I think the point is that economically it's usually far better to utilise
assets to the end of their economic life.

Obviously, one reason is it's less costly, the other is that electric bus
technology is still improving.

That means that if those new buses had been delayed until say 2029, it's
almost certain they'd be cheaper and more efficient.

So, sure, if Wellington's trolleybuses had been at the end of their
economic life, electric buses would have been a valid option.

An alternative could have been to keep the trolleybuses till they had to be
replaced, use the capital money saved to build trams from the railway
station, then buy better in 2029 or whenever those assets expired.

Having a tramway plus more modern buses for the same money seems a better
outcome.

Not only that, but options involving mixed battery and trolleybus operation
provide huge flexibility without the need for overhead wires in sensitive
areas.

Mark Skinner

On Sat, 30 Mar 2024, 10:26 am 'Brent Efford' via TramsDownUnder, < tramsdownunder@...> wrote:

> Truly risible, Tony. It appears that battery electric buses have yet to be

> introduced in Australia, and so you have no actual experience. I suggest

> you visit Wellington sometime and experience our growing electric bus

> system – far larger, better performing and more reliable than anything the

> old trolleybus system could ever aspire to. I once thought and argued as

> you do, before the battery buses were introduced, but on the spot user

> experience beats gunzel nostalgia every time.

> Other, smaller, New Zealand cities have already achieved 100% electric

> fleets, which we expect to get to about 2030. Do you suggest that they

> should have wired their bus routes instead?

> Brent Efford

>

> On Saturday, March 30, 2024 at 1:46:08 AM UTC+13 TP wrote:

>

>> The decision to close Wellington's trolleybus system is obviously going

>> to live on as a lesson around the world. The author of this excellent

>> transport channel covers all the issues well. Talking of costs, ironically

>> Wellington got rid of a system that had the lowest whole-of-life costs of

>> any electric transit system and replaced it with one (battery buses) with

>> higher costs and less reliability. If only they'd made that modest

>> investment in maintaining the infrastructure over the years, they would

>> have saved themselves a lot more cost later.

>>

>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxqnkLcMn4g

>>

>> Here, by contrast, from the same author, an interview about how the city

>> of Tallinn, Estonia, decided to keep and expand their trolleybus system

>> instead of close it. Note the comment that trolleybus substations can be

>> used by a future tram system if required (vice versa also applies, e.g. in

>> Prague).

>>

>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nm6eBzV0SU

>>

>> Tony P

>>

> --

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

> "TramsDownUnder" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@....

> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/8e64e7d6-e343-4132-a893-9d4523dc03bcn%40googlegroups.com

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/8e64e7d6-e343-4132-a893-9d4523dc03bcn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

> .

>