|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 23, 2019 23:20:33 GMT
That would have made sense when it was extended up to Golders back in 2017, but now as one few surviving routes going right through the West End, I would argue it should get electric buses. Ideally the electric buses due for the 94 could be diverted to the route Or RATP could order electric vehicles for both routes? This would help withdraw further SPs more quickly - though the 94's existing ADHs/VHs are compliant for its new contract, and the 139 could be retained with existing VHs unless TFL were to specify electric vehicles. Of course, the 139 could easily go to Metroline or Tower Transit, given BT isn't that close to the route. I think a single operator will be awarded both the 23 and 139 as these are in the same tranche. X would have space for the 139, while the 23 could be gained from V (due to the 27 loss). Or Metroline could win both - likely the 139 from W and the 23 from WJ or AH.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 23, 2019 23:29:08 GMT
Ideally the electric buses due for the 94 could be diverted to the route Or RATP could order electric vehicles for both routes? This would help withdraw further SPs more quickly - though the 94's existing ADHs/VHs are compliant for its new contract, and the 139 could be retained with existing VHs unless TFL were to specify electric vehicles. Of course, the 139 could easily go to Metroline or Tower Transit, given BT isn't that close to the route. I think a single operator will be awarded both the 23 and 139 as these are in the same tranche. X would have space for the 139, while the 23 could be gained from V (due to the 27 loss). Or Metroline could win both - likely the 139 from W and the 23 from WJ or AH. Unless there is going to be some form of joint bid for the routes, I am unconvinced they will go to the same Operator. I would expect Metroline to bid for the routes as I suspect TT will as well, however TT will no doubt want to learn any lessons from the 13 if it is true that it is loss making. With the 23 now going to Hammersmith, no reason that RATP could not bid for that with garages nearby.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jun 24, 2019 6:30:01 GMT
I think the 139 should definitely get electric buses. The complication is whether charging points can be installed at BT, a very angular garage making installing such equipment challenging. It’s certainly plausible the 139 could get electrics and if installing charging points at BT is too logistically difficult then the route could be moved to S or RP. The problem with moving the 139 out of BT is that the 139 is beneficial to BT by releasing some space there at night.
As for the 94. I don’t think it’ll get electric buses in December. Unless there’s been an incredible level of secrecy, I think we’d know by now. I think if these electric ever materialise they’ll probably go hand in hand with the Marble Arch cut. It remains to be seen when that happens. It’d be ironic for the 94 to get electric yet no longer run down polluted Oxford Street (similar irony to the 134 getting electrics).
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 24, 2019 7:45:24 GMT
The fact that enough buses have been scrapped together for the 266 (which will drop a couple of so with the cutback) the 94 may just continue with existing buses for the contract. Another option will be new buses ordered against the new 306 and they get diverted to the 94 and the 306 uses the 62 reg ADHs particulary if it joins the E3 at V.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 24, 2019 12:14:16 GMT
I think the 139 should definitely get electric buses. The complication is whether charging points can be installed at BT, a very angular garage making installing such equipment challenging. It’s certainly plausible the 139 could get electrics and if installing charging points at BT is too logistically difficult then the route could be moved to S or RP. The problem with moving the 139 out of BT is that the 139 is beneficial to BT by releasing some space there at night. As for the 94. I don’t think it’ll get electric buses in December. Unless there’s been an incredible level of secrecy, I think we’d know by now. I think if these electric ever materialise they’ll probably go hand in hand with the Marble Arch cut. It remains to be seen when that happens. It’d be ironic for the 94 to get electric yet no longer run down polluted Oxford Street (similar irony to the 134 getting electrics). I am unconvinced that BT could not have charging equipment. It be angular, but you don't need much space for the equipment to actually connect to the bus. So long as the buses park at night on private property it should be possible to do. The bigger question I suspect might be the 'behind the scenes' equipment, but I suspect there is much more flexibility where that can be placed.
If electric buses are the future then all garages need to be able to support them, so if you are going to make the 139 electric, you may as well make BT electric capable for the 139s.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 24, 2019 12:16:51 GMT
It was said a few years ago by TFL that for London to have a 100% electric fleet we would need 4 new power stations so I'm not convinced anytime soon we are going g to see every hybrid replaced with electric. Tfl still need to cut costs and both the 23 and 139 plus potentially 94 have existing buses for another contract.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 24, 2019 20:34:54 GMT
It was said a few years ago by TFL that for London to have a 100% electric fleet we would need 4 new power stations so I'm not convinced anytime soon we are going g to see every hybrid replaced with electric. Tfl still need to cut costs and both the 23 and 139 plus potentially 94 have existing buses for another contract. We certainly don't want four new fossil fuel burning power stations - that would just transfer both the pollution and CO2 problem elsewhere, not solve it. On the other another wind farm might just be the job! I do wonder why buses can't have solar panels on the roof to assist the batteries, whatever electricity they produce would be a bonus.
