The American bus revival

[gone7]

"No man is an island, entire of itself" someone once said. Any use of fossil fuels anywhere will affect me where I am, one way or another, sooner or later. It should just simply end now.

Perhaps you like mass transit, and that's fine. However, I look at it like spam e-mail. Some people actually don't mind receiving it. But, by the same token, they shouldn't mind not getting it, either.

I dare say that most people would be glad to travel in their nice safe personal electric vehicle. As I pointed out, there is absolutely no substitute for the convenience it offers, short of having loads of money for a chauffered limo.

The nice thing about electric vehicles is that there is no wishful thinking involved. They use off-the-shelf components and can be made to power any vehicle today. No pie-in-the-sky thinking is necessary.

The only thing required in our nation at this time is a willingness to make them available to the populace. Non-renewable energy sources are out; electricity is in. Buying any new vehicle that does not use electricity as its main motive force is simply being part of the problem and not part of the solution. There simply is no excuse for it.

As you probably heard, Ed Begley last year or so pointed out that his electric bill was less than $200 for the year, and that included all his driving of his electric vehicle as well.

Except for poor folks who can't afford to get a conversion done, there is no reason not to change now, and let mass transit and petroleum use die a well deserved death.

[Grant-53]

Since you are a resident of Gaia perhaps your objections to all fossil fuels are religious more than economic. Is there an electric car available that will carry six passengers 400 miles without recharging or burning carbon based fuel that costs less than $25,000 USD? For me that is one year's income so that makes me and my family "poor" by federal standards. The demographic for the educated poor is growing. Is a wood burning vehicle or biodiesel generating station morally acceptable? The problem then becomes how to generate enough electricty. How do we compare the ecological costs of hydroelectric transmission lines, solar cell production, wind turbines, or nuclear fission wastes?
What really bothers me is a mind set that refuses to clearly examine the risks and benefits of any solution that doesn't fit a personal world view. Do we have the moral or legal standing to tell an Inuit hunter not to shoot a polar bear or ride a snowmobile? Do we really expect Brazilian farmers not to clear land and burn brush for crops? Would I trade my gas car for an equivalent electric car? Sure I would. My wife's ancestors were owners of Pierce Arrow car company in Buffalo NY that made electric cars long ago. I have built and raced electric slot cars for decades. I have studied mechanical engineering, economics, and operations research enough to know that an all electric economy including transportation is going to take alot of work and capital. It may happen in my expected lifetime (30 years) and involves solutions we have yet to see. There needs to be tremendous improvements in conservation of energy. We in North America use far more (6x) than most other economies. Tailored solutions are more effective than a nationally mandated 'one best way' approach. We are seeing Siemans taking an integrated approach to monitoring and control of energy for urban buildings and transportation. There are off the shelf solutions for electric trains, buses, cars, and scooters now in urban settings. The harder solutions are for semi-rural and rural applications. The awd station wagon for a traveling nurse needs sufficient range; the farm tractors and harvestors need to operate for long hours at peak seasons.
I look for ways to reduce my transportation costs both in terms dollars and kwH. Here and now that means using the bus and bicycles more to reduce driving a car for local errands or commuting. I can use hypermiling and streamlining to double the fuel mileage on the cars I have now. Streamlining the bikes and trailer will extend the effective range of operation by 50%. Alternative ways of thinking are an important part of devising viable alternative technology. I will continue to lobby our state legislators to legalize electric bicycles and homebuilt mopeds that can be carried on external racks on clean diesel buses.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by ACEV

I dare say that most people would be glad to travel in their nice safe personal electric vehicle. As I pointed out, there is absolutely no substitute for the convenience it offers, short of having loads of money for a chauffered limo.

I think you're getting off the topic into another area entirely. The subject wasn't busses for local mass transit, but for city-city transport. Now quite aside from the fact that few personal electric vehicles have the range to do that, having to spend hours/days driving along a boring interstate is not my idea of convenient.

[gone7]

Switch the coaches to biodiesel/electric and then we have something worth considering. That is proven technology and available today.

Wind and solar are great and free. Nuclear fission requires a rail-gun setup to send the waste into the sun. In that case it would be great. Or a breeder that does not create a waste problem is also a great idea. We're at the bleeding edge of that tech.

Current transportation systems between cities is too darn slow. If we use a faster system, say 300 mph, then we can do the same for cars as for mass transit. Building the rails for one is like building the rails for the other. I'll take a private car any day. Hands-free on the rail.

There never is a need to worry about Kwh if the source is free as in sun and wind. And home built vehicles of any type are legal in most locales.

Mass transit is dead. It just doesn't know it.

[Frank Lee]

Mass transit is dead. It just doesn't know it.

Loved the BART out in San Francisco and the bus system in Seattle- waaaay better than driving!

[Grant-53]

Definitely want to see more high speed rail (150+mph) to take the congestion out of the air traffic system for trips up to 1200 miles or eight hours of travel. It would be easier to roll on/roll off a flatcar with your personal vehicle than tote the extra steel wheels on a small car. This would minimize the problem of limited range for an all electric car. There was a train that used to do that between NY and Florida. Passengers could ride, sleep, and move about in the rail cars as it was a 1300 mile, three day trip. I don't see tours buses going hybrid any time soon since they operate mostly at constant highway speeds. Buses that make frequent stops may well adopt the hydraulic accumulator system that UPS is testing on its delivery vans. All buses need to be more streamlined. I expect to see more hybrid cars, light diesel trucks, and electric bicycles. Those under 25 yr and the elderly are particularly drawn to low speed (20 mph) electric bikes or scooters. Rail and bus companies, I imagine, are more inclined to take electric bikes onboard than gas powered ones for safety reasons.
Conserving energy is important even when using renewable sources. So far our tranportation systems have been based on convenience as much as cost. Now we are looking for more integrated systems. Regional rail lines with stops in the airport terminal itself as in Philadelphia eliminate going to a parking lot outside. People like choices and like to pass, so based on the psychology of drivers, single tracks for private vehicles may not be very popular. In contrast, trollies are popular where available. In rural areas putting a diesel/electric 15 seat van on rails may work well. Wind and solar may be free but there are costs to collecting it and distributing it. In urban or built up areas real estate is priced by the square foot; in the country it is priced by the acre. This a key cost in any transportation system.

[gone7]

Rails give me the willies.

If it wasn't for all of us non-users paying for the passenger train system thru our federal taxes, it would never run at all.

We must end the noise and danger of trains going thru our towns and cities. No more dangerous crossings and no more uneven pavement there.

The most important and number one choice people want will always be the choice to have a safe and secure ride to the exact location they desire at the exact time they desire. No mass transit will ever offer that at all.

IMHO, it is time we move into the real twenty-first century with twenty-first century thinking.

[Frank Lee]

^That ain't 21st century thinking.

[Piwoslaw]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

^That ain't 21st century thinking.

I assumed ACEV was joking. I hope the joke's not on me

Originally Posted by ACEV

If it wasn't for all of us non-users paying for the passenger train system thru our federal taxes, it would never run at all.

I know people who say the same thing about trains. Those same exact people also claim that they have a right to do/have certain things (more freeways, with more lanes, for example) because they pay for them through taxes. Is this hypocrisy, or is someone making them pay for trains but keeping them from using them?

[gone7]

Sorry, the humor was lost on me. Please explain.