US schools can subscribe to an electric bus fleet at lower prices than diesel(canarymedia.com)
canarymedia.com
US schools can subscribe to an electric bus fleet at lower prices than diesel
https://www.canarymedia.com/articles/clean-fleets/us-schools-can-subscribe-to-an-electric-school-bus-fleet-at-prices-that-beat-diesel
291 comments
Even in terms of primary cost, diesel buses are expensive to maintain. My FIL was a mechanic for the local school district for 15 years, so I got a little insight into that aspect of the district. Our medium sized school district, 4 big high schools and all the feeder schools for them, employs around 6 full time mechanics plus their manager with all the equipment and the facility to work on the buses year round plus parts etc. It's not difficult to imagine that cost alone adds at least $1 million to our district's budget annually. In addition they have to have some percentage of extra buses because they are constantly rotating buses out for maintenance. They also have to have at least one extra bus and driver on standby every day because diesel buses breakdown regularly during a route and they have to go out with a second bus and pick up the kids and finish the route.
So if a district can outsource part of that maintenance cost, and electric buses prove to be lower maintenance and more reliable that their diesel counterparts, there are significant savings to be had for the school districts.
So if a district can outsource part of that maintenance cost, and electric buses prove to be lower maintenance and more reliable that their diesel counterparts, there are significant savings to be had for the school districts.
> diesel buses breakdown regularly
In comparison to what? Diesel engines in commercial vehicles are extremely reliable. It certainly could be possible for an electric bus to be more reliable, they certainly have less points of mechanical wear. However, there are a lot of power electronics going into charging their batteries and delivering the battery power to the motors.
In comparison to what? Diesel engines in commercial vehicles are extremely reliable. It certainly could be possible for an electric bus to be more reliable, they certainly have less points of mechanical wear. However, there are a lot of power electronics going into charging their batteries and delivering the battery power to the motors.
I agree, sorry to be tangential, but school buses even have a whole community around converting them into rvs/homes, skoolies. The advice thrown around most often within this community trends toward picking diesel over gas, because diesel ones are very reliable when maintained. I always read it's better to get a pre-2004 diesel bus, because they have simpler, more mechanical parts. Diesel engines are really hyped among skoolie enthusiasts, though of course that is not to say that in e.g. fb groups, you don't hear horror stories of people stranded with a broke-down rig, it's usually lack of maintenance though. When maintained, they do last well past when school districts retire them--maybe survivorship bias, the ones that lasted to the end were more likely to keep lasting. My boyfriend has one such bus that was made the same year he was born (1989) and it took us on a 10-state roadtrip and was our home for over a year.
The diesel engines in the Thomas busses my school district had in the 90s would like to have a word with you. Those fuckers were always breaking down. lol.
Plus they smelled like death and produced gross amounts of black smoke.
Plus they smelled like death and produced gross amounts of black smoke.
He probably lived through the "Maxfarce" era in which the Navistar MaxForce diesels that everyone and their brother ran proved to be less reliable than the International 7.3 IDIs they were replacing. To be clear, they weren't unreliable, they just had a tough act to follow.
Diesels, in general, are notoriously unreliable.
The only very selective myth I still hear repeated is that diesel engines are more durable now than they were, which isn’t saying much, and skirts around just how much else can and regularly does go wrong with a diesel-powered vehicle.
Flywheel clutches are an expensive nightmare, and the vibration destroys manifolds, cams and exhausts in short order.
That’s only for the dirtiest diesels that aren’t properly using DPFs or AdBlue (which if you’re seriously considering running school buses in 2022 and not using these, you’re a disgrace). Both of these fail regularly and cost a small fortune to replace.
There’s an entire underground industry dedicated to removing the particulate filters from Diesels to improve fuel economy and reliability (because I guess some people just hate kids, who knows?).
Electric vehicles have been around for well over a decade now, the data is back on them, and on the whole they are astonishingly reliable compared to the ICE vehicles they are replacing. There’s a lot of cables, sure, but they’re flexible and aren’t inherently moving parts.
The only very selective myth I still hear repeated is that diesel engines are more durable now than they were, which isn’t saying much, and skirts around just how much else can and regularly does go wrong with a diesel-powered vehicle.
Flywheel clutches are an expensive nightmare, and the vibration destroys manifolds, cams and exhausts in short order.
That’s only for the dirtiest diesels that aren’t properly using DPFs or AdBlue (which if you’re seriously considering running school buses in 2022 and not using these, you’re a disgrace). Both of these fail regularly and cost a small fortune to replace.
There’s an entire underground industry dedicated to removing the particulate filters from Diesels to improve fuel economy and reliability (because I guess some people just hate kids, who knows?).
Electric vehicles have been around for well over a decade now, the data is back on them, and on the whole they are astonishingly reliable compared to the ICE vehicles they are replacing. There’s a lot of cables, sure, but they’re flexible and aren’t inherently moving parts.
If Diesel engines are so unreliable why are they used in practically every heavy goods vehicle, bus, tractor, plant equipment, ship and backup electric generator in operation today?
Torque.
Which, incidentally, is also something electric motors are far superior at (flat curve...).
I thought electric had better torque, ie acceleration...?
Not true. There are diesel engines that have warranties up to half a million miles.
The old ones "run on physics"
The old ones "run on physics"
There absolutely are high warranty Diesel engines. That doesn't mean they'll last that long - a lot of those warranties are subsidised by servicing.
Even with that said (and as detailed above) there are so many other parts to a modern Diesel-powered vehicle that can and regularly do go wrong that they get a pass for because it's not in the engine block. I do wonder if this is because people just assume the vehicles are otherwise identical beyond the engine.
Even with that said (and as detailed above) there are so many other parts to a modern Diesel-powered vehicle that can and regularly do go wrong that they get a pass for because it's not in the engine block. I do wonder if this is because people just assume the vehicles are otherwise identical beyond the engine.
Exactly. Take construction or military machinery as example : they are all running diesel. Who says that's not reliable? Probably after clocking more than 200.000 km and without maintenance.
Motors on good shape and we'll maintained don't break down regularly
Most parts that break on a car are common to electric or engines. Suspension, brake fluid (the brakes might last longer but the fluid should be replaced every few years), tires, doors, seats.
> Most parts that break on a car are common to electric or engines. Suspension, brake fluid (the brakes might last longer but the fluid should be replaced every few years), tires, doors, seats.
It is true that a lot of parts are in common. But there are a lot of moving parts, susceptible to failure in an ICE not in electric.
I spent a lot of money recently fixing an oil leak and replacing the cam belt on my ICE. Routine maintenance (the leak specifically was not routine but leaks generally are).
My next car will be electric, I hope.
It is true that a lot of parts are in common. But there are a lot of moving parts, susceptible to failure in an ICE not in electric.
I spent a lot of money recently fixing an oil leak and replacing the cam belt on my ICE. Routine maintenance (the leak specifically was not routine but leaks generally are).
My next car will be electric, I hope.
Sure, but I just spent a lot of money on my car fixing non engine related problems. Most of the moving parts in an engine are well lubricated and thus don't fail very often. The real expensive failure on any car is when road salt rusts the body away.
Can you name them?
The engine is lubricated that well just because it gets the most wear and tear. The lubrication just tries to slow it down as much as possible. That's the reason why changing oil and filter is the first and foremost maintenance item on the list.
Shocks, struts and other suspension parts. After 10 years and 170k miles they were well worn.. these get a lot of wear and are not well lubricated,if only because unlike an engine they cannot be sealed.
Windshield was cracked.
Something in the TPMS was messed up.
Brake fluid change (another thing that few people do but should be done)
I didn't pay to fix the blind spot warning system, I want to but the repair costs is more than the car is worth.
Windshield was cracked.
Something in the TPMS was messed up.
Brake fluid change (another thing that few people do but should be done)
I didn't pay to fix the blind spot warning system, I want to but the repair costs is more than the car is worth.
"Most of the moving parts in an engine are well lubricated and thus don't fail very often."
For all our family cars over last 30 years, 90% of repair cost was engine. Those oarts are under temperature, pressure and massive friction.
For all our family cars over last 30 years, 90% of repair cost was engine. Those oarts are under temperature, pressure and massive friction.
[deleted]
Cummins diesels, Toyota diesels, Kubota diesels, Yanmar diesels Yes definitely.
US Detroit diesels? lol no.
US Detroit diesels? lol no.
DDC has been "detroit" in name only since the late '80s. First owned by Penske, then Daimler. The Series 60 and newer are perfectly acceptable diesels.
My father was a business manager for a few different school corporations. In at least one of them, the busses were all used - none were purchased new. It just wasn't worth it, and much cheaper to simply have an extra bus. You needed the mechanics regardless just to maintain them. You needed an extra driver anyway as well because people get sick. These aren't really the costs you are leading folks to believe they are, but part of overall cost savings.
One of the most wasteful (and expensive) things about school busses is that they are only used for school, which means they sit idle for much of the day. My father tried to work with at least one city to combine city busses with school busses - but state law (Indiana) forbid this since school busses were required by law to be the classic yellow with black markings.
I'll also add that outsourcing isn't without challenges, and the employees are often worse off. (I don't remember as many specifics right now: My father, who died 9 or 10 years ago, generally worked with custodial and cafeteria outsourcing.)
One of the most wasteful (and expensive) things about school busses is that they are only used for school, which means they sit idle for much of the day. My father tried to work with at least one city to combine city busses with school busses - but state law (Indiana) forbid this since school busses were required by law to be the classic yellow with black markings.
I'll also add that outsourcing isn't without challenges, and the employees are often worse off. (I don't remember as many specifics right now: My father, who died 9 or 10 years ago, generally worked with custodial and cafeteria outsourcing.)
>One of the most wasteful (and expensive) things about school busses is that they are only used for school, which means they sit idle for much of the day.
In my country's capital there is a plan of using a fleet of school mini-buses (as "taking kids to school" is among the top reasons why people say they still use a car for their daily commute), but also of putting these to work outside the narrow band of school start/end in other uses: taking old people to their doctors appointments, and commercial on-demand uberpool type transport.
In my country's capital there is a plan of using a fleet of school mini-buses (as "taking kids to school" is among the top reasons why people say they still use a car for their daily commute), but also of putting these to work outside the narrow band of school start/end in other uses: taking old people to their doctors appointments, and commercial on-demand uberpool type transport.
> I'll also add that outsourcing isn't without challenges, and the employees are often worse off. (I don't remember as many specifics right now: My father, who died 9 or 10 years ago, generally worked with custodial and cafeteria outsourcing.)
(In the following post I use "you" rhetorically, not talking about Broken_Hippo directly.)
Yeah. The body rental place makes it look like the killerest deal imaginable, like you get all the benefits of having human workers, minus actually having to deal with any human problems. No unions or strikes, if the body rental you're using gets organized it dies without the collateral damage to the renter, you just switch outsourcing unit. And there's tons of other human problems, and those human problems require other humans's help. They ought to get real, people are expensive, life is expensive, if something is more expensive than life we replace it with life.
There is this deal you can get where you pay about half market wages, almost exactly half, and there's no unionization or anything. Just have to worry about emigration. Called slavery, these days people focus on the whipping and the coercion, they forget if you're a slave your master will be disgustingly cheap with the things you need he must provide for you, because he knows it's literally painful to ask.
If you want something cheap and rather your money ends up spent on electricity than food, like who cares a joule's a joule, go, go and fire 100% of your workers and replace them all with machines. Sure to make a lot of money!
What will you spend it on, alternating current or direct current? What voltage are you compatible with?
(In the following post I use "you" rhetorically, not talking about Broken_Hippo directly.)
Yeah. The body rental place makes it look like the killerest deal imaginable, like you get all the benefits of having human workers, minus actually having to deal with any human problems. No unions or strikes, if the body rental you're using gets organized it dies without the collateral damage to the renter, you just switch outsourcing unit. And there's tons of other human problems, and those human problems require other humans's help. They ought to get real, people are expensive, life is expensive, if something is more expensive than life we replace it with life.
There is this deal you can get where you pay about half market wages, almost exactly half, and there's no unionization or anything. Just have to worry about emigration. Called slavery, these days people focus on the whipping and the coercion, they forget if you're a slave your master will be disgustingly cheap with the things you need he must provide for you, because he knows it's literally painful to ask.
If you want something cheap and rather your money ends up spent on electricity than food, like who cares a joule's a joule, go, go and fire 100% of your workers and replace them all with machines. Sure to make a lot of money!