Having said that we have to start somewhere, and it does seem appropriate to make some routes, preferably those going through some of the most polluted areas, electric. Oxford Street buses arguably should all be electric, and you don't need four power stations to make that start.
You are of course right that the 23, 94 and 139 all have compliant buses, however if any or all of these routes became electric I would not expect an issue in finding a good home on another London route for these buses.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 24, 2019 21:42:29 GMT
It was said a few years ago by TFL that for London to have a 100% electric fleet we would need 4 new power stations so I'm not convinced anytime soon we are going g to see every hybrid replaced with electric. Tfl still need to cut costs and both the 23 and 139 plus potentially 94 have existing buses for another contract. We certainly don't want four new fossil fuel burning power stations - that would just transfer both the pollution and CO2 problem elsewhere, not solve it. On the other another wind farm might just be the job! I do wonder why buses can't have solar panels on the roof to assist the batteries, whatever electricity they produce would be a bonus.
Having said that we have to start somewhere, and it does seem appropriate to make some routes, preferably those going through some of the most polluted areas, electric. Oxford Street buses arguably should all be electric, and you don't need four power stations to make that start.
You are of course right that the 23, 94 and 139 all have compliant buses, however if any or all of these routes became electric I would not expect an issue in finding a good home on another London route for these buses.
Solar panels are heavy ... reduce capacity of a vehicle even more. It is not just power stations ... it is also a lot of electricity infrastructure that will need upgrading ... which will be charged to customers, which 8s why electric buses seem to be clustered on certain garages. I am not aware of any major plans to add capacity to the UK electricity supply ... the new nuclear power stations seem to have gone very quite, and we have power stations scheduled for decommissioning in the not too distant future ... everyone is pushing electric ... but if its take up is too high ... we could be in trouble. At least company car drivers dont cause a drain on the electricity supply as very few charge them up ... just have them for the financial benefits without enhancing the environment as planned.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jun 24, 2019 21:55:18 GMT
It should be remembered that the price of oil is staying static and may even start to drop due to demand decreasing due to more miles per gallon, more trains converting to electric, the phasing out of so much plastic. An article the other day said Hybrid cars are greener them all electric at the moment.
Add to this the fact the ones on the 43/134 are not even in service yet I'm sure all eyes will be one them to see are they running all day, are substitutions by conventional buses common, the fact that both routes need alot of spares (many garages are at cacapcity now without needing 4 or 5 spares per route plus buying 3 mroe buses then needed at probably 400k a pop).
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 24, 2019 22:08:02 GMT
It should be remembered that the price of oil is staying static and may even start to drop due to demand decreasing due to more miles per gallon, more trains converting to electric, the phasing out of so much plastic. An article the other day said Hybrid cars are greener them all electric at the moment. Add to this the fact the ones on the 43/134 are not even in service yet I'm sure all eyes will be one them to see are they running all day, are substitutions by conventional buses common, the fact that both routes need alot of spares (many garages are at cacapcity now without needing 4 or 5 spares per route plus buying 3 mroe buses then needed at probably 400k a pop). Indeed it will be interesting to what happens, particularly to compare the two types of buses.
Electric buses on routes such as the 46 seem to go all day, I think the 5 electric buses on the 98 can, but not 100% sure, so no doubt someone will correct me. I therefore think the omens are good that the buses will go all day long, at least after a few charging cycles, although how they will perform in say 5 years time, I wouldn't like to say.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 24, 2019 22:32:08 GMT
It should be remembered that the price of oil is staying static and may even start to drop due to demand decreasing due to more miles per gallon, more trains converting to electric, the phasing out of so much plastic. An article the other day said Hybrid cars are greener them all electric at the moment. Add to this the fact the ones on the 43/134 are not even in service yet I'm sure all eyes will be one them to see are they running all day, are substitutions by conventional buses common, the fact that both routes need alot of spares (many garages are at cacapcity now without needing 4 or 5 spares per route plus buying 3 mroe buses then needed at probably 400k a pop). Indeed it will be interesting to what happens, particularly to compare the two types of buses.
Electric buses on routes such as the 46 seem to go all day, I think the 5 electric buses on the 98 can, but not 100% sure, so no doubt someone will correct me. I therefore think the omens are good that the buses will go all day long, at least after a few charging cycles, although how they will perform in say 5 years time, I wouldn't like to say.
