NSW Electric Bus Plan

[Linto63]

The ABC, Nine media and the Guardian are just looking for negatives to hang on the government before the election, even to the extent of turning positives into negatives.

Most of the negative press that the government has received in recent months, has been a result of poor decisions of its own making, either collectively or by high profile people within it. Suggesting that there is a media driven agenda is turning a blind eye to the facts.

Their motivation is obvious to anybody who knows the truth, but of course they're playing the general public who aren't around the details of what the government has achieved.

The media isn't playing the public fools, it is just reporting the facts, inconvenient as some may find it.

So we end up with the lie that the government isn't doing much about bus electrification. It's pretty disgusting and I don't blame Constance for that.

You find it disgusting, seemingly because It doesn't suit your narrative, but the role out of electric buses has meant a significant drop in the number of new buses purchased.

Normally 200 buses would be delivered annually to Sydney's various fleets to maintain average and maximum ages. Yet because no more diesels have been ordered since Constance's 2020 announcement, not even half of this have been delivered in the past year. Which is having knock-on effects with operators having to scrounge around to find buses to replace those reaching the 26 year maximum. Setting a realistic timetable after consulting with his department, the treasury etc would have been a better way for Constance to have proceeded.

While an order for 79 Custom Dennings was announced in February for Transit Systems region 6, AFAIK there is nothing else on order (or hasn't been publicly announced), so the problem may continue.

[tonyp]

Constance announced the government's intention to electrify the fleet (wthout setting a finish date) in October 2019. At the time, four buses were already being trialled in the inner west. In December 2020, he announced that 50 electric buses would be acquired and set the aspirational date of 2030 as a challenge to TfNSW. A unit was then set up in Transport to proceed with studies, consultation and business case.

From TfNSW media release of 2/12/2020:
“I want to scale up our efforts towards tackling climate change so I am challenging Transport for NSW to aim for my goal of electrifying the state’s entire bus fleet by 2030,” Mr Constance said.

That's somewhat different from directing them to achieve that by that date.

So, with bureaucracy taking its usual time to get into gear, during 2021 they issued a draft Zero Emission Bus Strategy and on 24 August 2021 issued a call for submissions on that. I believe work on the business case is still proceeding.

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/news-a ... s-strategy

Following that process (and while even more electric buses were being acquired in the meantime), the government issued a more detailed strategy with the more specific, staged dates, on 22 June 2022, about 2 1/2 months ago.

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/projec ... sion-buses

Certainly Stokes and Elliot failed to discourage the media from interpreting Constance's motivational goal as something firm, thus encouraging the media to fail to report the facts and interpret it as a "failure". They and/or their advisers were being rather klutz-like in that regard because, as they should know, the mood of the media is to look for any sign of weakness or "failure" in the government and their fact-free remarks left the gate wide open for criticism of the government. Unfortunately, nowadays governments rise and fall on public perception as manipulated by the media and typically not on facts. Any political party needs to take command of the narrative if they want to win. The fact is that the whole program is proceeding just as Constance expected and he deserves credit for initiating it.

It doesn't make sense to buy new diesel buses for Sydney if it's planned to electrify the system, because the diesels have a 25 year life. However, there's still scope in the timeline for acquisitions of diesels in the regions. The Panel has a range of electric bus suppliers that operators can choose from and there's no obstacle to them doing that other than funding and setting up electric infrastructure, admittedly not minor matters.

[Merc1107]

It doesn't make sense to buy new diesel buses for Sydney if it's planned to electrify the system, because the diesels have a 25 year life. However, there's still scope in the timeline for acquisitions of diesels in the regions. The Panel has a range of electric bus suppliers that operators can choose from and there's no obstacle to them doing that other than funding and setting up electric infrastructure, admittedly not minor matters.

Assuming Linto is correct, having a growing number of buses hitting the 26yr limit will result in the electric bus deliveries having to be fast-tracked initially to bring down the average fleet age, which will then have a knock-on effect on their ultimate replacement in however many years time.

If it's necessary to replace ageing diesels before electric infrastructure comes online - then either new diesel buses must be purchased (and cascaded to the regions as the electric rollout progress, or on-sold to private operators who will at least be replacing much older, more emissions-intensive units) or secondhand buses from elsewhere must be procured; if TfNSW even allows that. I certainly don't subscribe to an argument where it is suggested there is no point buying newer, more environmentally-friendly buses if what they replace continues to operate in some capacity rather than being scrapped - after all, buses are keeping cars off the road; and 4-8 cars use the same amount of fuel as a bus...

