[jaxbot]

Seems like misguided faux environmentalism, like banning plastic straws but keeping the longtail of plastic waste. Electric buses are good, of course, but a well-designed and highly utilized bus network, even with the dirtiest diesel engines, is going to get you serious wins over GHG/CO2/VOC emissions from automobiles if you can replace those trips.

[bryanlarsen]

Certainly we don't want to make perfect the enemy of the good: given a fixed budget we're probably better off buying 2 diesel buses rather than a single electric bus.

But don't forget particulate emissions: I believe that's the primary motivation for electric bus conversion. Buses are a significant portion of particulates in many cities, and particulates kill people.

[NickM]

given a fixed budget we're probably better off buying 2 diesel buses rather than a single electric bus.

I think the situation is a little more complicated than that. Electricity is a much cheaper fuel than diesel, and maintenance costs are lower for electric vehicles too, so in the long term electric buses may end up saving more money than they cost.

Add to that the fact that interest rates are very low right now, and it may even turn out that financing the electric buses and charging systems could allow cities to save money from day one, though I haven't crunched any numbers so this is admittedly just speculation on my part.

[barney54]

Particulates are one reason most city buses in the United States now run on natural gas. That's a real improvement over diesel in terms of particulates.

[opencl]

At least newer diesels are a lot better about particulates than the older ones, the EPA has mandated particulate filters since 2007 and they reduce them by ~85-95%.

http://www.meca.org/regulation/us-epa-20072010-heavyduty-eng...

[seanmcdirmid]

My city has upgraded to hybrid and NG buses in the last decade (in addition to some non battery very old and new trolley electrics), there are plenty of solutions in between dirty diesel and clean electric that have to be considered as well.

[dsfsafasfasf]

For particulates you can switch to CNG, and you can probably convert the diesel engines to run off that too.

[elihu]

Also noise.

[WhompingWindows]

It's neither misguided nor faux environmentalism. As a cyclist, going behind buses is straight toxic. Maybe you're a car user and you don't mind the dirtiest diesel engines, but those particles poison the lungs of our citizens and that nasty emission discourages people from using buses and cleaner transportation modes.

We must move to electrification if we want to save our lungs and our planet. No amount of dirtiest diesel is going to save us.

[ajross]

> As a cyclist, going behind buses is straight toxic.

Maybe[1], but still less so than the equivalent emissions from the dozen or so passenger vehicles that bus replaced.

The upthread point (which is correct) is that the environmental gains from bus transportation are concentrated in the efficiency gains of shared vehicles and that the relative impact of the fuel used is fairly minor. Get people on buses, then optimize. The linked article is worrying about things in the wrong order.

[1] I mean, no, not really. Diesel exhaust stinks, it's not particularly "toxic".

[deagle50]

Except that diesel emissions kill city residents.

[StreamBright]

So does coal power plant emission.

[woodandsteel]

>Electric buses are good, of course, but a well-designed and highly utilized bus network, even with the dirtiest diesel engines, is going to get you serious wins over GHG/CO2/VOC emissions from automobiles if you can replace those trips.

The long-term plan is to electrify both the buses and the cars, and also the trucks, and to do that in a reasonable amount of time, you need to work from now on at all of them at once.

What's your long-term plan?

And by the way, most of these cities already have a big diesel network. But let me ask again, what is your long-term plan?

[dsfsafasfasf]

"even with the dirtiest diesel engines, is going to get you serious wins over GHG/CO2/VOC emissions from automobiles"

Not for particulates. Even a clean diesel bus is going to be dirtier in particulates vs. gasoline. Its the nature of the fuel (i.e. not the thermo cycle used).

ON the other hand, converting to CNG eliminates particulates completely (you use the same engine, just feed it CH4)

[eeZah7Ux]

> even with the dirtiest diesel engines, is going to get you serious wins

This is true: more public transport should be the n.1 priority, even if it's diesel.

However you are creating a false dichotomy: electric VS diesel.

We can have more public transport and electric transport at the same time. Less cars, thanks.

[StreamBright]

Depending on what is the source of energy used to charge the buses.

[tropo]

That "well-designed and highly utilized bus network" is the hard part. I've never seen it.

Around here the buses run pretty empty. Sometimes they are literally empty. They take longer routes than cars, with each passenger going a longer distance because the bus route is not what they really want. It would be far better if the passengers had cars.

[esoterica]

You’ve never seen it because you live in a city with garbage transit.

(It would not be better if all the passengers had cars, because then it would lead to greater congestion and it would take everyone 2 hours to go 10 miles.)

[crummy]

Wouldn't the proper solution be to improve the bus routes?