Optare and BYD both claim the range is 160 miles on the vehicle, I'm not too savvy with the physics however I imagine that's heavily dependant on the speed the bus is travelling at and how much power all the other mechanisms on the bus are drinking. If we take the 160 miles as a benchmark. The 43 is a 9 mile long route so give it 18 miles a rounder which puts it at 8 round trips a day. So it could potentially last a day however that can only be proven in service.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 24, 2019 23:23:12 GMT
It was said a few years ago by TFL that for London to have a 100% electric fleet we would need 4 new power stations so I'm not convinced anytime soon we are going g to see every hybrid replaced with electric. Tfl still need to cut costs and both the 23 and 139 plus potentially 94 have existing buses for another contract. We certainly don't want four new fossil fuel burning power stations - that would just transfer both the pollution and CO2 problem elsewhere, not solve it. On the other another wind farm might just be the job! I do wonder why buses can't have solar panels on the roof to assist the batteries, whatever electricity they produce would be a bonus.
Having said that we have to start somewhere, and it does seem appropriate to make some routes, preferably those going through some of the most polluted areas, electric. Oxford Street buses arguably should all be electric, and you don't need four power stations to make that start.
You are of course right that the 23, 94 and 139 all have compliant buses, however if any or all of these routes became electric I would not expect an issue in finding a good home on another London route for these buses.
Currently, the most polluted roads in London AFAIK is Brixton Road at the top, followed by in no particular order, Putney High Street, Oxford Street & Marylebone Road - very interesting that the only electric route along these roads is the 98 and it's only 5 buses as well.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jun 25, 2019 6:28:14 GMT
It should be remembered that the price of oil is staying static and may even start to drop due to demand decreasing due to more miles per gallon, more trains converting to electric, the phasing out of so much plastic. An article the other day said Hybrid cars are greener them all electric at the moment. Add to this the fact the ones on the 43/134 are not even in service yet I'm sure all eyes will be one them to see are they running all day, are substitutions by conventional buses common, the fact that both routes need alot of spares (many garages are at cacapcity now without needing 4 or 5 spares per route plus buying 3 mroe buses then needed at probably 400k a pop). Remember that the 134's Metrodeckers were ordered to match the PVR when the route still went to Tottenham Court Road. PB will have plenty of Metrodeckers sitting there doing during the height of the morning and evening peak. I wonder if PB will look to put some of the surplus Metrodeckers on another route and then use that to push more TEs out
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Jun 25, 2019 8:21:09 GMT
It should be remembered that the price of oil is staying static and may even start to drop due to demand decreasing due to more miles per gallon, more trains converting to electric, the phasing out of so much plastic. An article the other day said Hybrid cars are greener them all electric at the moment. Add to this the fact the ones on the 43/134 are not even in service yet I'm sure all eyes will be one them to see are they running all day, are substitutions by conventional buses common, the fact that both routes need alot of spares (many garages are at cacapcity now without needing 4 or 5 spares per route plus buying 3 mroe buses then needed at probably 400k a pop). Indeed it will be interesting to what happens, particularly to compare the two types of buses.
Electric buses on routes such as the 46 seem to go all day, I think the 5 electric buses on the 98 can, but not 100% sure, so no doubt someone will correct me. I therefore think the omens are good that the buses will go all day long, at least after a few charging cycles, although how they will perform in say 5 years time, I wouldn't like to say.
The performance of the BYDs on the 153 and 360 is certainly encouraging. Neither route has a big surplus of spares, yet Go-Ahead haven't had to use a diesel bus on the 153 since taking over the route, and diesels are extremely rare on the 360 (none since ULEZ introduction). It'll be interesting to see if the double-deckers can match this.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 25, 2019 17:25:30 GMT
We certainly don't want four new fossil fuel burning power stations - that would just transfer both the pollution and CO2 problem elsewhere, not solve it. On the other another wind farm might just be the job! I do wonder why buses can't have solar panels on the roof to assist the batteries, whatever electricity they produce would be a bonus.
Having said that we have to start somewhere, and it does seem appropriate to make some routes, preferably those going through some of the most polluted areas, electric. Oxford Street buses arguably should all be electric, and you don't need four power stations to make that start.
You are of course right that the 23, 94 and 139 all have compliant buses, however if any or all of these routes became electric I would not expect an issue in finding a good home on another London route for these buses.
Currently, the most polluted roads in London AFAIK is Brixton Road at the top, followed by in no particular order, Putney High Street, Oxford Street & Marylebone Road - very interesting that the only electric route along these roads is the 98 and it's only 5 buses as well. You are of course right, and I don't think I explained myself very well. Oxford Street may not be the most polluted, but it has a higher profile and a far greater number of pedestrians and fewer vehicles than the other roads. Electric buses on buses on Oxford Street will therefore have a greater impact and benefit more people.
|
|