4 ms·

> the solution that experts in the field have settled on. 1. The "experts" ain't always actually experts 2. They haven't settled on anything, judging by the a

> the solution that experts in the field have settled on. 1. The "experts" ain't always actually experts 2. They haven't settled on anything, judging by the abundance of trams and lightrail still in service.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago
There's no one size fits all answer, and scrapping existing infrastructure is not a high priority but... The basic shape of the future is electric powered and with batteries. Even for areas with existing overhead line systems, adding batteries is a no brainer, as it simplifies complicated junctions and a thousand other annoying edge cases. And extending the system with electric busses for less busy areas is also a no brainer (which they probably already do with some other kind of bus). As batteries plummet in price the distance between recharges can be stretched, current models have like 10km to 30km autonomous range, which means they're basically battery busses with in-motion charging. Battery busses are a global oppprtunity, with massive cost savings over existing alternatives today and the benefits of scale will quickly make them better than the trams and trollybusses that only work in specific locations, even in those specific locations that they are great for. They'll improve, just as an offshoot of the wider EV revolution but long term they're an obvious dead-end. In motion charging will be something you do to get even cheaper electricity costs by managing demand, not something you do because batteries are too expensive or heavy. And induction charging at stops may well prove a better investment if it can be shared with other EVs on the road. In short, in a world with cheap plentiful batteries and electricity, full of a thousand other types of battery EVs they don't make sense. Anyone advocating for them is basically arguing against cheap, plentiful batteries existing, which if it was true, would be the real problem to solve. But it's not.

ZeroGravitas 4y ago

There's no one size fits all answer, and scrapping existing infrastructure is not a high priority but... The basic shape of the future is electric powered and with batteries. Even for areas with existing overhead line systems, adding batteries is a no brainer, as it simplifies complicated junctions and a thousand other annoying edge cases. And extending the system with electric busses for less busy areas is also a no brainer (which they probably already do with some other kind of bus). As batteries plummet in price the distance between recharges can be stretched, current models have like 10km to 30km autonomous range, which means they're basically battery busses with in-motion charging. Battery busses are a global oppprtunity, with massive cost savings over existing alternatives today and the benefits of scale will quickly make them better than the trams and trollybusses that only work in specific locations, even in those specific locations that they are great for. They'll improve, just as an offshoot of the wider EV revolution but long term they're an obvious dead-end. In motion charging will be something you do to get even cheaper electricity costs by managing demand, not something you do because batteries are too expensive or heavy. And induction charging at stops may well prove a better investment if it can be shared with other EVs on the road. In short, in a world with cheap plentiful batteries and electricity, full of a thousand other types of battery EVs they don't make sense. Anyone advocating for them is basically arguing against cheap, plentiful batteries existing, which if it was true, would be the real problem to solve. But it's not.