What will you spend it on, alternating current or direct current? What voltage are you compatible with?
My daughter takes an electric bluebird to school. It has broken down numerous times this year, it has even stopped mid-route due to low battery (no idea who's to blame for that). Nevertheless it's nice to see progress and things will get better.
> They also have to have at least one extra bus and driver on standby every day because diesel buses breakdown regularly during a route and they have to go out with a second bus and pick up the kids and finish the route.
I distinctly remember being one of those kids that would have to be picked up in another bus every once in awhile. This was before cell phones, so the bus driver had to walk to the nearest house (this was out in the country) and ask to use the phone. I think we had a problem bus for a few months where this happened fairly regularly until they swapped it out for a different one.
One time a passing vehicle kicked up a rock that took out the windshield. Nobody was seriously injured, but there was a fair bit of broken glass.
I distinctly remember being one of those kids that would have to be picked up in another bus every once in awhile. This was before cell phones, so the bus driver had to walk to the nearest house (this was out in the country) and ask to use the phone. I think we had a problem bus for a few months where this happened fairly regularly until they swapped it out for a different one.
One time a passing vehicle kicked up a rock that took out the windshield. Nobody was seriously injured, but there was a fair bit of broken glass.
The buses in my small town all had radios (and quite a bit of chatter between drivers, as I recall). Were you in a district with very long distances or geography where that wouldn’t have been feasible?
My bus route wound over and between a couple of hills, so a radio might not have worked.
California's greatly surpasseed the misery of their old diesel fleets. In a bid to "reduce carbon emissions" (really: cut budgets in the way that screwed over parents as much as possible), they simply eliminated most school busses.
Then, the state government claimed this reduced carbon emissions, ignoring the externalities associated with doubling most parents' commutes for 18+ years.
Then, the state government claimed this reduced carbon emissions, ignoring the externalities associated with doubling most parents' commutes for 18+ years.
Stating the obvious here, but eliminating school buses and thus making people have to drive their kids to school would INCREASE carbon emissions. So the statement is both factually incorrect and a shameless attempt at misdirection.
"Misleading and factually incorrect": the foundation of all public policy in CA.
Do school districts still use diesel? CNG seems pretty popular these days.
I'm in high school in the USA and am on multiple interscholastic sports teams, and am also interested in transportation. I have yet to see a single CNG school bus
Likely the CNG buses are purchased by wealthy districts and the less well off districts purchase the used diesel buses at a discount.
For city buses. Schools are mostly diesel from what I've seen. You need special infrastructure to fill CNG, which limits trips.
> Diesel motors generate a substantial amount of fine particulate that is unhealthy for anybody, and particularly unhealthy for children.
This is one of the biggest issues with US' private healthcare system.
The U.S. government just doesn't feel that direct "cost" in the same way countries that have to pay to fix the health of their citizens do. This is why you see a lot of other countries put higher taxes on sugar, gasoline, diesel, etc. Because they see a direct correlation between the consumption of those things and them having to invest more in their national healthcare system out of their tax money.
Meanwhile, in the US, since it's the citizens that pay out of pocket, that money still goes into the economy, so it's kind of all the same to the government whether or not they get sick or not. They may notice some correlation in the long-term, but the negative effects of these things are not nearly as urgent to the government.
This is one of the biggest issues with US' private healthcare system.
The U.S. government just doesn't feel that direct "cost" in the same way countries that have to pay to fix the health of their citizens do. This is why you see a lot of other countries put higher taxes on sugar, gasoline, diesel, etc. Because they see a direct correlation between the consumption of those things and them having to invest more in their national healthcare system out of their tax money.
Meanwhile, in the US, since it's the citizens that pay out of pocket, that money still goes into the economy, so it's kind of all the same to the government whether or not they get sick or not. They may notice some correlation in the long-term, but the negative effects of these things are not nearly as urgent to the government.
This is simply false.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56571
> Federal Subsidies. In CBO and JCT’s projections, net federal subsidies (that is, the cost of all the subsidies minus the taxes and penalties) in 2021 for insured people are $920 billion, or 4.4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).
The US federal government (that is, excluding state and county governments, which also spend money on this) spends 920 billion dollars a year on health insurance and care. This also excludes the VA system (~200 billion), which does cover dependents. So that's 1.1 trillion per year by the federal government alone. To take California for an example, you can add another 100 billion in state spending on Medi-Cal. It's also not uncommon for counties and cities to operate and run their own hospital systems.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/56571
> Federal Subsidies. In CBO and JCT’s projections, net federal subsidies (that is, the cost of all the subsidies minus the taxes and penalties) in 2021 for insured people are $920 billion, or 4.4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP).
The US federal government (that is, excluding state and county governments, which also spend money on this) spends 920 billion dollars a year on health insurance and care. This also excludes the VA system (~200 billion), which does cover dependents. So that's 1.1 trillion per year by the federal government alone. To take California for an example, you can add another 100 billion in state spending on Medi-Cal. It's also not uncommon for counties and cities to operate and run their own hospital systems.
Very true and also the reason for the exploding costs of the education system people complain about. In countries where universities run on public budgets you won't see exploding administrations and degree inflation because the state has a direct incentive to keep costs low rather than handing out loans that go to private institutions.
Was honestly surprised when I saw that the rate of university graduation in the US is twice as high as it is here in Germany.
Was honestly surprised when I saw that the rate of university graduation in the US is twice as high as it is here in Germany.
I guess if you're a year/two into a course in America you'd probably have $20,000 in debt to pay. If you have to pay it without graduating then you'd probably think you'd wasted the money - so you'd be likely to finish the degree to make sure you got "something" out of it.
By contrast here in Finland education is free, so it's a lot easier for people to start courses, and if it didn't suit then drop out. Or move cities, and get a job.
Where education is free I'd expect both more people to sign up to it, but also more people to drop out. Or take 10+ years to eventually get their degree whilst continuing to work.
By contrast here in Finland education is free, so it's a lot easier for people to start courses, and if it didn't suit then drop out. Or move cities, and get a job.
Where education is free I'd expect both more people to sign up to it, but also more people to drop out. Or take 10+ years to eventually get their degree whilst continuing to work.
Canadian has free healthcare and still has diesel public/school buses
Nope, about 1/3 of Americans have Medicaid or Medicare. At least 6% of all gdp is government dollars in healthcare, probably more.
The US spends about as much as peer nations on healthcare through taxes. Then it spends that much again in private expenses. In return it gets poorer health outcomes.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/237043/us-health-care-sp...
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-...
https://www.statista.com/statistics/237043/us-health-care-sp...
Huh? Most of Europe has socialized medicine and they have a ton more diesels and thus air pollution than the US.
Yes, that was a mistake. Diesel was promoted as lower C02 than petrol engines, before the problems with particulates were well known. (1)
This is of course changing now. (2)
As noted in the second link, a factor is the "Volkswagen emissions scandal", AKA "Dieselgate" (3)
1) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41985715
2) https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/98747/d...
3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
This is of course changing now. (2)
As noted in the second link, a factor is the "Volkswagen emissions scandal", AKA "Dieselgate" (3)
1) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41985715
2) https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/98747/d...
3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
I really doubt this causation, for a few reasons.
1. Everyone gets sick and dies. Dying a bit earlier from diesel probably doesn't cost more than whatever you would have died from later.
2. These other countries also have government funded pension system. If people live longer that's an added expense! If you do the cynical math, government finances are best if people die of something cheap soon after they retire.
1. Everyone gets sick and dies. Dying a bit earlier from diesel probably doesn't cost more than whatever you would have died from later.
2. These other countries also have government funded pension system. If people live longer that's an added expense! If you do the cynical math, government finances are best if people die of something cheap soon after they retire.
Consider that, even for two people who die at the same age, the one who is sick for many years before dying probably incurs more healthcare costs.
Lots of nations have public health-care and millions of diesel motors.
(Disclaimer: have driven pure electric for going on 7.5 years)
It may be more complex: electricity generation is very dirty in some regions, such as where coal is burned.
Is it more dirty than diesel emissions? I have no idea, but old diesels were nasty.
It may be more complex: electricity generation is very dirty in some regions, such as where coal is burned.
Is it more dirty than diesel emissions? I have no idea, but old diesels were nasty.
Engineering Explained did the math: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RhtiPefVzM
Spoiler: Well-to-wheels, BEV cars are better than the best gas cars (top end prius) even if the source electricity is 100% coal.
The best is still not driving, but it's a step in the right direction.
Spoiler: Well-to-wheels, BEV cars are better than the best gas cars (top end prius) even if the source electricity is 100% coal.
The best is still not driving, but it's a step in the right direction.
There's also the fact that coal power plants tend to be pretty far from heavily populated areas. Even if the US power grid were 100% coal (which it is not) this would still be a win as far as cleaner air goes for a significant portion of the population. There's a big difference between a coal burning power plant's emissions 50 miles away and a school bus idling right outside your house in terms of air quality. That's not even counting the air scrubbers and particulate capturing systems many coal power plants are required to have. The bottom line is the exhaust coming out of a coal burning power plant is much cleaner than even a brand new diesel school bus, let alone all the older buses still in service.
The biggest source of particulate in my neighborhood as in most is recreational wood fires, where they allowed. The diesel schoolbus is nothing by comparison. Actually the fires are not allowed but people do it anyway and you need a drone to find them.
Plus coal is more expensive by LCOE than wind and solar, and has been for several years.
That means electric companies are losing money running coal plants.
They are racing to replace them with wind and solar and natural gas turbine, with the gas turbine slater for replacement with storage once that is cheap enough.
Finally, with EVs and the electric grid, the power can be phased out centrally. Even if coal is used RIGHT NOW, once new power generation is available it is a seamless switchover for EVs.
If in the long term some dirt cheap thorium reactor supplants solar and wind, EVs don't care where the electrons come from.
Plus home solar, EVs doubling as home energy backup/storage, less components in the EV require less manufacturing, safer skateboard design, more internal space, lower center of gravity, regen breaking.
Although the ideal transition is a 100 mile LFP PHEV for the next ten years. No range anxiety, 90% + of daily and weekend driving is all electric, maximizes use of current manufacturing capacity of batteries, regen breaking efficiency.
Ten years ago (,ten years after the first Prius) we should have required all consumer passenger vehicles to be PHEV in a phased in manner.
It's still not too late to do that.
That means electric companies are losing money running coal plants.
They are racing to replace them with wind and solar and natural gas turbine, with the gas turbine slater for replacement with storage once that is cheap enough.
Finally, with EVs and the electric grid, the power can be phased out centrally. Even if coal is used RIGHT NOW, once new power generation is available it is a seamless switchover for EVs.
If in the long term some dirt cheap thorium reactor supplants solar and wind, EVs don't care where the electrons come from.
Plus home solar, EVs doubling as home energy backup/storage, less components in the EV require less manufacturing, safer skateboard design, more internal space, lower center of gravity, regen breaking.
Although the ideal transition is a 100 mile LFP PHEV for the next ten years. No range anxiety, 90% + of daily and weekend driving is all electric, maximizes use of current manufacturing capacity of batteries, regen breaking efficiency.
Ten years ago (,ten years after the first Prius) we should have required all consumer passenger vehicles to be PHEV in a phased in manner.
It's still not too late to do that.
This video is actually a great example of how smart people can fool themselves.
The sources he uses for breakeven time (DOE) assumes 24.3 mpg [1] for the average regular car, but people don't drive average cars they drive specific cars.
If you take the DOE assumptions and approach this from the other end, CO2 pollution by mpg, then you find an ICE car getting approx 30 mpg or more is less polluting per mile driven than an EV powered entirely by coal, and one getting >45 mpg is less polluting than an EV powered by natural gas. This does not include the battery at all, which makes sense as it is an independent consideration.
This is a more honest way to present the information so individuals can make informed decisions for themselves among potential car purchases and so that people aren't fooled into thinking that all EVs are less polluting in all circumstances.
1 - https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions_sources....
The sources he uses for breakeven time (DOE) assumes 24.3 mpg [1] for the average regular car, but people don't drive average cars they drive specific cars.
If you take the DOE assumptions and approach this from the other end, CO2 pollution by mpg, then you find an ICE car getting approx 30 mpg or more is less polluting per mile driven than an EV powered entirely by coal, and one getting >45 mpg is less polluting than an EV powered by natural gas. This does not include the battery at all, which makes sense as it is an independent consideration.
