But the reality is that Wellington’s trolleybus overhead network was not an “asset’ but a liability, greatly constraining bus operations and reducing bus performance. Freed from wire dependency, several new bus routes, many electric, have been introduced. Including the #25 past my gate – covering the old #9 trolley route plus big extensions which I regularly use. Plus the trolley fleet – cobbled together with critical parts already second-hand – was already expiring, down to about 30 active vehicles in 2017 from its original size of 60.
Expenditure on trolleys actually reduced bus electrification because the overwhelming majority of the fleet was diesel and there was no way that any substantial replacement of diesels by trolleys could occur. Spending the many millions required for overhead and substation refurbishment on bridging the cost difference between BEBs and diesels instead will (eventually) enable a 100% electric fleet that will perform far better and range further than trolleys could ever manage. What’s not to like (unless you are a gunzel with a wire fetish)?
Brent Efford
On 30/03/2024, at 12:55 PM, Mark Skinner emessk@...> wrote:
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@... mailto:tramsdownunder@googlegroups.com> 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@... mailto:tramsdownunder+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> 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.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tramsdownunder/8lkJTZrmfyw/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email totramsdownunder+unsubscribe@... mailto:tramsdownunder+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAPUC4X810_NA9aEYL-MO3Kc6yM3MdWH0dhbfRVj5xqaASM_7qQ%40mail.gmail.com https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAPUC4X810_NA9aEYL-MO3Kc6yM3MdWH0dhbfRVj5xqaASM_7qQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer.
<20230618_114546.jpg>