Article recently posted on Australasian Bus & Coach talking about how the width & mass restrictions are having an impact on possible uptake of electric buses.
Figured some certain members of the board would be interested in seeing this so here you go;
The Electric Vehicle Council report supports the view that more must be done to prepare infrastructure and energy generation for the zero-emissions bus transition
Width and mass rules limiting electric transition in EVC report
The EVC report says more must be done to electrify Australian buses
The recently released State of Electric Vehicles report from the Electric Vehicle Council (EVC) has found that restrictive mass and width rules and a lack of vehicle standards means the transition to electric buses is behind what it should be.
The report finds that many operators are working towards a bus fleet made up of electric models, yet many have significant concerns about the ambitious state targets for bus fleet electrification without the sufficient infrastructure.
Much like in the electric car sector, the report suggests that the infrastructure isn’t ready for a transition to electric buses.
This infrastructure worry also extends to power generation and distribution networks to fuel the nation’s bus fleets.
In response, federal transport minister Catherine King says the government is working on a range of reforms including a draft fuel efficiency standard set to be released by the end of this year.
King says this standard will encourage more fuel-efficient internal combustion engines as well as low and zero-emissions vehicles.
Finally, King has also confirmed that the government is reviewing a series of amendments to current width and mass requirements for electric truck and buses.
Transport enthusiast & photographer / videographer since 2016, documenting & preserving our local Transport History through videos & photos.
Electric truck and bus operators and manufacturers are doubtless mounting an attack on the NHVR in order not to have a loss of payload as a result of having heavy batteries on board. This is one of the biggest downsides to battery electric vehicles. The longer the range you want, the more batteries you need on board and the smaller the payload. The alternative is to have less batteries, thus reduce the range, thus having to stop more frequently to recharge. Downtime during revenue-earning service is not an attractive proposition. This is a major reason that trolleybus systems are still thriving, in spite of the attractions of battery-electric vehicles.
On the other side of the coin, we have numerous road authorities who are going to be very unhappy at the growing number of heavier battery-electric vehicles (including cars) bashing the hell out of their roads. They will want weight taxes even more on battery-electric vehicles. What will the Federal and state governments say when the demand for more federal funding of road maintenance comes in? It's going to be an interesting discussion in years to come.
tonyp wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 9:14 amOn the other side of the coin, we have numerous road authorities who are going to be very unhappy at the growing number of heavier battery-electric vehicles (including cars) bashing the hell out of their roads. They will want weight taxes even more on battery-electric vehicles. What will the Federal and state governments say when the demand for more federal funding of road maintenance comes in? It's going to be an interesting discussion in years to come.
This will happen alongside declining revenue from fuel excise tax.
At some point I foresee that registration will have to change to adapt (I think Victoria might already have made changes?), or electric recharging points will have a "fuel" excise charge built on top of the regular electricity tariff used for recharging.
Smaller batteries means less range, so possibly more "unproductive" time to recharge them. Providing rapid in-service charging will be expensive. The operators would have to weigh up the cost benefits or losses relative to their specific operations.
Preserving fire service history @ The Museum of Fire.
boronia wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2023 4:52 pm
Smaller batteries means less range, so possibly more "unproductive" time to recharge them. Providing rapid in-service charging will be expensive. The operators would have to weigh up the cost benefits or losses relative to their specific operations.
Less batteries mean more passenger capacity. The purpose of buses is to transport passengers. Replacing passenger capacity with battery weight doesn't make sense.
The most economic electric buses to buy and operate are trolleybuses. They only need small battery packs with in-motion charging. The next cheapest are opportunity-charging buses. They also have small battery packs but have the disadvantage of downtime in service while topping up charge. The least economical electric buses are those that run only on batteries and charge overnight. Their biggest drawback is loss of passenger capacity and the cost of replacing large battery backs about every eight years. While 12 metre battery buses are popular, larger capacity buses typically need to have opportunity charging or are trolleybuses.
Let us talk about axle weights and "pounding the hell" out of the road surfaces. I honestly believe and I have heard the said by experts, that tri-axle trailers on trucks and their trailers do a lot more harm to road surfaces than a single heavier bus axle - the scrubbing axles of a rigid, heavily sprung truck/trailer set up (particularly when turning) does an awful lot of harm to road surfaces that buses/coaches will never equal.
Tim Williams wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2023 8:16 pm
Let us talk about axle weights and "pounding the hell" out of the road surfaces. I honestly believe and I have heard the said by experts, that tri-axle trailers on trucks and their trailers do a lot more harm to road surfaces than a single heavier bus axle - the scrubbing axles of a rigid, heavily sprung truck/trailer set up (particularly when turning) does an awful lot of harm to road surfaces that buses/coaches will never equal.