This is a more honest way to present the information so individuals can make informed decisions for themselves among potential car purchases and so that people aren't fooled into thinking that all EVs are less polluting in all circumstances.
1 - https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions_sources....
How is doing a calculation based on assuming electricity sourced 100% from coal or NG help develop an informed decision? US electricity is roughly 40% carbon free, 40% natural gas and 20% coal - wouldn’t it be more honest to use this mix in your calculation? And that’s ignoring particulates and NOx.
Coal is used to establish a lower bound.
That makes little sense to me.
Your analysis would result in the conclusion that charging an EV in France (90% carbon free electricity) causes the same amount of CO2 emissions as using one in South Africa (90% fossil fuel electricity).
The expansion of EVs has coincided with a massive drop in coal electricity share and a massive increase in solar PV and wind share, globally. Assuming that expanding EVs are being powered by coal is odd to say the least. Especially given that (at least where I live) 70%+ of EV charging is done at home, mostly using off-peak electricity, which tends to have a much higher renewable share.
Your analysis would result in the conclusion that charging an EV in France (90% carbon free electricity) causes the same amount of CO2 emissions as using one in South Africa (90% fossil fuel electricity).
The expansion of EVs has coincided with a massive drop in coal electricity share and a massive increase in solar PV and wind share, globally. Assuming that expanding EVs are being powered by coal is odd to say the least. Especially given that (at least where I live) 70%+ of EV charging is done at home, mostly using off-peak electricity, which tends to have a much higher renewable share.
And maybe as the type of generation used for the marginal difference in energy required. If your country generates 90% of its electricity from hydroelectric and 10% from coal, you might still use coal for the comparison because hydroelectric power would be slow to add and the extra electricity for EVs would have to provided by coal
Assuming that it's more likely that marginal demand will be met by coal than by renewables makes no sense to me.
Coal is rapidly been retired as a source of electricity generation - 85% of generation capacity being retired in 2022 will be coal[1] - and there hasn't been a new large coal plant built in the US for over a decade[2]. In Europe the amount of electricity being generated by coal is half of what it was at its peak.
Meanwhile, renewables now make up about a 87% share of new electricity generation capacity in the the US[3]. Europe is similar.
Pricing the CO2 emissions cost of an EV using the dirtiest and fastest declining electricity source (coal) does not seem fair or honest to me.
[1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50838
[2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever...
[3] https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/solar/renewables-are-87...
Coal is rapidly been retired as a source of electricity generation - 85% of generation capacity being retired in 2022 will be coal[1] - and there hasn't been a new large coal plant built in the US for over a decade[2]. In Europe the amount of electricity being generated by coal is half of what it was at its peak.
Meanwhile, renewables now make up about a 87% share of new electricity generation capacity in the the US[3]. Europe is similar.
Pricing the CO2 emissions cost of an EV using the dirtiest and fastest declining electricity source (coal) does not seem fair or honest to me.
[1] https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=50838
[2] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/will-the-u-s-ever...
[3] https://www.renewableenergyworld.com/solar/renewables-are-87...
Still... if you plan to add 100MW of renewable this year and retire 100MW of coal, then demand goes up by 100MW, do you now add 200MW of renewable instead, or do you delay the retiring of the 100MW of coal?
This is an important point. I live in Illinois which is over 60% carbonless mainly through aging nuclear investments. It would be naively optimistic to suggest that marginal demand will be only 40% fossil fuel since the nuclear will not be replaced.
There are many, many assumptions to such calculations. Here's PG&E's best guess at g CO2 / kWh based on time of day/year in California (page 2):
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/fuels/lcf...
If you only charge from noon to two in Q1, then use have zero marginal emissions per mile driven (this is the best case). If you only charge from 7-8pm you emit 142.06 gCO2e/MJ.
1 megajoule = 0.2777777778 kilowatt-hour
Converting gives us ~512 g CO2e per kWh.
Car efficiency is measured in miles per kWh. 4 miles per kWh is doable (some cars are better, some worse). So, that's 128g CO2e per mile.
50 miles per gallon would be great. A gallon of gas emits 20 lbs CO2, or 0.4lbs per mile, which is 181 grams per mile.
So, if you only charge at the worst possible time in California (basically forcing PG&E to use natural gas plants to charge your car), then a 50 mpg car is still 50% worse than a slightly larger EV.
In practice, you charge during off peak hours. At night, emissions are about half worst case. During the day, they're 10% of worst case.
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/fuels/lcf...
If you only charge from noon to two in Q1, then use have zero marginal emissions per mile driven (this is the best case). If you only charge from 7-8pm you emit 142.06 gCO2e/MJ.
1 megajoule = 0.2777777778 kilowatt-hour
Converting gives us ~512 g CO2e per kWh.
Car efficiency is measured in miles per kWh. 4 miles per kWh is doable (some cars are better, some worse). So, that's 128g CO2e per mile.
50 miles per gallon would be great. A gallon of gas emits 20 lbs CO2, or 0.4lbs per mile, which is 181 grams per mile.
So, if you only charge at the worst possible time in California (basically forcing PG&E to use natural gas plants to charge your car), then a 50 mpg car is still 50% worse than a slightly larger EV.
In practice, you charge during off peak hours. At night, emissions are about half worst case. During the day, they're 10% of worst case.
If you just apply CA's 49% natural gas (according to DOE) to the 45 mpg for 100% natural gas you come up with a gas-burning car needing >90 mpg to be cleaner -- well higher than the 70 mpg you calculated vs charging on natural gas -- but easily achievable with hybrids.
I feel like there are many people who see 30 coal / 45 nat gas and take offense that it doesn't make EVs sound particularly good. This is why I called it a more honest presentation because EVs in terms of CO2 are fairly bad in WV and marginal in DE or MI or many other places compared to a high-mpg regular car. Instead of taking offense and setting out to correct the record, understand that not sounding particularly good is an accurate view.
Even in CA, the mpg needed to be cleaner than EV formulation makes it clear that driving a 100 mpg hybrid for instance is so good that any further gains are of little consequence.
I feel like there are many people who see 30 coal / 45 nat gas and take offense that it doesn't make EVs sound particularly good. This is why I called it a more honest presentation because EVs in terms of CO2 are fairly bad in WV and marginal in DE or MI or many other places compared to a high-mpg regular car. Instead of taking offense and setting out to correct the record, understand that not sounding particularly good is an accurate view.
Even in CA, the mpg needed to be cleaner than EV formulation makes it clear that driving a 100 mpg hybrid for instance is so good that any further gains are of little consequence.
In the same vein as my sibling comment, the average is an average because not everyone drives a prius; tons of the US are dominated by trucks and SUVs. A more informed metric would be comparing EV vs ICE in cities based on those cities' percentage of electricity generation and average MPG based on the car population.
Not driving would mean smaller schools closer to home, and infrastructure that allows kids to ride their bike to school. It's completely doable, but it does require people to care about more than just cars.
America is actively against letting your kid out of your sight, with the fear of bad actors perpetuated by primetime news channels being the driving factor. The advent of only needing to part with your child when you drop them off at school, or watch them get on the bus, provides a framework for chain-of-custody and accountability if anything were to happen to the child. Unless you still allow car access for the parents worried about this, simply putting more schools within a mile or two of homes isn't going to work without parents being on board.
A school being a mile away with safe sidewalk tend to convince people the kid can go alone sooner.
It would significantly expand taxes, and that nearly always faces stiff opposition with voters. Especially when it is an open-ended increase.
> It would significantly expand taxes
How exactly? Do you have any examples? Also, have you ever seen the price of car infrastructure? I would be willing to bet that denser walkable urban infrastructure projects are waaaaay cheaper than building and maintaining sprawling road, sewage, and power transmission networks. Sprawl is seriously draining the finances of many small cities and towns in the US. There's a whole book about it: https://www.google.com/search?q=strong+towns
You could also just watch this smug video https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0
How exactly? Do you have any examples? Also, have you ever seen the price of car infrastructure? I would be willing to bet that denser walkable urban infrastructure projects are waaaaay cheaper than building and maintaining sprawling road, sewage, and power transmission networks. Sprawl is seriously draining the finances of many small cities and towns in the US. There's a whole book about it: https://www.google.com/search?q=strong+towns
You could also just watch this smug video https://youtu.be/7IsMeKl-Sv0
The only way you could sell it as an overall less expensive option would be with really elaborate studies that could convincingly tie the transportation effects to the design of the school system.
But, when it comes to schools, fewer buildings means lower costs. We've been suffering this for years, there aren't anywhere near as many schools in my district as there were 30 or 40 years ago, even as the number of students go up. It's less expensive to consolidate the schools into a fewer number of locations and increase the capacity of the remaining locations.
Ergo, going the other direction and creating more, smaller schools (each with their own infrastructure, custodians, some level of administration, etc) is going to require taxpayers to foot the bill. And not like a levy that only lasts for X years, but on an ongoing basis. Where I live (Oregon) there is massive resistance to new taxes. I do not think we are unique in that regard.
But, when it comes to schools, fewer buildings means lower costs. We've been suffering this for years, there aren't anywhere near as many schools in my district as there were 30 or 40 years ago, even as the number of students go up. It's less expensive to consolidate the schools into a fewer number of locations and increase the capacity of the remaining locations.
Ergo, going the other direction and creating more, smaller schools (each with their own infrastructure, custodians, some level of administration, etc) is going to require taxpayers to foot the bill. And not like a levy that only lasts for X years, but on an ongoing basis. Where I live (Oregon) there is massive resistance to new taxes. I do not think we are unique in that regard.
Yeah, but it's not terribly likely that you could stop maintaining the sprawl, because it's already there. Certainly not quickly.
Yeah they are going to raise taxes to pay for it because that's all they can do. Which is the opposite of what OP said
No, it is not more dirty than diesel emissions. Coal plants are stationary, so they can install huge scrubbing apparatus. Diesels have to drag whatever cleanup mechanism they have installed with them, which is inherently limiting.
Also, those coal plants aren't parked outside primary schools idling, and schoolkids aren't spending hours sitting around their smokestacks.
Don't get me wrong: Coal is dirty as sin and radioactive as hell. Coal delenda est.
Also, those coal plants aren't parked outside primary schools idling, and schoolkids aren't spending hours sitting around their smokestacks.
Don't get me wrong: Coal is dirty as sin and radioactive as hell. Coal delenda est.
It's much cleaner, even after accounting for losses in electricity transport and storage. Power plants are just much more efficient than mobile internal combustion engines.
Let's not forget the diesel emissions cheating scandal. Diesel engines are so amazingly difficult deal with from an emissions perspective that it's basically impossible to build one with an emissions system that doesn't require constant maintenance (filters, additives).
Diesel emissions requirements for commercial vehicles are much more lenient for this reason.
Diesel emissions requirements for commercial vehicles are much more lenient for this reason.
> Is it more dirty than diesel emissions? I have no idea, but old diesels were nasty.
When comparing old diesels to old coal power plants the power plants win by being more efficient but both belch out a lot of pollution. They also have the advantage of burning coal, a fuel which is available in abundance and does not need as much processing as crude oil does to be used in diesel engines.
When comparing old diesels to modern coal power plants this is true at an even higher level since those modern power plants filter out fly ash and are more efficient.
When comparing modern diesels to old coal-fired power plants the diesels win by being less polluting and possibly on terms of efficiency.
Modern diesels versus modern coal power plants goes to the power plants again since these win on terms of efficiency - especially when using combined heat & power - over the diesels.
When comparing old diesels to old coal power plants the power plants win by being more efficient but both belch out a lot of pollution. They also have the advantage of burning coal, a fuel which is available in abundance and does not need as much processing as crude oil does to be used in diesel engines.
When comparing old diesels to modern coal power plants this is true at an even higher level since those modern power plants filter out fly ash and are more efficient.
When comparing modern diesels to old coal-fired power plants the diesels win by being less polluting and possibly on terms of efficiency.
Modern diesels versus modern coal power plants goes to the power plants again since these win on terms of efficiency - especially when using combined heat & power - over the diesels.
I have found measuring in typical American neighborhoods that PM2.5 is raised the most when people burn wood for recreation or heat in the evening. It is much higher in the evening with a few neighborhood fire pits than during rush hour with a few diesel vehicles around.
