4 ms·

Diesel’s last remaining benefits are of no value for a bus (locomotive-class horsepower possibilities and rapid refueling) as a bus never weighs much and goes i

Diesel’s last remaining benefits are of no value for a bus (locomotive-class horsepower possibilities and rapid refueling) as a bus never weighs much and goes in a circle.

roryirvine 1y ago
Yep - and, in urban areas, buses are pretty much the best possible use case for BEVs, aren't they? Short distance, high utilisation, predictable routes with far more stop/start than normal traffic. Consider also that bus depots are the perfect site for big battery banks hooked up to their charging stations, and tend to have plenty of room for solar panels on the roof. So electrification is good for the grid too. It's one of those rare situations where everyone benefits.
- duskwuff 1y ago
  > in urban areas, buses are pretty much the best possible use case for BEVs, aren't they? I'd argue that mail delivery is an even better use case - it starts and stops even more frequently than a bus, practically never needs to travel at high speeds, and only needs to make one run a day. But it's not a competition - they're both good use cases.
Symbiote 1y ago
I think existing electric locomotives are more powerful than existing diesel locomotives. The "most powerful diesel–electric locomotive model ever built on a single frame", the EMD DDA40X, provides 5MW. The EURO9000, "currently the most powerful locomotive on the European market" provides 9MW under electric power. USA-made locomotives are so far down the list on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_powerful_locomotives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_powerful_locomoti... that I suspect there's some other reason they're not needed, e.g. spreading the braking force across multiple locomotives throughout the train.
- bombcar 1y ago
  That electric locomotive has a really long cord attached to it - it only has about 2MW under diesel. Once you allow attaching an extension cord, electric wins ever time; there's zero competition.
  - crote 1y ago
    Trains run on rails, which doesn't exactly allow them to go off-highway. If you're already spending a fortune on building the rail infrastructure, why wouldn't you spend a few bucks extra to install the extension cord?
    - bombcar 1y ago
      Because in most places in the world, the rail is already built. So it's either extend the existing rail network, or try to build a new one entirely. (Apparently it's something on the line of $10m/mile to add electrification, so presumably building it while building out is less, but not much less.)
rsynnott 1y ago
The first one feels like a red herring, anyway; some places have battery powered _locomotives_, now.

Diesel’s last remaining benefits are of no value for a bus (locomotive-class horsepower possibilities and rapid refueling) as a bus never weighs much and goes in a circle.

roryirvine 1y ago

Yep - and, in urban areas, buses are pretty much the best possible use case for BEVs, aren't they? Short distance, high utilisation, predictable routes with far more stop/start than normal traffic. Consider also that bus depots are the perfect site for big battery banks hooked up to their charging stations, and tend to have plenty of room for solar panels on the roof. So electrification is good for the grid too. It's one of those rare situations where everyone benefits.

duskwuff 1y ago
> in urban areas, buses are pretty much the best possible use case for BEVs, aren't they? I'd argue that mail delivery is an even better use case - it starts and stops even more frequently than a bus, practically never needs to travel at high speeds, and only needs to make one run a day. But it's not a competition - they're both good use cases.

Symbiote 1y ago

I think existing electric locomotives are more powerful than existing diesel locomotives. The "most powerful diesel–electric locomotive model ever built on a single frame", the EMD DDA40X, provides 5MW. The EURO9000, "currently the most powerful locomotive on the European market" provides 9MW under electric power. USA-made locomotives are so far down the list on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_powerful_locomotives https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most_powerful_locomoti... that I suspect there's some other reason they're not needed, e.g. spreading the braking force across multiple locomotives throughout the train.

bombcar 1y ago
That electric locomotive has a really long cord attached to it - it only has about 2MW under diesel. Once you allow attaching an extension cord, electric wins ever time; there's zero competition.
- crote 1y ago
  Trains run on rails, which doesn't exactly allow them to go off-highway. If you're already spending a fortune on building the rail infrastructure, why wouldn't you spend a few bucks extra to install the extension cord?
  - bombcar 1y ago
    Because in most places in the world, the rail is already built. So it's either extend the existing rail network, or try to build a new one entirely. (Apparently it's something on the line of $10m/mile to add electrification, so presumably building it while building out is less, but not much less.)

rsynnott 1y ago

The first one feels like a red herring, anyway; some places have battery powered _locomotives_, now.