[Linto63]

The whole problem arose because Constance didn't do his homework. Had he consulted with the relevant departments and the industry, he would have realised that 2030 was never possible. We can split hairs as to whether it was an aspiration or a commitment, but it was poor politics. Had he made a commitment to transition to electric power in a more orderly fashion, the public would have bought it.

It's a bit like bringing forward coal power stations closures. Nice in theory, but if there isn't a ready to go replacement, then there will be a problem.

[tonyp]

The whole problem arose because Constance didn't do his homework. Had he consulted with the relevant departments and the industry, he would have realised that 2030 was never possible. We can split hairs as to whether it was an aspiration or a commitment, but it was poor politics. Had he made a commitment to transition to electric power in a more orderly fashion, the public would have bought it.

It's a bit like bringing forward coal power stations closures. Nice in theory, but if there isn't a ready to go replacement, then there will be a problem.

Most of those environmental goals are aspirational goals too. There's nothing wrong or new about aspirational goals. Constance didn't try to enshrine his goal as others are trying to do with other environmental goals. This is a storm in a teacup.

[boronia]

It was still "his goal", and the press as usual only takes small snippets out of statements, so "by 2030" becomes the promise. He always seemed reluctant to explain the misquotes that ALP trolls pick up on- "ferries that don't fit under bridges". "trains too wide for tunnels", etc. He is master of his own perceived incompetence.

[tonyp]

It was still "his goal", and the press as usual only takes small snippets out of statements, so "by 2030" becomes the promise. He always seemed reluctant to explain the misquotes that ALP trolls pick up on- "ferries that don't fit under bridges". "trains too wide for tunnels", etc. He is master of his own perceived incompetence.

Both the Ministry and Transport, the paid staff who are supposed to do that for him, are in general quite poor at taking command of the narrative. The best of the PR professionals must have found better jobs elsewhere, leaving the field open to the trolls. I think there's an assumption that the general public is wiser and can see through the untruths, but eventually it wears its way through. As you see when you follow the various online discussions, there are a few people (including yourself thank goodness!) who correct the misinformation with facts, but we're up against people who just stick their fingers in their ears and go lalalala to close down any discussion. Then you have sections of the media that are weaponised against the government and the truth becomes buried deep.

Lets hope they get their act together before the election because what they've achieved for public transport in the last decade has been unmatched in the last 80 years or more and they should be out promoting it.

[Swift]

.

Lets hope they get their act together before the election because what they've achieved for public transport in the last decade has been unmatched in the last 80 years or more and they should be out promoting it.

Labor is hoping this election will be the one they win due to the LNP wearing out their welcome as you alluded to a while back. Fickle NSW people wanting the next big thing will also help their cause.
Labor likely have no intention of propelling NSW forward like Neville Wran. It will be far closer to a Bob Carr experience.

[Merc1107]

.

Lets hope they get their act together before the election because what they've achieved for public transport in the last decade has been unmatched in the last 80 years or more and they should be out promoting it.

Labor is hoping this election will be the one they win due to the LNP wearing out their welcome as you alluded to a while back. Fickle NSW people wanting the next big thing will also help their cause.
Labor likely have no intention of propelling NSW forward like Neville Wran. It will be far closer to a Bob Carr experience.

How much room is there for the private sector (i.e. operators of buses, trams) to innovate in service delivery in the event the Government becomes inactive in further public transport initiatives? Presumably many are eager to engage in some corporate social responsibility and positive PR with e-buses (or H2 ones), so perhaps their experiences overseas will prove useful in guiding the way forward. Or is TfNSW calling all the shots here (under the guide of the incumbent Governement) and not interested in anyone's opinion?

[tonyp]

How much room is there for the private sector (i.e. operators of buses, trams) to innovate in service delivery in the event the Government becomes inactive in further public transport initiatives? Presumably many are eager to engage in some corporate social responsibility and positive PR with e-buses (or H2 ones), so perhaps their experiences overseas will prove useful in guiding the way forward. Or is TfNSW calling all the shots here (under the guide of the incumbent Governement) and not interested in anyone's opinion?