This is also when residents have asthma symptoms too. To be fair they are more likely to be home.
So it is not cut and dry but if possible I would love to get rid of vehicle emissions as some particulate is too fine to measure.
This is also when residents have asthma symptoms too. To be fair they are more likely to be home.
So it is not cut and dry but if possible I would love to get rid of vehicle emissions as some particulate is too fine to measure.
So what? You can try and clean up both. Particulate is not the only pollutant either. NOx and ozone are also emitted from diesel cars.
Agree, just saying vehicle emissions are part of the picture and more work needs to be done on air quality.
Yes because the coal burning is done at a central location with fairly advanced technology to capture dirty hydrocarbons. The tailpipe is spreading soot all over.
[deleted]
Electricity generation CAN be done cleanly, and should in the future continue to get greener.
ICE cars will always give off pollution.
ICE cars will always give off pollution.
We can make power plants cleaner, and generally we do (but not nearly fast enough).
The thing is that we're going to burn coal no matter what.
downvotes to ask a question? what has HN become?
Apparently there's an important patent on lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries that expires next month (on April 27th). I'm hoping that changes the economics on batteries and that LFPs become cheap and abundant, and widely available from a variety of manufacturers that aren't located in China.
LFP seems like the obvious choice for large vehicles like buses unless there's some reason to really need to optimize for range. In schoolbuses especially, it would be good to use a kind of battery that's much less likely to catch on fire.
LFP seems like the obvious choice for large vehicles like buses unless there's some reason to really need to optimize for range. In schoolbuses especially, it would be good to use a kind of battery that's much less likely to catch on fire.
Yes, that's a great point. Even if you ignore the usual idle time between the morning and afternoon runs, I have to imagine a range of 150-200 miles would cover ~95% of use cases. The bus problem therefore should be much easier than the long haul truck problem. Plus, there's no trailer so you could run the battery pack the entire length of the bus.
One problem is that 'diesel outages' on school nights are extremely rare or nonexistent. Maybe deliveries are late or pumps break but it seems like a solved problem. Electric trains are also a solved problem and are hardened from many power outages too.
Whereas some work needs to be done to harden the infrastructure at the school district level to avoid electric bus outages.
Whereas some work needs to be done to harden the infrastructure at the school district level to avoid electric bus outages.
If there's a major power outage, the school probably won't be in session either. Though getting the students home might be a problem if power goes out in the middle of a school day and the buses haven't charged enough to get the students home. (If they have enough reserve capacity it's probably not an issue.)
Worst case, you could have some diesel generators at the bus depot.
They work really well for city buses also, although they need some charging at the ends. Still have a sweet spot in regards to range though even though the latest generation allows for high capacity buses. They needed to rework a bunch of lines to fit in the envelope.
https://www.electricitygoteborg.se/en/news/improved-urban-en...
Also helps that Volvo is headquartered in Goteborg, so always eager to try new things. The first "prototype" style BEV bus line opened early 2015.
https://www.electricitygoteborg.se/en/news/improved-urban-en...
Also helps that Volvo is headquartered in Goteborg, so always eager to try new things. The first "prototype" style BEV bus line opened early 2015.
LiFePo batteries are already getting produced in huge numbers in China and are very cheap even here in the west. Could the Chinese LiFePo products legally be imported if they were using patented tech? Or is it a specific variation of LiFePo that is patented, and could make the batteries better?
Because at 150-250$/kWh retail price it's going to be extremely hard for local manufacturers to compete in the market against established Chinese manufacturers that can already make state of the art, high quality batteries at insane volumes.
Because at 150-250$/kWh retail price it's going to be extremely hard for local manufacturers to compete in the market against established Chinese manufacturers that can already make state of the art, high quality batteries at insane volumes.
I'm not 100% sure what the situation is, but I think the issue is that if some car manufacturer tried to import a large quantity of LFP cells from China they might be sued if they don't pay the patent licensing fees. Thus the price of LFP cells in China isn't the same as the price of LFP cells anywhere else purchased through legitimate channels. (I'm not sure if the cheap-ish cells you can get on AliExpress are paying those royalties or if they're kind of flying under the radar.)
I'm hoping to see sub-$100 per kwh LFP cells sometime soon in the U.S. through some channel that ordinary people can order from. It would be a huge boon for EV conversion if the batteries weren't hugely expensive. I think that's probably attainable. LFP batteries aren't fundamentally expensive, you just need to have good automation, cheap energy, and economies of scale. The input materials are relatively cheap. China's main advantage besides the patent thing is that they've been quietly building their battery manufacturing capabilities and supply chains for a couple decades, and it's hard to compete with that.
I'm hoping to see sub-$100 per kwh LFP cells sometime soon in the U.S. through some channel that ordinary people can order from. It would be a huge boon for EV conversion if the batteries weren't hugely expensive. I think that's probably attainable. LFP batteries aren't fundamentally expensive, you just need to have good automation, cheap energy, and economies of scale. The input materials are relatively cheap. China's main advantage besides the patent thing is that they've been quietly building their battery manufacturing capabilities and supply chains for a couple decades, and it's hard to compete with that.
Is safety a criteria for school bus in USA? I thought it was only cost since the design is from the last century and many bus don’t even have seatbelts.
The NHTSA recognizes that large busses are not cars and use a different solution.
Large school buses are heavier and distribute crash forces differently than passenger cars and light trucks do. Because of these differences, bus passengers experience much less crash force than those in passenger cars, light trucks, and vans.
NHTSA decided the best way to provide crash protection to passengers of large school buses is through a concept called “compartmentalization.” This requires that the interior of large buses protect children without them needing to buckle up. Through compartmentalization, children are protected from crashes by strong, closely-spaced seats that have energy-absorbing seat backs.
Statistics bear this out, taking a school bus to school is about 70 times more likely to deliver a student safely. In this context, 70 is huge.
Large school buses are heavier and distribute crash forces differently than passenger cars and light trucks do. Because of these differences, bus passengers experience much less crash force than those in passenger cars, light trucks, and vans.
NHTSA decided the best way to provide crash protection to passengers of large school buses is through a concept called “compartmentalization.” This requires that the interior of large buses protect children without them needing to buckle up. Through compartmentalization, children are protected from crashes by strong, closely-spaced seats that have energy-absorbing seat backs.
Statistics bear this out, taking a school bus to school is about 70 times more likely to deliver a student safely. In this context, 70 is huge.
It’s a nice way to say that kids can slam the seats.
And airbags is a nice way of saying a little bomb is going to blow up in your face if you crash.
They'll slam into the seats and still be safer.
YouTube has plenty of videos showing the insides of school buses during crashes, anything that ain't a frontal crash has kids sliding and flying all over the place.
They slide sideways out of the seats trough any serious horizontal forces, in the case of a rollover their heads will violently hit the roof as they literally take off from the seats [0], and then fall on the people on the ground side.
[0] https://youtu.be/OvNjVQkye8Y
They slide sideways out of the seats trough any serious horizontal forces, in the case of a rollover their heads will violently hit the roof as they literally take off from the seats [0], and then fall on the people on the ground side.
[0] https://youtu.be/OvNjVQkye8Y
YouTube also has plenty of videos of plane crashes, that doesn't mean that passenger aircraft are inherently unsafe, but that there are always risks associated with transportation and given extraordinary enough circumstances those risks will be revealed.
The point here is not "school buses are inherently unsafe", the point is that they seem to lack a basic safety feature that's otherwise common, even in passenger aircraft, that of seatbelts.
[deleted]
This NTSB PSA video explains it like "eggs in a carton" [0], but those bus seats look like regular benches, zero molding for an actual fit, like an egg would have inside a carton from all sides.
I understand that getting a horde of kids to put on seatbelts is a compliance nightmare, but imho it's difficult to argue how that wouldn't make a massive difference in a crash scenario, particularly during roll-over incidents [1]
[0] https://youtu.be/ksw67zFnuAE
[1] https://youtu.be/l4uHbX0SL_w (NSFW)
I understand that getting a horde of kids to put on seatbelts is a compliance nightmare, but imho it's difficult to argue how that wouldn't make a massive difference in a crash scenario, particularly during roll-over incidents [1]
[0] https://youtu.be/ksw67zFnuAE
[1] https://youtu.be/l4uHbX0SL_w (NSFW)
How common do you think that is? There seem to be several videos, but perhaps there's a lot of CCTV on school buses.
I can't remember ever seeing pictures of a city bus (as opposed to a long distance bus) overturned in an accident in Europe. City bus-type vehicles are used for public bus service and school bus service ("school bus" is a usage, not a type of vehicle) but searching for things like "bus crash England" shows very, very few cases where a bus has overturned, even when it's come off the road and slid down a slope.
If [1] is anything to go by, the bus needs to hit a similarly heavy vehicle to overturn. Could the American school bus design be susceptible to climbing up/rolling over a car, then tipping, compared to the typical European low-floor lower-centre-of-gravity bus?
(No doubt there are other factors that influence the American school bus design.)
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/16/bus-toppled-colli...
I can't remember ever seeing pictures of a city bus (as opposed to a long distance bus) overturned in an accident in Europe. City bus-type vehicles are used for public bus service and school bus service ("school bus" is a usage, not a type of vehicle) but searching for things like "bus crash England" shows very, very few cases where a bus has overturned, even when it's come off the road and slid down a slope.
If [1] is anything to go by, the bus needs to hit a similarly heavy vehicle to overturn. Could the American school bus design be susceptible to climbing up/rolling over a car, then tipping, compared to the typical European low-floor lower-centre-of-gravity bus?
(No doubt there are other factors that influence the American school bus design.)
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2009/dec/16/bus-toppled-colli...
School busses have a ton of safety features -- just with a different strategy than is applied to cars. Part of the reason many don't have seat belts is because they are also designed to have safety features that work without seatbelts. The passengers are rowdy kids who might not always wear their seatbelts, so while adding them might increase protection in some cases, a safety design that primarily relies on seatbelts might not actually be a great idea.
US school busses are heavy and sit very high. Busses can be hit by cars with little force imparted to the occupants. The most dangerous thing about school busses is the risk it poses to the other drivers that hit it: https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Cra...
US school busses are heavy and sit very high. Busses can be hit by cars with little force imparted to the occupants. The most dangerous thing about school busses is the risk it poses to the other drivers that hit it: https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Cra...
There have been a ton of DOT and NHTSA studies that have shown that seatbelts don't keep children that much safer during accidents that involve school busses, because the children are high off the ground, busses don't move at very high speeds, 48 children wearing seatbelts makes a firefighters rescue job 100x harder, etc...
Seat belts have been required in some states for decades at this point. We had them on buses when I was in elementary school 20 years ago, in NJ.
Now... getting kids to actually use them is a different matter.
Now... getting kids to actually use them is a different matter.
In many of the most common situations - they just don't matter that much on a school bus.
The bus is generally the largest vehicle on the road, and an impact from a car (or even pickup truck/suv) is unlikely to significantly move the bus. Plus - the sit very high, and impacts tend to drive the other vehicle down - rather than moving the body of the bus.
The only situation they really are useful is when the bus rolls, and for buses that aren't driving highway speeds (which is most of them), they almost never roll (the only exception is essentially driver error - where the bus leaves the road on slope)
The bus is generally the largest vehicle on the road, and an impact from a car (or even pickup truck/suv) is unlikely to significantly move the bus. Plus - the sit very high, and impacts tend to drive the other vehicle down - rather than moving the body of the bus.
The only situation they really are useful is when the bus rolls, and for buses that aren't driving highway speeds (which is most of them), they almost never roll (the only exception is essentially driver error - where the bus leaves the road on slope)
When it comes to batteries, I can't imagine safety not being a major design consideration. EV fires are maybe exaggerated a bit in the media because of the novelty whereas ICE vehicle fires aren't as newsworthy, but they're still a thing that can happen and could potentially be very destructive and hazardous especially on something with a huge battery pack like a bus. Using a kind of battery that tends not to burst into flames if ill-treated seems like a good idea.
IIRC the conclusion was that requiring seat belts slows down the loading / unloading process and decreases ridership enough that more kids will actually get hurt when their parents drive them to school instead (since cars are far more dangerous to riders than giant heavy slow-moving busses).
