a necessity.
Plenty of uses for such money (River crossings in the east, start digging Bakerloo Line to Lewisham, draw up plans and funding for more tube expansions, Crossrail 2 to get off the ground, Tram extension to Crystal Palace had a go-ahead but no funding, revitalise cancelled Sutton tram project which was cut because of funding in pandemic-era, far more)
I'm sure the folks in the bus scene actually operating, have thought this out well. I'm just an armchair enthusiast with some knowledge here and there from what I can easily search online.
One final downside is the wires when it goes wrong (falls down, etcetera)
This isn't a problem in this scenario. We're using diesel-electric buses that can operate with their diesel engines on. We're using battery electric buses which have a lot of range
Even regular trolleybuses have about 40 miles of range to circumvent any issues with trolleybus wire failure.
Third-rail system / bottom power source
Trams in Dubai use a third-rail system which is very safe due to it being recessed, though such recessed designs would clog-up easily in hemispheres that experience snow.
Thus rules us out.
Though can we innovate on that, safety to pedestrians, yet powers our vehicles?
Yes, some of our old trams were cable powered.
Key word: some.
 |
| Leonard Bentley notice the lack of overhead wires |
A further issue is tarmac related tracks tend to fail quicker than grade-separated counterparts. Very often does Croydon's Tramlink have repairs in Church Street or East Croydon or in between those areas where it uses streets to traverse. The same is prominent in other tram operations in city centres or town centres.
Plug-in-Hybrids Electric
Toyota Prius plug-in hybrid anyone? At large scale? But buses?
The Toyota Prius can operate about 40 miles on electric only, with it's range pushed to about 230 miles using the petrol engine. Regular petrol cars double that range easily.
For our diesel buses, 200 miles is rather low, up to about 450 miles being normal.
Virtual Electrics on route 69 (nice)
The ability to operate solely on electric power at denser populated areas (Stratford in this case), but operate conventionally as a diesel-electric in quieter areas (anywhere else in this case).
Great theory, though this being prototype technology, mostly missed this promise.
69 charging at Walthamstow/ Canning Town failure, these had a bottom pickup power system engraved into the asphalt on the bus stands at either end of the route. It's success rate was low, with these special E40Hs being used as regular E40Hs instead of Virtual Electrics that they were intended to be.
Brighton success with Enviro400 Extended Range.
Doing away with the issues of charging, however doing the same promised tactic of being solely-electric powered in Brighton, but outside of the city these operate as conventional E40Hs.
These Enviro400 ERs had more batteries than either the E400VE or regular E400Hs, enough batteries to have no rear window in the lower deck.
Emergency Generator
If you're in the aerospace scene as a plane enthusiast you would be familiar there's redundancies almost everywhere.
From multiple computer systems responsible for the motion of the flight.
The multiple engines (two is still multiple)
... that's just the tip of the sky.
What can go wrong will go wrong - Murphy
Therefore, planning for that inevitability is essential. In this case we can't exactly have redundant batteries, that reduces perceived range even further.
Healthier for the batteries if we do reduce perceived range, batteries are optimal between 20%-80% charge (even your phones!) though 60% maximum is most optimal for an electric vehicle.
Yes you'll go through more charge cycles capping yourself at a lower percentage. Charging frequently does reduce battery lifespan. Charging from a low percentage to a high percentage often does reduce battery lifespan even more.
In the end, your vehicle battery can hold more charge after 5 years by capping yourself to 60%, losing roughly 15% of it's physical capacity instead of 20%-25% physical capacity.
Batteries will degrade over time regardless of it's materials.
By using 322 377 Metrocities as lab rats, installing a small diesel engine as a generator which weighs less than 300 kilograms preferably (since these electric buses are 800kg heavier than their diesel predecessors). With preferably less than 300 litres of fuel tank (weighs around 255kg).
--------------------------------- Solutions (Jugaad/cheaper) ---------------------------------
Both to do with range
Cheaper solutions, because that's the British way:
------------------------
Mandated Charging flexibility
Recall I said Arriva's Brixton (BN) electric buses were charged at Go-Ahead's Camberwell (Q).