There is much debate on this and I think it depends on if it is a seal or hotmix,temperature of the day and how much screwing around is done or is it mainly straight going but already buses are allowed to be above the legal axle weight and they want to increase it more and that is alright if it stays on well build roads but not OK if it is going around the backroads.
Electric cars with low profile tyres on rainy days will do far more damage than bikes on backroads and apart from being far more affordable they take up no space on the backroads or carparks.
PS
I have noticed lately trailers that have a self steering axle set back to allow 9t + 16.5t = 25.5t instead of the tri of 20t and be kinder to the tyres and roads.
Myrtone wrote: ↑Wed Nov 29, 2023 3:58 pm
Why not use trolleybuses? Those are electric too and weigh less and their batteries do not need to hold as much power.
I think trolly buses are a good choice, it’s just a pain to install the infrastructure. They are good for all the main roads and city centre areas, but not great when heading suburban. Especially with some of the school routes that had down random residential streets. I guess bus companies could have a combination of trolly and battery electric buses. It would just make their fleet less flexible.
Magnetic wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:12 pm
I think trolly buses are a good choice, it’s just a pain to install the infrastructure. They are good for all the main roads and city centre areas, but not great when heading suburban. Especially with some of the school routes that had down random residential streets. I guess bus companies could have a combination of trolly and battery electric buses. It would just make their fleet less flexible.
Trolleybus systems, including overhead power supply, are the cheapest type of electric bus system to acquire and operate. Battery buses with opportunity charging are the next cheapest, but have the disadvantage of downtime for charge top up while in service (Brisbane Metro is this type). The most expensive system to buy and operate are pure battery buses, which also have the disadvantage of significantly lower passenger capacity.
Modern trolleybus systems are actually a combination of the traditional trolleybus and the battery bus. They have small, lighter battery packs that enable them to run off wire for significant distances, recharging in motion while running on wire. This also means that the entire length of routes doesn't have to be wired, typically only parts of the main trunk. A video example of such a system in operation is shown here:
Magnetic wrote: ↑Thu Feb 01, 2024 11:12 pm
I think trolly buses are a good choice, it’s just a pain to install the infrastructure. They are good for all the main roads and city centre areas, but not great when heading suburban. Especially with some of the school routes that had down random residential streets. I guess bus companies could have a combination of trolly and battery electric buses. It would just make their fleet less flexible.
Trolleybus systems, including overhead power supply, are the cheapest type of electric bus system to acquire and operate. Battery buses with opportunity charging are the next cheapest, but have the disadvantage of downtime for charge top up while in service (Brisbane Metro is this type). The most expensive system to buy and operate are pure battery buses, which also have the disadvantage of significantly lower passenger capacity.
Modern trolleybus systems are actually a combination of the traditional trolleybus and the battery bus. They have small, lighter battery packs that enable them to run off wire for significant distances, recharging in motion while running on wire. This also means that the entire length of routes doesn't have to be wired, typically only parts of the main trunk. A video example of such a system in operation is shown here:
I had heard that these new trolly buses had batteries to run off wire but I thought it was only for several kilometres. Do you know how far approximately they are able to run off the wire?
This is sort of how Newcastle trams work. At each stop they raise the pantograph or whatever it’s called to charge up while stopped. I’d be interested to know how much battery they use between stops and how launch charge they get at each stop. Charging for 15 seconds every few minutes seems excessive
Magnetic wrote: ↑Fri Feb 02, 2024 9:52 pm
I had heard that these new trolly buses had batteries to run off wire but I thought it was only for several kilometres. Do you know how far approximately they are able to run off the wire?
This is sort of how Newcastle trams work. At each stop they raise the pantograph or whatever it’s called to charge up while stopped. I’d be interested to know how much battery they use between stops and how launch charge they get at each stop. Charging for 15 seconds every few minutes seems excessive
It depends on the topgraphy. If that part of the route is flat, you can expect 6 or 7 km off-wire.
The Newcastle trams have a different system, opportunity charging, like the Brisbane Metro buses. The Brisbane buses will top up at termini only, the Newcastle trams have to top up at every stop for something like 30 to 45 seconds which, yes, is pretty terrible. Battery trolleybuses aren't forced to stop at all, except when the poles are raised during a typical bus stop dwell. Poles can be lowered on the move when changing to battery operation.