TfNSW calling the shots:

https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/operat ... ment-panel

But the Panel is open to manufacturers proposing new models.

I note that the Dutch company Ebusco is presenting its 2.2 model at the bus expo.

https://www.ebusco.com/au/electric-buses/ebusco-2-2/

[Linto63]

How much room is there for the private sector (i.e. operators of buses, trams) to innovate in service delivery in the event the Government becomes inactive in further public transport initiatives?

Not a huge amount, fundamentally they are operating fairly prescriptive contracts. There is scope for innovation during the tender process, and in the ongoing dialogue between TfNSW and operator over the life of the contract. But any major deviation has to be approved by TfNSW, so the ball is firmly in its court.

[tonyp]

We see a lot of marketing blah nowadays about electric buses, much of it being driven by marketing coming out of China which is accepted uncritically by many of the newbies to electrification in the industry. We don't see much comparative study that should be mandatory when approaching new technology. This work is normally done in Europe which, of course, has had well over a century of experience with electric transit, but that is typically ignored outside Europe as being "outdated", with the trolley bus being a particular laughing stock among the ignorant.

We do have a basic picture that the WOL cost of a battery electric bus is similar to that of a diesel bus, but it's not so publicised that a battery electric bus costs a lot more upfront (though much cheaper to maintain), has a restricted passenger capacity because of its weight, has significant downtime and needs a battery bank renewal at eye-watering cost around half-life of the bus, thus also shortening the life of the bus because it's uneconomic to replace the batteries a second time late in the life of the bus.

We rarely see this quantified, because it doesn't suit the marketing agenda of the battery-electric bus proponents, but recently a Czech manufacturer of electric drive equipment, Cegelec, has released a short paper comparing the relative costs of battery-electric (overnight charge), battery-electric (opportunity charge) and trolley (in-motion charge) buses.

https://www.cegelec.cz/wp-content/uploa ... ity-EN.pdf

Particularly interesting is the bar chart which contains the sort of information that the authorities in Wellington and Brisbane, for example, should have properly considered before they made the decisions they did. If the process had been followed properly, Wellington should still have trolleybuses and Brisbane should have built a trolleybus system for the fixed routes traversed by its double articulated buses. (The Hess bus model that they're buying actually has a trolleybus version as well.)

Of course, it's difficult to convince a city to build a system with overhead wires from scratch, but some cities like Prague and Berlin are because they have a power supply already in place from their tram systems and, with the modern dynamic charging trolleybus, the whole of a route doesn't need to be wired any longer.

Some of these issues have been identified here by the private sector, through BusNSW, which has addressed two significant issues for battery-electric buses operated in Australia.

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/ladoc ... BusNSW.pdf

1. The standard operating life of a battery-electric bus needs to be reduced to 18 years because of the cost of battery replacements (which represent about 20-30% of the cost of the bus, as shown also in the chart in the Cegelec paper). There will be one half-life replacement, but the cost of a second replacement close to full-life (presently 25 years) is uneconomic. (This is barely an issue for a modern in-motion charging trolleybus.)

2. The loss of passenger capacity in a battery-electric bus is substantial (typically some 20 passengers) due to weight and the need to comply with axle load standards. Hence there's a need for agreement on some sort of exemption to the national heavy vehicle standards to enable battery-electric buses to carry similar loads to diesel buses (or to the lighter trolleybuses for that matter). This loss of capacity is quite a serious problem, economically, because it means that additional buses (and drivers) have to be acquired to move the same number of passengers as previously.

My main reason for posting all of this information is that the issues are not as clear cut or black and white as is often made out. There are no clear answers as to which option is better - all have pluses and minuses, though the dynamic-charging trolleybus does have the lead on several counts, but may not be acceptable to many jurisdictions. The only thing that's certain is that the diesel city bus is down and out on environmental grounds. I won't comment on fuel cell buses because there is too much that is unresolved at this stage.

[Merc1107]

The standard operating life of a battery-electric bus needs to be reduced to 18 years because of the cost of battery replacements (which represent about 20-30% of the cost of the bus, as shown also in the chart in the Cegelec paper). There will be one half-life replacement, but the cost of a second replacement close to full-life (presently 25 years) is uneconomic. (This is barely an issue for a modern in-motion charging trolleybus.)