I'm curious how they perform in cold conditions. Where I grew up, a solid 50% of the school year was at or below freezing regularly. We really worked those bus heaters -- you know the type, under a few seats scattered around the bus. Curiously, it doesn't seem that buses use heat from the engine, like most ICE vehicles, for heat. Instead, I'm pretty sure they were just using power from the motor for electric heating elements with fans. Given that an electric bus could easily fit an enormous battery slab under the seating, I wonder if electric buses could be even better than ICE buses in cold conditions -- barring the obvious issues with battery efficiency in cold.
LFP batteries don't handle below-freezing temperatures very well, but that could be mitigated by using insulation and water cooling/heating depending on the time of year. Also maybe hooking them up to a pre-heater system that gets the batteries up to temperature before their route begins. (Sort of like those oil pan heaters they use in really cold climates.)
Cabin heating could be done with a heat pump for more efficiency, I suppose. Heating could consume quite a bit of power, but I suppose compared to the energy required to move a school bus around it's probably fairly minor.
Cabin heating could be done with a heat pump for more efficiency, I suppose. Heating could consume quite a bit of power, but I suppose compared to the energy required to move a school bus around it's probably fairly minor.
Wonder if radiant floor heating would be a good solution. Adding a warm air blower near the front to counteract cold air intrusion from opening and closing the door could help keep the interior of the bus a nice constant temperature.
Single pane (if thick) windows, very loosely sealing; in recent years possibly open for fresh air even in cold months.
I grew up in a semi-temperate region that only had at most maybe a month of really cold temperatures each year. Those under-seat heaters were still very nice to be near and also helped to melt the snow and slush into just ice on the floor.
You should assume, from a heating and ventilation perspective, that the inside of a school bus is a mobile open air tent, but simultaneously also on the verge of being an enclosed space packed to the gills with people.
I grew up in a semi-temperate region that only had at most maybe a month of really cold temperatures each year. Those under-seat heaters were still very nice to be near and also helped to melt the snow and slush into just ice on the floor.
You should assume, from a heating and ventilation perspective, that the inside of a school bus is a mobile open air tent, but simultaneously also on the verge of being an enclosed space packed to the gills with people.
I do not know if we are in a commodity super-cycle but Li price is brrrrrrr.
https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=...
The days of falling battery prices in dollar terms are over.
https://www.dailymetalprice.com/metalpricecharts.php?c=li&u=...
The days of falling battery prices in dollar terms are over.
I think you are underestimating the ingenuity of humans. Shortages can lead to new, more efficient ways of doing things. High prices are going to encourage more lithium production, or research into perfect substitutes. It's highly unlikely that in a decade battery prices will be higher than they are today.
Lithium is a tiny fraction of battery cost.
Materials are 60% cost of Li battery and across the board material costs are increasing. So, I stick to my assessment barring new evidence (which was not provided by your post), that Li battery prices falling in dollar terms is done.
Reference: https://qnovo.com/82-the-cost-components-of-a-battery/
Reference: https://qnovo.com/82-the-cost-components-of-a-battery/
The only component of the battery which contains Lithium is the cathode, which according to the article you linked is a little less than 1/3 of the material cost, or around 20% of the total cost. The battery chemistry which contains the most Lithium is Lithium Cobalt Oxide, which by weight is approximately 7% Lithium and 60% Cobalt. Even though Lithium is vastly more expensive than Cobalt, Cobalt still accounts for the majority of the cathode material cost. So it seems like Lithium accounts for at most 10% of the cost of the battery.
LFP doesn't use nickel or cobalt, which are usually the most expensive materials. Lithium prices will probably go up, but I don't think they're hugely significant yet. LFP cells also use plastic, iron, fertilizer (phosphate), and typically copper and aluminum. I think there's some graphite too.
Maybe there'll be some equilibrium price as manufacturing costs drop and material prices go up. It would be surprising though if LFP prices didn't keep dropping. (Especially retail prices, which seem to be around $300/kwh in the U.S.)
Maybe there'll be some equilibrium price as manufacturing costs drop and material prices go up. It would be surprising though if LFP prices didn't keep dropping. (Especially retail prices, which seem to be around $300/kwh in the U.S.)
Lithium gives you about 10 kWh per kg, actually a little better than that:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-much-lithium-li-ion-vehic...
So, at the current elevated spot price, Li represents about 5% of the sticker price of a lithium battery. Plus, supply responses to demand growth in minerals tend to be relatively slow, which means that a short term price rise doesn't necessarily suggest a shortage of availability.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-much-lithium-li-ion-vehic...
So, at the current elevated spot price, Li represents about 5% of the sticker price of a lithium battery. Plus, supply responses to demand growth in minerals tend to be relatively slow, which means that a short term price rise doesn't necessarily suggest a shortage of availability.
Busses as a Service from a venture-backed company in a ridiculously volatile market..
What happens if/when they run out of funding?
Having a business productivity app go out of business with an "amazing journey" post is irritating but there are 50 other apps that will take their place. Introducing "as a service" here where there are serious legal and even civil rights issues in play is radically different.
What happens if/when they run out of funding?
Having a business productivity app go out of business with an "amazing journey" post is irritating but there are 50 other apps that will take their place. Introducing "as a service" here where there are serious legal and even civil rights issues in play is radically different.
I mean, this is how aircraft and trains (and yes, even buses) get leased these days, particularly in the EU.
Vehicle depreciation is a massive headache.
Vehicle depreciation is a massive headache.
Those fleet lessors are not the manufacturers. If the lessor goes belly-up, you can lease the exact same model of plane/train/etc from one of their competitors.=
If Boeing's financial stability depended on the sucess of one particular aircraft lessor, that would be a huge problem.
If Boeing's financial stability depended on the sucess of one particular aircraft lessor, that would be a huge problem.
These services are already outsourced in many school districts, with the district doing nothing more than contracting out for certain service levels and writing a check. Presumably if it pencils out, those contractors will switch to electric without even needing to consult the board of education.
Do you mind pointing to a few companies who offer said contract services? Is it mostly a metropolitan thing?
Chicago Public Schools has dozens of bus contractors. Here is one that is relatively big: https://www.unitedquick.com/
You can find bus contracts given to the owners of single busses though those firms do t have large web presences.
You can find bus contracts given to the owners of single busses though those firms do t have large web presences.
When I was a kid like 15 years ago we'd walk to school if it was close. I took the bus until middle school which was like 1 mile away.
I hope car usage goes down, especially a single person driving a big SUV. Walk, or bike, to where you need to go. Less cars, more safe.
I hope car usage goes down, especially a single person driving a big SUV. Walk, or bike, to where you need to go. Less cars, more safe.
I'm glad your parents were in an economic situation where you could live walking distance from school in a neighborhood safe enough to do so. Only 9% of students in the US live within a reasonable walking distance.
My parents were poor immigrants (mom couldn’t work legally due to immigration status), But yeah I’m glad I had other friends from my apartment complex that I could walk to school with.
You ever been to inner city? That’s probably where that 9% is from, unless you’ve got more stats you can pull up because it seems your only perspective is numbers you read on theatlantic or something along with your latte.
With less cars on the road as time goes on, I hope walking and public transit becomes a viable option. You ever seen kids going on the metro busses or light rail? I’ve only ever seen this in cities, and never in suburbs where I live now, except the kids who live across the street from the school.
You ever been to inner city? That’s probably where that 9% is from, unless you’ve got more stats you can pull up because it seems your only perspective is numbers you read on theatlantic or something along with your latte.
With less cars on the road as time goes on, I hope walking and public transit becomes a viable option. You ever seen kids going on the metro busses or light rail? I’ve only ever seen this in cities, and never in suburbs where I live now, except the kids who live across the street from the school.
what is a reasonable walking distance? 9% seems like a surprisingly small number.
Just looked at CDC website it says fewer than 20%.
Suburbs have been the only place where I’ve seen lots of yellow busses because everything is so spread out. Idk where that dude got his numbers, go to any city in the USA and you'll see kids taking public transit to school aka walking.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2016/15_0573.htm#:~:text=Esti....
Suburbs have been the only place where I’ve seen lots of yellow busses because everything is so spread out. Idk where that dude got his numbers, go to any city in the USA and you'll see kids taking public transit to school aka walking.
https://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2016/15_0573.htm#:~:text=Esti....
Not every school system provides transportation, and when they do, some states (maybe all?) require that transportation be provided by a yellow school bus and not a city bus. (My father ran into this in Indiana).
I'm gonna guess that in at least some of these areas, they walk/take busses because the school system doesn't provide transportation.
I'm gonna guess that in at least some of these areas, they walk/take busses because the school system doesn't provide transportation.
> go to any city in the USA and you'll see kids taking public transit to school aka walking
The majority of children do not live in cities. Most people move to suburban/urban areas when they have kids.
The majority of children do not live in cities. Most people move to suburban/urban areas when they have kids.
From a 2014 study in Norfolk, UK[0] (note: UK should have relatively similar child obesity rates as the US at this time, given they only surpassed the US in 2018[1]):
> This study shows that young people living closer to school are more likely to walk to school than those living further away (Panter et al., 2008, Pont et al., 2009). The novel contribution of this work is the identification of the threshold distances that children walk to school, and that this increases as young people age; the criterion distances were 1421 m (0.8 miles) at 10 years, 1627 m (~1 mile) at 11 years and 3046 m (~1.9 miles) at 14 years.
However, note that US suburbs are often vastly more spread out while servicing the same size population: for example, Worcester, England at 100k population is only 12 square miles[2] and Chico California with 100k population is 34 square miles[3].
0: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135382921...
1: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5750341/Bigger-11-y...
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester,_England
3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chico,_California
> This study shows that young people living closer to school are more likely to walk to school than those living further away (Panter et al., 2008, Pont et al., 2009). The novel contribution of this work is the identification of the threshold distances that children walk to school, and that this increases as young people age; the criterion distances were 1421 m (0.8 miles) at 10 years, 1627 m (~1 mile) at 11 years and 3046 m (~1.9 miles) at 14 years.
However, note that US suburbs are often vastly more spread out while servicing the same size population: for example, Worcester, England at 100k population is only 12 square miles[2] and Chico California with 100k population is 34 square miles[3].
0: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S135382921...
1: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5750341/Bigger-11-y...
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worcester,_England
3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chico,_California
I think car usage is likely to go up unless the crime in cities is dealt with. For that to happen we have to stop calling constructive peace keeping work "racist" though and that seems unlikely.
Zum is an electric schoolbus provider mentioned in the article. Their headquarters in near SF, in Redwood City. They're hiring engineers:
https://www.ridezum.com/corporate-hq-hiring.html
It looks like they're modernizing the whole student transportation process: apps for parents/drivers/school admins, dynamic routing, monitoring, and metrics. They claim 20% reduction in student commute times. That's a big quality of life improvement.
I think the job would be quite interesting: geo, real-time, mobile, web, embedded, physical infrastructure, optimization, diverse user base, and many human factors. They're well-funded so probably pay decently.
The office photos show a large open plan, which could be an acoustic hellscape, like Google SF Spear St. If the space has enough sound-absorbing panels and dividers and quiet floors then it could be ok. Can any of you comment on the work environment?
https://www.ridezum.com/corporate-hq-hiring.html
It looks like they're modernizing the whole student transportation process: apps for parents/drivers/school admins, dynamic routing, monitoring, and metrics. They claim 20% reduction in student commute times. That's a big quality of life improvement.
I think the job would be quite interesting: geo, real-time, mobile, web, embedded, physical infrastructure, optimization, diverse user base, and many human factors. They're well-funded so probably pay decently.
The office photos show a large open plan, which could be an acoustic hellscape, like Google SF Spear St. If the space has enough sound-absorbing panels and dividers and quiet floors then it could be ok. Can any of you comment on the work environment?
For those questioning the feasibility, 100% electric school buses are already on the road in Montreal. I see them frequently, and they seem to handle our crappy roads and winters fine.
Why would electric buses have more problems on winter roads than ICE buses?
Cold air impacting heath & capacity on the Li batteries, perhaps? Lithium batts tend to be finicky about their temperatures. Even my PHEV chevy volt de-rates the capacity if the ambient air temps hit less than 36*F.
There's an effect on range for sure. But there are also ways to mitigate that by for example heating the battery.
There are plenty of EVs operating under arctic conditions in Norway, for example. And not just in Oslo where temperatures are mild. Here's a story about a Norwegian with a model 3 that lives on the north coast of Norway in the arctic circle: https://electrek.co/2020/02/11/tesla-model-3-arctic-circle-w...