Future issues will occur, so having an agreement between all operators that under similar power-loss scenarios that any bus can charge at any other operator's depot.
Whatever the cost to that is, I have no idea, however some negotiation without doubt.
That way, a hasty call up can be avoided, which isn't a big issue.
Though negotiating a deal or how to go about the issue, whilst the issue is ongoing, can be avoided which is a medium-high issue I'd say.
------------------------
CCS2 charging at bus stations
This isn't fast charging, so any increase in charge would be less than 7% at best, even on stand time.
Might be easier to abandon the bus at a bus station; bus station controllers dislike this, with good reason.
------------------------
Extra spares
Having an extra bus spare mandated might be better/cheaper.
The usual unwritten rule in the era of internal-combustion-engine era has been 10% on top of the Total Vehicle Requirement (or simply multiply by 1.1, same result).
Often routes would have no spare, as they share a depot with multiple buses of the same type. Think small route R5/R10 in Orpington (MB), only required SEN42, as it shares a roof with many few dozens of same sized small Enviro200s.
Unusual circumstances where buses had one extra spare, Arriva ordered 22 StreetLites for route 450 (with a Peak Vehicle Requirement of 19).
319 - 3 spares (under normal circumstances only ever saw hybrids very very rarely)
65 and 125 use hybrids overnight as per contract (diesels the 125 sees even)
X140 (1-2 spares, 698 hybrid crosslinks) > SL9 (PVR increase by 3 for electric bus charging)
322 vs 339
The 322 regularly could operate with 14 buses on average accounting for seasons. That's 3 more than it has - 11 buses ordered for it new, and it's been using diesels as backup. Now those diesels are gone it uses identical electric buses initially sat in storage for E5.
Perhaps because 322's are the first batch whilst 339's are the next batch, therefore already more refined. Definitely all more refined than the 312 EMC batch of 2014/15 era.
359 has no spares.
In the past, TfL wouldn't award to a bidder if the spare was insufficient. This was the case with 372's hybrid award in 2019. The actual winner had a spare that was diesel, obviously not awarded to them on that basis.
TfL has since become even more financially strained (as of 2024, they've turned a profit) so the 359 has been awarded with an ambiguous "Electric buses" not mentioning New or existing. Turns out it would have 2 buses indirectly poached from 184 who would receive a frequency cut (2 W15 buses sent over instead, they have LEDs).
In conclusion, having an extra bus spare mandated might be better/cheaper.
Charging-related Peak Vehicle Requirement increase
Better yet, incorporate this extra buses into schedule.
The X140, contracted to use some hybrids - these would be from route 698.
X140 renumbered Superloop SL9
No non-Superloop buses allowed on Superloop services.
No Superloop buses allowed on normal buses.
Upon conversion into Superloop SL9, the route had the same number of buses it would've used from 698 - in the form of electric buses sourced within RATP.
This resulted in a Peak Vehicle Requirement increase from 10 to 13!
Fun fact: X68 upon renumber to SL6, also gained an extra hybrid spare - EH213 from New Cross (NX).
The same happened to 312 a few years prior, utilising redundant RATP Metrocity OCEs after Hounslow (AV) removed the portable chargers (especially with H98 converted to double deck, doubly redundant those single deck electrics became).
The 312 however would only have it's PVR go from 7 to 9. An increase of 2.
Unfortunately the age and reliability of those early Metrocities did not mean much in reality, the route still always saw diesel buses in the evening for sure, during the day it would still be an often occurrence.
Camouflage peak hour journeys as buses to substitute:
Technically the 111's PVR upon changeover from RATP to Abellio, should've gone from 25 to 27. However it did not. Instead the intended extra buses (school additional journeys) would be diverted from route 111 to 481 at Richmond Council's behest.
So these operate like normal school buses, morning journeys and afternoon journeys. They can be incorporated into schedule to substitute buses that have been running long.
Furthermore, 111 (a 24-hour service) has been capable of being 100% electric quite often in the past summer when it had all of it's Wright Electroliners.
-------------------------------------- End credits --------------------------------------
Food for thought
Until the next one, stay safe and bless you!
No comments:
Post a Comment