That's perhaps one of the most frustrating aspects of using battery-electrics for decarbonising transport. Given the amount of energy, and resources that go into manufacturing vehicles, we need to be looking towards fleets that last a lot longer than they presently do - as there will no longer be the benefit to a shorter lifecycle related to emissions, or fuel consumption.

The 18 year limit is not entirely dissimilar to CNG buses (or presumably H2 buses) given the tanks have a finite lifespan (somewhere in the realm of 20-30yrs), beyond which their use is illegal, although they don't need a midlife tank replacement as a general rule!

[grog]

Layperson here, but surely there is a good chance that any mid life replacement could be with a battery which is a fraction of the weight or with much greater range, or a bit of both.

Also with simpler technology than ICE buses wouldn’t it make sense to think about extending the life to 27 years with 2 mid life replacements?

[Swift]

As most western countries limit service life to 15 years, 18 is pretty good.
At least it saves all that particulate pollution diesels spew over the life of a bus and other poisonous gases as it accelerates away hundreds of times a day in stop start conditions. Diesel should have been abolished long ago. It's a disgusting choice for buses in the 21st century.
Less time in the workshop and all those fluid changes saved. A much smoother riding experience for the passengers too. The advantages are too great and too many.
What about charging at termini to extend range?

[tonyp]

Although bus life in Europe is now regulated to about 15 years, trolley electric buses have always been an exception because they suffer less deterioration from the effects of a diesel engine and front line lifespans of up to 30 years have not been uncommon.

The 18 year suggestion for electric buses comes from BusNSW because they're not confident of these buses reaching 27 years. The Chinese buses certainly won't.

[Swift]

The 18 year suggestion for electric buses comes from BusNSW because they're not confident of these buses reaching 27 years. The Chinese buses certainly won't.

Who do they think they are that they arrive at that?
TNSW being self appointed world authorities on anything.
I bet they can't define a woman though.

[grog]

There are whole of life carbon emissions reduction benefits to extending the life of vehicles, it would be worth investing in trying to make this happen for electric buses if the level of deterioration is more like that of a trolly bus.

Although an 18 year transition to electric buses (NSW) coupled with an 18 year bus lifespan would ensure a pretty stable pipeline of work for bus builders in the state!

[HunterLine5]

I see in the “to be delivered “ section, that Newcastle is to receive a Bustech Zdi. Would this be a electric bus?…from memory I think they are getting 3,wow,

[moa999]

Any news on when the CDs might return to service?

[ScaniaGrenda]

I see in the “to be delivered “ section, that Newcastle is to receive a Bustech Zdi. Would this be a electric bus?…from memory I think they are getting 3,wow,

Yes the ZDi is an integrated electric bus series from Bustech & this would mark the 2nd time Newcastle Transport has gone for an integrated solution (BCI being their first tho they went for Diesel). Newcastle Transport operates two depots the well known one out of Hamilton & the other down at Belmont but all the current media PR I've seen seems to focus on Hamilton Depot (Belmont will obviously get them in due time in the future).

I believe I've heard 3 from memory as well but only one listed on the Fleet-lists at the moment & no obviously it isn't at Hamilton yet, I checked when I walked past the Depot the other day from the public street walk and couldn't see 2900

At the moment as it stands, the general public is yet to see a finialised ZDi so there has really been a lot of skepticism around the ZDi but I suppose on the other hand If has taken this long, they'd surely be making sure the final product isn't going to be a failure, just prey that they learnt from the SA prototype flaws & improved upon them.

[mk2n75]

From what, I have heard, the chargers are fitted and a tesla car or two was there, the other night for testing the chargers.
and before the end of this month one bustech will arrive......
or maybe a new fleet of BCIs will arrive......


.

[BAMBAM]

Any news on when the CDs might return to service?

It was first reported last week on Facebook that Busways element has returned to service and now this week some pictures and photos have been uploaded on Facebook being in service.

[tonyp]

Any news on when the CDs might return to service?

It was first reported last week on Facebook that Busways element has returned to service and now this week some pictures and photos have been uploaded on Facebook being in service.

And they show up in Anytrip.

[moa999]

But not the TJH Waverley buses.

So is that suggesting it's an operator decision rather than TfNSW?