It seems that that particular car has some features that are genuinely nice to have when it is minus 32. Like the ability to warm it up before you get into it. That costs energy of course and that explains most of the range hit you get.
Most recent EVs have ways to cool (high temperatures are also a problem) and heat batteries, which older cars and phevs would have lacked. And of course the process of charging and discharging batteries actually warms batteries up as well. That's why heat is a problem and probably a bigger problem from an engineering point of view. Yet nobody ever complains about Tesla's not working in the desert. It's kind of a solved problem. Extreme temperatures affect range and you need to plan accordingly. But otherwise the battery will work fine.
There are plenty of EVs operating under arctic conditions in Norway, for example. And not just in Oslo where temperatures are mild. Here's a story about a Norwegian with a model 3 that lives on the north coast of Norway in the arctic circle: https://electrek.co/2020/02/11/tesla-model-3-arctic-circle-w...
It seems that that particular car has some features that are genuinely nice to have when it is minus 32. Like the ability to warm it up before you get into it. That costs energy of course and that explains most of the range hit you get.
Most recent EVs have ways to cool (high temperatures are also a problem) and heat batteries, which older cars and phevs would have lacked. And of course the process of charging and discharging batteries actually warms batteries up as well. That's why heat is a problem and probably a bigger problem from an engineering point of view. Yet nobody ever complains about Tesla's not working in the desert. It's kind of a solved problem. Extreme temperatures affect range and you need to plan accordingly. But otherwise the battery will work fine.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that's mostly because it's a Chevy, not because managing lithium batteries in cold weather is an unsolved problem:
https://news.yahoo.com/cold-hard-truth-evs-winter-103037566....
If you are in a climate where freezing weather is common, you might want to swap it for a different brand. There are comparably priced options that work well in the cold (just look at the chart in the article).
https://news.yahoo.com/cold-hard-truth-evs-winter-103037566....
If you are in a climate where freezing weather is common, you might want to swap it for a different brand. There are comparably priced options that work well in the cold (just look at the chart in the article).
While I don't doubt other manufacturers have taken steps to charge better at cold temperatures, since theoretically you can do this if you have the charger warm the pack up to temperatures above freezing, this isn't just an issue with my Chevy.
All battery chemistry suffers from degraded performance in cold temperatures, because they all rely on chemical processes that are hampered by cold. Lithium batteries are in some ways more susceptible because they are just a more finicky battery chemistry overall, being far more sensitive to charging currents, temperatures, and voltages.
There's tons of articles and references out there about the cares that must be taken with batteries of various chemistries, and they all talk about the low temperature issues.
- https://www6.slac.stanford.edu/news/2021-08-24-how-extreme-c...
- https://www.fluxpower.com/blog/the-importance-of-industrial-...
- https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-410-charging-at-hig....
- https://relionbattery.com/blog/the-best-battery-for-cold-wea....
All battery chemistry suffers from degraded performance in cold temperatures, because they all rely on chemical processes that are hampered by cold. Lithium batteries are in some ways more susceptible because they are just a more finicky battery chemistry overall, being far more sensitive to charging currents, temperatures, and voltages.
There's tons of articles and references out there about the cares that must be taken with batteries of various chemistries, and they all talk about the low temperature issues.
- https://www6.slac.stanford.edu/news/2021-08-24-how-extreme-c...
- https://www.fluxpower.com/blog/the-importance-of-industrial-...
- https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-410-charging-at-hig....
- https://relionbattery.com/blog/the-best-battery-for-cold-wea....
My Tesla definitely lost range in the cold, too. I don't think it's just that Chevy (LG, you mean) doesn't know how to make a good battery pack.
Heating the batteries and passenger compartment is quite expensive energy-wise, you certainly have to calculate that in when determining an appropriate battery size for such an application.
Definitely something to consider. I wonder if there's some value to a secondary/supplemental seasonal battery that can be added for part of the year to handle the extra load.
Would come down to whether the installation/removal (to lower the "dry" weight for the warm seasons) would be worth the energy savings of not hauling around the supplemental battery weight.
Other options might be to use some kind of thermal mass for heating, perhaps a large heated mass or fluid tank? Not sure if there's any benefit there though beyond being able to swap out the fluid tank between runs faster than charging a battery.
Would come down to whether the installation/removal (to lower the "dry" weight for the warm seasons) would be worth the energy savings of not hauling around the supplemental battery weight.
Other options might be to use some kind of thermal mass for heating, perhaps a large heated mass or fluid tank? Not sure if there's any benefit there though beyond being able to swap out the fluid tank between runs faster than charging a battery.
You don't need to heat the entire passenger compartment unless folks are in there, though. You just heat the bits that could benefit. This is the same sort of thinking behind the engine block heaters (for combustion engines) folks use when it is cold and a similar theory to trucks that heat their diesel tanks to keep the diesel from turning to gel, though I don't know if that's an issue anymore with modern diesel blends.
Where do the trucks get the energy to heat the tanks, assuming they are off? Electricity - is there enough in the battery? Keep the ICE running?
It’s cold in the winter.
Shorter routes and longer idle periods mean that school buses can be charged at lower intensities over longer periods of time than commercial vehicles that have to charge quickly to get back on the road
Most relevant sentence in this article.
Most relevant sentence in this article.
I ride on an electric bus a few times a week..
https://tcatbus.com/its-electric-on-the-ithaca-commons/
https://tcatbus.com/its-electric-on-the-ithaca-commons/
Plenty of electric buses driving around in Berlin where I live as well. Very nice when I bike through town. Nothing worse than getting stuck behind a stinking old diesel engine.
Shenzen in China switched all of their city buses to electric a few years ago. They have tens of thousands of them driving around there.
Shenzen in China switched all of their city buses to electric a few years ago. They have tens of thousands of them driving around there.
Hmm...buses that (per the article) cost 2x or 3x what diesel ones would. From a company that's raising a whole lotta $$$ from VC's. And (plausibly) school districts will get rid of their old diesel bus fleets when they switch over...
Is anyone else suspecting an "of course we'll loose money like crazy, until we hit 'em with the massive price increase" business model?
EDIT: Wow, huge response. 3 points to add:
- Yes, kids not breathing fumes is better...but that doesn't change the company's nor the school district's finances.
- No, I have no good data on whether the "vastly lower TCO will cover the higher up front cost..." theory is 100% correct, or utter BS.
- My one not-too-close data point: A friend worked for a metropolitan bus system ~2011. She said they were getting rid of their "~1.4 up-front cost" diesel-electric hybrid buses - because the real TCO was considerably worse than the older, straight-diesel buses.
Is anyone else suspecting an "of course we'll loose money like crazy, until we hit 'em with the massive price increase" business model?
EDIT: Wow, huge response. 3 points to add:
- Yes, kids not breathing fumes is better...but that doesn't change the company's nor the school district's finances.
- No, I have no good data on whether the "vastly lower TCO will cover the higher up front cost..." theory is 100% correct, or utter BS.
- My one not-too-close data point: A friend worked for a metropolitan bus system ~2011. She said they were getting rid of their "~1.4 up-front cost" diesel-electric hybrid buses - because the real TCO was considerably worse than the older, straight-diesel buses.
This is a fairly standard reframing when your product has lower TCO but higher upfront costs.
If people just look at the upfront cost, they have that 2x or 3x gut reaction and just switch off.
Some nerdier types might draw up a spreadsheet and know exactly how many months they'd expect to break even and start saving.
People familiar with spreadsheets probably also don't have that much trouble getting loans and paying them back on time, and doing even more sums to see if that makes financial sense.
But your average school bus buyer perhaps needs someone else to do all that for them, hedge the risk and present it to them as an immediate saving on their monthly spend.
People have sold rooftop solar this way, or replaced kerosene lamps in Africa with solar and batteries, and EVs Vs monthly Car payment plus fuel.
If people just look at the upfront cost, they have that 2x or 3x gut reaction and just switch off.
Some nerdier types might draw up a spreadsheet and know exactly how many months they'd expect to break even and start saving.
People familiar with spreadsheets probably also don't have that much trouble getting loans and paying them back on time, and doing even more sums to see if that makes financial sense.
But your average school bus buyer perhaps needs someone else to do all that for them, hedge the risk and present it to them as an immediate saving on their monthly spend.
People have sold rooftop solar this way, or replaced kerosene lamps in Africa with solar and batteries, and EVs Vs monthly Car payment plus fuel.
I'm not sure why you would assume that the average school bus buyer can't do a spreadsheet. Our local suburban NY school district is fairly run-of-the mill, and has a budget of $84 million with several million dollars of that being for transportation. We have our own busses and drivers, and they spend about a quarter million dollars a year on diesel fuel.
The Superintendent for business affairs that has an MBA from Columbia and earns $231,000, and should clearly be able to handle a spreadsheet and then making the yearly powerpoint presentations.
The Superintendent for business affairs that has an MBA from Columbia and earns $231,000, and should clearly be able to handle a spreadsheet and then making the yearly powerpoint presentations.
It was more a general point, and I did say 'perhaps', which was based on reading a headline that said "get EV busses for less than your monthly spend" rather than "EVs have lower TCO" which is the pitch I'd use for the more sophisticated buyer.
But maybe in this case, the buyer needs that sales pitch not for themselves but for the people who would be angry if they did something financially sensible with future payoff.
But maybe in this case, the buyer needs that sales pitch not for themselves but for the people who would be angry if they did something financially sensible with future payoff.
As much flak as people give "the government" for poor spending, there's actually a huge amount of auditing and checks in place for purchases by officials.
There's no way a decision like this gets made without a several "independent assessments" happening as a CYA move.
There's no way a decision like this gets made without a several "independent assessments" happening as a CYA move.
The administration of the Roslyn school district ripped off tax payers for years. While it was caught it took awhile to discover:
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/09/hugh-jackman-mo...
https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/09/hugh-jackman-mo...
[deleted]
It's not just the cost over time, it's the availability of capital in large clumps - also known as "the cost of being poor:" It may be 5x cheaper in the long run to pay 3x the cost today, but if you don't have 3x the cost today, well, good luck.
Capex <=> Opex swaps are pretty common, and it's not just a matter of poverty. (It's why airlines lease their planes.) Swap "subscribe" with "lease" and this article becomes less interesting.
> Swap "subscribe" with "lease" and this article becomes less interesting
To VCs, too
To VCs, too
Yeah, and school's budgets are cash tight, with comparatively little ability to fundraise, so any large cash transaction will be DOA.
The swap should take place, and I'm now wondering why this hasn't occurred.
The swap should take place, and I'm now wondering why this hasn't occurred.
Schools often issue bonds to cover large purchases. Plus, sometimes states/fed will toss them grants.
It's interesting to see how different bond proposals are received by the public. In the more conservative areas I've lived, adding a penny to the sales tax to fund school bonds is pretty much always approved by the voters and renewals are likewise rubberstamped. In liberal areas, that's a much more difficult tax to get passed, mainly on the grounds that it is regressive. School bonds secured with increased property taxes tend to work in the reverse, with property tax increases being popular in liberal areas but opposed in conservative ones.
>This is a fairly standard reframing when your product has lower TCO but higher upfront costs.
I'd say it's the opposite a lot of times. EVs are one such product. People will say, "sure I'm paying 20k more for the car, but I'll make it up in fuel savings and zero maintenance!" without ever calculating how much fuel and maintenance you'd actually have to use to break even. Then, of course, there is the regulatory and temporal risk that energy costs today aren't what they might be down the road, and that there are some high-ticket items an EV can have fail itself.
It's hardly ever a no-brainer, because the invisible hand tends to make it so.
>People have sold rooftop solar this way
So many companies have gone bust because of this.
I'd say it's the opposite a lot of times. EVs are one such product. People will say, "sure I'm paying 20k more for the car, but I'll make it up in fuel savings and zero maintenance!" without ever calculating how much fuel and maintenance you'd actually have to use to break even. Then, of course, there is the regulatory and temporal risk that energy costs today aren't what they might be down the road, and that there are some high-ticket items an EV can have fail itself.
It's hardly ever a no-brainer, because the invisible hand tends to make it so.
>People have sold rooftop solar this way
So many companies have gone bust because of this.
[deleted]
School buses are bought by spreadsheet literate people. Understanding lifetime cost is a job requirement of the kind of people who run bus fleets and most people are qualified to do their jobs and do them satisfactorily.
