Graeme Wall wrote:
As I say, the electric buses here seem to manage a full day on a fairly
intensive service without needing more than an overnight charge at the
depot.

It's certainly feasible to have 100% battery buses. They are just very
expensive, and hence why they only show up when subsidised - Stagecoach,
First et al are not buying them as the natural option instead of diesel
buses. China has made good progress in this area, but with heavy government
subsidies.

It's a tradeoff whether more fixed infrastructure (charging at bus stations,
route wiring) costs less than larger batteries in vehicles. I suspect that
will depend on a case-by-case basis.

Theo

In message , at 11:49:54 on Mon,
21 Jan 2019, Theo remarked:
As I say, the electric buses here seem to manage a full day on a fairly
intensive service without needing more than an overnight charge at the
depot.

It's certainly feasible to have 100% battery buses. They are just very
expensive, and hence why they only show up when subsidised - Stagecoach,
First et al are not buying them as the natural option instead of diesel
buses. China has made good progress in this area, but with heavy government
subsidies.

It's a tradeoff whether more fixed infrastructure (charging at bus stations,
route wiring) costs less than larger batteries in vehicles. I suspect that
will depend on a case-by-case basis.

Bear in mind also that the infrastructure to charge overnight includes
extra grid feeds to provide the power to the garage/parking-lot.

If the buses were running on power from overhead lines, not only is the
demand spread over 16hrs rather than 8hrs, but it's likely that at least
some could come from existing feeds for the overhead lines as they
traverse the wider area.
--
Roland Perry

On 21/01/2019 13:52, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:49:54 on Mon,
21 Jan 2019, Theo remarked:
As I say, the electric buses here seem to manage a full day on a fairly
intensive service without needing more than an overnight charge at the
depot.

It's certainly feasible to have 100% battery buses.Â* They are just very
expensive, and hence why they only show up when subsidised - Stagecoach,
First et al are not buying them as the natural option instead of diesel
buses.Â* China has made good progress in this area, but with heavy
government
subsidies.

It's a tradeoff whether more fixed infrastructure (charging at bus
stations,
route wiring) costs less than larger batteries in vehicles.Â* I suspect
that
will depend on a case-by-case basis.

Bear in mind also that the infrastructure to charge overnight includes
extra grid feeds to provide the power to the garage/parking-lot.

If the buses were running on power from overhead lines, not only is the
demand spread over 16hrs rather than 8hrs, but it's likely that at least
some could come from existing feeds for the overhead lines as they
traverse the wider area.

Buses only working for 16 hours a day! In the provinces maybe.

--
Basil Jet - Current favourite song...
What by Bruce
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtJEAud9vao

In message , at 07:00:30 on Tue, 22 Jan
2019, Basil Jet remarked:

Bear in mind also that the infrastructure to charge overnight
includes extra grid feeds to provide the power to the
garage/parking-lot.
If the buses were running on power from overhead lines, not only is
the demand spread over 16hrs rather than 8hrs, but it's likely that
at least some could come from existing feeds for the overhead lines
as they traverse the wider area.

Buses only working for 16 hours a day! In the provinces maybe.

Nah, out in the provinces it's more like 9hrs a day if you are lucky.
And that's the bus *routes*. Individual buses aren't running 20hrs a day
even if there are timetable slots for a few late night/early morning
ones.

However, the proposition that 16hrs is an underestimate makes my
original point even more relevant!
--
Roland Perry

Ian Jackson wrote:
In message , MikeS writes

Yes but trolley buses needed overhead wires. I remember the excitement
in my schoolboy days when the bus came off the wires. I think it could
move on its battery - about 10 yards on the flat.

Indeed. I think the battery was just intended to prevent the bus finding
itself stranded in situations when the arms could not reach (or did not
have access to) any wires. I've only once seen a trolley bus on battery
power, and I think it was when it had to leave its normal path for a
short distance because of some roadworks.

Batteries in the latter years were not always in the best condition and
they were not charged at line voltage and depended on a motor generator to
charge them and it wasn’t unknown for a driver to forget to turn this on

Though the speed was only about 5 mph the range would have been a lot
further than 10 yards when in good order, wasn’t there a garage somewhere
that had an exit where trolleys had to run along an unwired street till
they reached the wires on a route.
Another probably apocryphal tale is that one on a driver training run was
taken from the system on the South
of the river and onto the Northern network and back again being driven on
and off the woolwich ferry on its batteries.
One moving on its batteries always looked a bit strange to my six year old
eyes ,usually at Hammersmith.

GH

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:49:54 on Mon,
21 Jan 2019, Theo remarked:
As I say, the electric buses here seem to manage a full day on a fairly
intensive service without needing more than an overnight charge at the
depot.

It's certainly feasible to have 100% battery buses. They are just very
expensive, and hence why they only show up when subsidised - Stagecoach,
First et al are not buying them as the natural option instead of diesel
buses. China has made good progress in this area, but with heavy government
subsidies.

It's a tradeoff whether more fixed infrastructure (charging at bus stations,
route wiring) costs less than larger batteries in vehicles. I suspect that
will depend on a case-by-case basis.

Bear in mind also that the infrastructure to charge overnight includes
extra grid feeds to provide the power to the garage/parking-lot.

If the buses were running on power from overhead lines, not only is the
demand spread over 16hrs rather than 8hrs, but it's likely that at least
some could come from existing feeds for the overhead lines as they
traverse the wider area.

I wonder if any of the cable ducts that once supplied tram and trolley
buses feeder cabinets and pillars are still in place and what condition
they are in , some sections will no doubt have been destroyed or
deteriorated too far or repurposed for communication cables.

GH