This isn't a case where a good product isn't succeeding because "hurr durr the public is dumb". People have run the numbers. It just doesn't work, yet.
This isn't a case where a good product isn't succeeding because "hurr durr the public is dumb". People have run the numbers. It just doesn't work, yet.
I want to see that spreadsheet.
While not ideal, the alternative is kids continuing to sit in buses that idle for long periods of time slowly leaking diesel exhaust into the cabin area (at least that was the case with the Bluebird models I rode as a kid), that can't be good.
I think it's important to keep the electrification and subscription aspects distinct.
Electrification of bus fleets is an absolute good. Electric buses may cost more in the short run, but for the sake of children's health, not to mention the world they live in, school districts should be dumping diesel in favor of electric as soon as they can afford to do so. As taxpayers we should be ready to foot the bill.
There are real concerns with privatization of school bus fleets though. Safety obviously, but also advertising and marketing to children as other posters have pointed out. If a company offered school districts a subscription model with diesel buses we'd be rightfully suspicious of where this could lead. We should maintain these suspicions even as we encourage phasing out diesel fleets in favor of electric.
Electrification of bus fleets is an absolute good. Electric buses may cost more in the short run, but for the sake of children's health, not to mention the world they live in, school districts should be dumping diesel in favor of electric as soon as they can afford to do so. As taxpayers we should be ready to foot the bill.
There are real concerns with privatization of school bus fleets though. Safety obviously, but also advertising and marketing to children as other posters have pointed out. If a company offered school districts a subscription model with diesel buses we'd be rightfully suspicious of where this could lead. We should maintain these suspicions even as we encourage phasing out diesel fleets in favor of electric.
School bus fleets are already significantly privatized[1]. Not making judgement calls there, just pointing out that ship has sailed.
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Student_(United_States)
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Student_(United_States)
Yea, here the batteries catch fire and a bunch of kids burn to death. Grim, but possible.
ICE vehicles have orders of magnitude higher fire risk than EV.
https://www.kbb.com/car-news/study-electric-vehicles-involve...
Right, because diesel buses are totally not flammable at all.
I bought a number of plastic "jerry cans" that all had stickers on them saying you shouldn't use gasoline or diesel to start fires.
Oddly the reason why is different for the two fluids. Gasoline can catch fire quickly and form a fireball, whereas diesel is hard to ignite and won't help start a fire.
This movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_5th_Wave_(film)
has a scene where the kids set a school bus on fire with the fuel which isn't realistic.
Oddly the reason why is different for the two fluids. Gasoline can catch fire quickly and form a fireball, whereas diesel is hard to ignite and won't help start a fire.
This movie
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_5th_Wave_(film)
has a scene where the kids set a school bus on fire with the fuel which isn't realistic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nL10C7FSbE compares the flammability of several types of fuels.
2m08s for Jet-A. 3m50s for #2 diesel. 6m03s for heating oil. 7m30s for kerosene (all those are basically the same and surprising to most how not flammable they are in liquid form). 10m15s for avgas. 11m30s for auto gas.
2m08s for Jet-A. 3m50s for #2 diesel. 6m03s for heating oil. 7m30s for kerosene (all those are basically the same and surprising to most how not flammable they are in liquid form). 10m15s for avgas. 11m30s for auto gas.
That's some bullshit video.
All you need is some tissue and a gas soldering iron or equivalent lighter. Lights up in under one second.
All you need is some tissue and a gas soldering iron or equivalent lighter. Lights up in under one second.
Back in the day we would make ‘firebowls’ with a metal bowl and burning various liquids, igniting it with a long lighter. We would burn everything from gasoline to corn oil that way.
Not likely, not without being in a serious accident. Despite the Chevy Bolt's highly publicized battery fires (which did not kill anyone), EV batteries don't usually burst into flames unprovoked. The battery will be well protected in a school bus frame.
Fire risk is a major reason why we already put as many as 8 or more emergency exits on full size school busses.
https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
Lithium-Ion Battery Fires in Electric Vehicles - Safety Risks to Emergency RespondersNTSBGov
Thermal runaway, stranded energy and battery reignition should preclude EV usage to transport children until adequate safety measures are put in place. EV car fires are intense, high voltage and severe. A bus full of children fire doesn't bear thinking about.
Thermal runaway, stranded energy and battery reignition should preclude EV usage to transport children until adequate safety measures are put in place. EV car fires are intense, high voltage and severe. A bus full of children fire doesn't bear thinking about.
Ever been near a car fire? They burn pretty well and you'll feel it from the other side of a multilane road. I've also seen buses burn.
Is there a reason to think that more kids are going to burn in electric busses than ICE ones?
Ever been near an EV fire?
They burn with the equivalent of a 220v welder across the whole battery skateboard, will literally melt aluminum wheels and body parts and require 20 tons of water to temporarily extinguish. There's a huge difference between an ICE vehicle fire, which is essentially rubber, upholstery and plastics burning sometime compounded by gasoline vapor and an EV thermal runaway trapped energy event. I think all EVs should be required to have manual escape locks etc at a minimum. https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
They burn with the equivalent of a 220v welder across the whole battery skateboard, will literally melt aluminum wheels and body parts and require 20 tons of water to temporarily extinguish. There's a huge difference between an ICE vehicle fire, which is essentially rubber, upholstery and plastics burning sometime compounded by gasoline vapor and an EV thermal runaway trapped energy event. I think all EVs should be required to have manual escape locks etc at a minimum. https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
It's incredible to me that EV enthusiasts are such zealots they refuse to take into account the facts around practicality, pollution and fire risk, just choosing to downvote instead.
A demonstration of a gasoline vs battery fire https://youtu.be/tuVxwmnhqP4
A demonstration of a gasoline vs battery fire https://youtu.be/tuVxwmnhqP4
That's a demonstration of a $99 harbor freight flux core welder, not a "battery fire"
This is a EV fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdaFk3w6rUY
And this is a diesel school bus on fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nPrUdP_POg
If any vehicle catches on fire, you have to leave the vehicle, or risk death. There is no "safe fire"
This is a EV fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdaFk3w6rUY
And this is a diesel school bus on fire: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nPrUdP_POg
If any vehicle catches on fire, you have to leave the vehicle, or risk death. There is no "safe fire"
Again, I suggest you digest 'Lithium-Ion Battery Fires in Electric Vehicles - Safety Risks to Emergency Responders' from the US NTSB which is analysis of types of EV vehicle fires.
https://youtu.be/J6eS6JzBn0k
The 220v mig welder example was to demonstrate the different fire characteristics of a trapped/runaway energy battery fire vs gasoline fire. All commercial vehicles such as school buses have a significant fire risk from hydraulic fluids used for brakes, steering etc.
Here is is a refuse truck hydraulic fire example https://youtu.be/aj8-JlRqoWc
The dramatic bus fire you found was probably a combination of that and upholstery. Diesel is much less flammable than gasoline, one of the reasons for its use in commercial vehicles. https://www.anl.gov/article/7-things-you-might-not-know-abou...
Again, a major concern for me is the over reliance on electric door locks in EVs, which have trapped Tesla drivers who then burnt to death in high voltage fires. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tesla-driv...
Manual locks would be far safer, especially on school bus full of children. I am not opposed to EVs but I do feel there is a very unrealistic utopian view of their strengths while completely ignoring weaknesses, mostly due to massive public relations persuasiveness.
The 220v mig welder example was to demonstrate the different fire characteristics of a trapped/runaway energy battery fire vs gasoline fire. All commercial vehicles such as school buses have a significant fire risk from hydraulic fluids used for brakes, steering etc.
Here is is a refuse truck hydraulic fire example https://youtu.be/aj8-JlRqoWc
The dramatic bus fire you found was probably a combination of that and upholstery. Diesel is much less flammable than gasoline, one of the reasons for its use in commercial vehicles. https://www.anl.gov/article/7-things-you-might-not-know-abou...
Again, a major concern for me is the over reliance on electric door locks in EVs, which have trapped Tesla drivers who then burnt to death in high voltage fires. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/tesla-driv...
Manual locks would be far safer, especially on school bus full of children. I am not opposed to EVs but I do feel there is a very unrealistic utopian view of their strengths while completely ignoring weaknesses, mostly due to massive public relations persuasiveness.
My point is that both will kill. There are, of course, some differences between fires of different types. However, one thing remains constant: the occupants can be killed by any of them if they don't get out.
I definitely agree that manual locks are safer -- school bus emergency exits don't even have locks, they simply only have latches on the inside. This isn't a problem with batteries though -- this is a problem with Tesla.
I definitely agree that manual locks are safer -- school bus emergency exits don't even have locks, they simply only have latches on the inside. This isn't a problem with batteries though -- this is a problem with Tesla.
>That starts with phasing the purchase and deployment of electric school buses — which still cost two to three times more than their diesel counterparts — to take advantage of expected declines in cost over the coming years, McIntyre said.
Sounds like the model is to be the first mover and being entrenched by the time it's profitable without a price hike
Sounds like the model is to be the first mover and being entrenched by the time it's profitable without a price hike
The "subscribed" buses will be privately owned and operated, they'll be increasingly filled with advertising and other predatory bullshit for exploiting the passengers.
I think that's pretty unlikely, at least with schoolbuses. The US has laws around child privacy and advertising that companies easily flaunt online, but are much more difficult to flaunt when your product is a physical bus.
OTOH, I would not be surprised to see these buses rusting in a storage lot within a decade because these firms have closed up shop and some random server somewhere is no longer responding to requests. I hope (but am not hopeful) that municipal and state governments take measures during procurement to ensure that they aren't being turned into captive customers.
OTOH, I would not be surprised to see these buses rusting in a storage lot within a decade because these firms have closed up shop and some random server somewhere is no longer responding to requests. I hope (but am not hopeful) that municipal and state governments take measures during procurement to ensure that they aren't being turned into captive customers.
Captivate screens behind each seat with 'educational' content and pre-roll/banner ads. "We're giving kids extra education through new technology and they also learn about the value of chocolate sugar milk at the same time!"
In the '90s the dairy industry managed to get "got milk" posters into approximately every US elementary school.
Milk was my one true vice. Swear the stuff is more addictive them anything. Yes I’m boring.
Spent many years thinking it was healthy. Much regret.
Spent many years thinking it was healthy. Much regret.
I always found it sort of disgusting, but as an adult discovered that 1 tablespoon of Valhrona powdered cocoa, 1 tablespoon of Equal Exchange baking cocoa and 2 tablespoons of sugar in 1.75 cups of grass-fed organic whole milk deals with the bad part.
The average lifetime of a schoolbus is 10 - 12 years, so if they do manage to keep this service going for a decade, that's pretty good -- in 10 years the schol district would have been ready to refresh their fleet anyway, and hopefully the reason this business can't survive long-term is that electric buses become cheaper and ubiquitous.
Part of the reason for the 10-12 year lifespan is that ICE motors are really complicated and at a certain point, it's cheaper to throw out the bus than pay for motor repairs. EV motors last a lot longer and are a lot easier to maintain.
Rather than throw them out, I'd say there's an optimal point to sell them off. (A couple of years ago, I bought a bus that was sold by an institution when the mileage reached a certain point.)
The electric motor might last, all the electronics, probably not.
Don't forget a snack machine with sweets right inside the bus.
Or... A cold drinks machine, with all the bus windows locked shut. I'm sure I remember something about McDonalds putting more salt in the chips [/ food] so people buy a drink.
>they'll be increasingly filled with advertising and other predatory bullshit for exploiting the passengers
What's this based on ? AFAIK many school districts already contract out their school bus service. Are we seeing that in those cases?
What's this based on ? AFAIK many school districts already contract out their school bus service. Are we seeing that in those cases?
[deleted]
“You’re only two bus rides away from your next Robux reward!”
So like city buses?
Not really, no. City busses recognize revenue from advertising and use it to subsidize fares. Being a public service, the public benefits. On the other hand, private bus fleets with private advertisements on loan to school districts will recognize that advertising revenue as profit, benefiting shareholders. Not everything needs a profit motive.
I don't know what the split is elsewhere, but it's worth noting that for BART in the Bay Area, at least, makes something like $10m/yr, compared to nearly $500m/yr in actual fares - so, in exchange for approximately 2% of annual revenues, we get BART trains and stations covered in ads.
Edit: Thought to look this up for SFMTA - 2020 proposed budget (projections as of 2019, chosen because it's the last "normal" year) - total revenue $1.2Bn, "Advertising, interest, and service fees" $54m.
Edit: Thought to look this up for SFMTA - 2020 proposed budget (projections as of 2019, chosen because it's the last "normal" year) - total revenue $1.2Bn, "Advertising, interest, and service fees" $54m.
Literally all the school buses in my area are operated by private companies which contract with the local public school districts. None of them are full of advertising.
It is a different calculation for the school board. For them, the costs of retraining staff, retooling a shop, increasing parts inventory are all big costs. Plus the risk of buying a bunch of lemons.
Leasing them with performance guarantees moves not just the costs, but also the risks to a specialist better suited to carrying them.
I don’t know if this firm is legit, but the deal could make sense.
Leasing them with performance guarantees moves not just the costs, but also the risks to a specialist better suited to carrying them.
I don’t know if this firm is legit, but the deal could make sense.
A fair portion of school districts already contract their buses to First Student and similar bus companies. And if this company were to raise it's rates drastically, the districts could switch to First Student.
The upfront price difference should be offset in the long term by buying cheap electricity instead of expensive diesel.
> Hmm...buses that (per the article) cost 2x or 3x what diesel ones would.
What about when you consider total life cycle costs? Diesel fuel costs often many times of cost of the vehicle over its lifespan.
Fuel costs will likely increase quite a bit in the future.
What about when you consider total life cycle costs? Diesel fuel costs often many times of cost of the vehicle over its lifespan.
Fuel costs will likely increase quite a bit in the future.
Frankly, if they rip off school districts in order to keep kids from inhaling nitrogen dioxide, that's still a better business model than most of the ones I've heard.
I think that depends on the extent to which they rip them off.
I guess you're probably right. But it seems like we're looking at a small factor (2-3) applied to the usual price of a school bus. Of course, there are also reasons it might not be a ripoff, as others brought up (lower ops costs, economy of scale). I just felt like highlighting the problems with prioritizing price over all else around the health of primary schoolchildren.
> She said they were getting rid of their "~1.4 up-front cost" diesel-electric hybrid buses - because the real TCO was considerably worse
In my city, the original hybrids used Toyota Prius batteries and deep cycled them, which they weren't designed for, killing them and requiring regular replacements. That couldn't have been good for the budget.
In my city, the original hybrids used Toyota Prius batteries and deep cycled them, which they weren't designed for, killing them and requiring regular replacements. That couldn't have been good for the budget.
The play is in vehicle-to-grid (V2G) electric price arbitrage, the article even mentions that a full third of the revenue from the program is coming from selling V2G power generation back to the grid.
[deleted]
For those curious about EV bus including maintenance vs diesel EEVBlog has one episode on a private company switching to EV:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKs3LytrICA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKs3LytrICA
What is the range on these?
In rural area, yellow busses need to travel for two hours morning and night. And for extra-curricular activities, like transportation to away games, drives can last five hours or more.
In rural area, yellow busses need to travel for two hours morning and night. And for extra-curricular activities, like transportation to away games, drives can last five hours or more.
Most Americans don't live in rural areas.
Personally I am very exited about it but we lack data that does allow us to do proper TCO comparison of ICE vs EV on the heavy duty side. Also how does V2G economics actually work if you are trying to optimize for the lowest charging rate (usually during night to avoid peak)? If you are in V2G mode after 6 pm i assume you would need to start charging at night during cheapest rates and assure that the bus is charged by 5 am. Wouldn't this require 1 to 1 charger to bus ratio as you might not have enough time to swap? Wouldn't then infrastructure costs(chargers that are build and concrete around it) skyrocket?
> we lack data that does allow us to do proper TCO comparison of ICE vs EV on the heavy duty side
These districts have transferred that risk to the provider. Which seems reasonable.
These districts have transferred that risk to the provider. Which seems reasonable.
Yes, makes sense from the districts perspective, but I meant from sustainability of the business model perspective.
Any overnight charging solution almost surely needs a 1-to-1 ratio anyway, because you're probably not going to pay an expensive and unreliable human to plug and unplug buses overnight every night when a charger will last 10+ years. You're already paying the bus driver to park the bus and to drive it away in the morning. Add a minute of bus driver labor to plug it in and a minute to unplug it in the morning.
Nice thing about this application is the predictability of the routes. And compared to city buses the ratio of time driving per regen is larger. I assume drain and recharge puts wear on the batteries?
Great news. Buses and government vehicles are perfect for electric. They go back to dedicated parking lots perfect for charging.
We desperately need to force electric vehicles for the upcoming USPS replacements too.
The funding / reform bill passed, but as far as I can tell it does not mandate or address the fleet. DeJoy said he was replacing with gas. There was a proposed bill but I can't find any recent news on it.
Ridiculous to spend that much money on 100% custom built vehicles that are gas powered.
We desperately need to force electric vehicles for the upcoming USPS replacements too.
The funding / reform bill passed, but as far as I can tell it does not mandate or address the fleet. DeJoy said he was replacing with gas. There was a proposed bill but I can't find any recent news on it.
Ridiculous to spend that much money on 100% custom built vehicles that are gas powered.
Due to the usage patterns of the bus fleet I wonder if they could be used for some vehicle to grid [1] power bank on weekends/during weekday downtime? It might shorten the lifetime of the batteries themselves but would be a nice additional revenue stream.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid
This topic triggers me a bit because along with rants about CRT, masking, book banning, etc one of the buried topics among the loonies who have berated and attacked our school boards was that they were against electric buses. This is despite good info at least in our district that making the move would yield considerable savings over the service life. So point being, if you are following what's happening in your school district and there's an active group of nutjobs, don't be surprised to see them lash out against this too. I truly about fell out of my chair in shock the first time I heard one of these fools go off on a rant about masks that culminated in a monolog about electric buses taking away our freedom.
Just as an interesting note, our school district has switched the entire fleet (around 150) to CNG. This has supposedly reduced opex substantially over diesel. Also a huge reduction in particulates. Probably not as clean as EV but an improvement . Our district owns all their vehicles, but I believe this is not common.
I still don't get that TCO for EV is higher than Diesel.
On the consumer side, let's look at Tesla Model Y vs. Lexus RX 350. I am using "premium" makes on both sides of this equations. If we want to go with a cheaper ICE then it should be compared with a cheaper EV. Idea being, there is a reasonable comparison where EV comes out ahead on TCO.
Cost / mile: $0.04 vs. $0.10 Difference in purchase cost: $55K (base model Lexus) vs $59K (base model). Include $7500 Fed Credit this comes to ~$56K (assuming a 35% marginal tax rate) Average miles per year: 12K. So fuel savings of ~$720 Even assuming a very generous cost of capital even TCO over 2 years beats ICE. That's before maintenance costs (which seem to be lower for EV).
On the consumer side, let's look at Tesla Model Y vs. Lexus RX 350. I am using "premium" makes on both sides of this equations. If we want to go with a cheaper ICE then it should be compared with a cheaper EV. Idea being, there is a reasonable comparison where EV comes out ahead on TCO.
Cost / mile: $0.04 vs. $0.10 Difference in purchase cost: $55K (base model Lexus) vs $59K (base model). Include $7500 Fed Credit this comes to ~$56K (assuming a 35% marginal tax rate) Average miles per year: 12K. So fuel savings of ~$720 Even assuming a very generous cost of capital even TCO over 2 years beats ICE. That's before maintenance costs (which seem to be lower for EV).
TCOs for individual consumers will be vastly different depending on the parameters of the situation, with particular impact driven by volume of miles driven annually.
Due to this, commercial fleets in my view have a much clearer picture here than personal vehicle decisions. This is also particularly driven by personal vehicle purchases being driven less by “TCO” in a strict sense but rather “what is my monthly payment”.
Due to this, commercial fleets in my view have a much clearer picture here than personal vehicle decisions. This is also particularly driven by personal vehicle purchases being driven less by “TCO” in a strict sense but rather “what is my monthly payment”.
That’s fair. TCO decisions are probably more relevant in a commercial context.
In what world is the maintenance cost for a fleet of EV busses going to be less than that of a diesel? There are two orders of magnitude more diesel mechanics than people qualified to work on EV drivetrains.
I think the argument is that EVs will require vastly less maintenance, which makes sense on paper. I'm not sure how well that will bear out in the near to mid term, though, as these are new designs which haven't been put through the paces yet.
It's a pretty big transportation sector we're talking about (half a million of these buses in the US), so it will not be a fast transition and early adopters will be paying higher costs than later ones to iron out the kinks. Most districts are probably waiting for someone else to try it out first.
It's a pretty big transportation sector we're talking about (half a million of these buses in the US), so it will not be a fast transition and early adopters will be paying higher costs than later ones to iron out the kinks. Most districts are probably waiting for someone else to try it out first.
There's far less going on in a normal EV drivetrain, which kinda supports the lower maintenance cost.
Fewer fluids required, just your differential and some coolant for the motors really.
Given the specialization of parts, it's far more likely that any performed maintenance is going to be more of a swap for known-good parts and sending them off to the home-office for reconditioning.
Fewer fluids required, just your differential and some coolant for the motors really.
Given the specialization of parts, it's far more likely that any performed maintenance is going to be more of a swap for known-good parts and sending them off to the home-office for reconditioning.
>I am using "premium" makes on both sides of this equations
I guess, but a "premium" Model Y doesn't have any features that a far lesser ICE doesn't have, with inferior build quality. That's kind of the point. A premium Honda, VW or Toyota SUV are better comparisons, and substantially cheaper. Of course, that makes the TCO much more competitive...
I guess, but a "premium" Model Y doesn't have any features that a far lesser ICE doesn't have, with inferior build quality. That's kind of the point. A premium Honda, VW or Toyota SUV are better comparisons, and substantially cheaper. Of course, that makes the TCO much more competitive...
We can compare these ICEs to a Mach-e or an ID.4 or an Ioniq 5. Build quality on these is pretty comparable to premium ICE models from these manufactures.
I guess you have shown that in the luxury segment the TCO comes out better for EVs. Many people are not buying $50k+ luxury vehicles. Care to run an estimate for something like what I was buying a year ago? I was in the market for a loaded 5 year old vehicle with 60-80k miles for $10-13k (Dodge Dart for example, also liked a few Ford Fusion options). There were options like this available, though I happened to stumble upon the apocryphal 13 year old 175k miles $1,000 Honda and went with that.
When I leased our Bolt, the retail price was $23K. Costs me 1.7 cents a mile in fueling costs. It is a good bit nicer than an 80K Dodge Dart, of course, but it's a data point. I also have time-of-use rates, which helps.
Anyway. Assuming 27 mpg for the Dart (this is what Fuelly says average Dart owners experience) and $4.67 gasoline (the US average from a few days ago), should cost around 17 cents a mile in gasoline. Assuming an average of 14.8 cents per kWh (the US average from February) and 3 miles per kWh (somewhat conservative, but close enough) for the Bolt, you'd be looking at 5 cents per mile in electricity.
Not a perfect comparison, the Bolt would be brand new with a warranty, etc, but at least it's not a luxury EV comparison, just an appliance car like a Dart. You'd break even on costs at 76K miles.
Of course, at that point the Bolt has just reached the mileage the Dart started at, and so it will quickly pull ahead in TCO. If you do a lot of road trips you might not like it, but if you primarily drive in the city you will really like not having to stop once a week to get gas.
Anyway. Assuming 27 mpg for the Dart (this is what Fuelly says average Dart owners experience) and $4.67 gasoline (the US average from a few days ago), should cost around 17 cents a mile in gasoline. Assuming an average of 14.8 cents per kWh (the US average from February) and 3 miles per kWh (somewhat conservative, but close enough) for the Bolt, you'd be looking at 5 cents per mile in electricity.
Not a perfect comparison, the Bolt would be brand new with a warranty, etc, but at least it's not a luxury EV comparison, just an appliance car like a Dart. You'd break even on costs at 76K miles.
Of course, at that point the Bolt has just reached the mileage the Dart started at, and so it will quickly pull ahead in TCO. If you do a lot of road trips you might not like it, but if you primarily drive in the city you will really like not having to stop once a week to get gas.
A better alternative is the trolley bus, no batteries needed. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-51034523
that's excellent for city busses that run all day with good frequency, but I would not say so for school busses, whose reason to exist is to collect students that live far away from the school for one specific commute only. Should the municipality really build out overhead powerlines for 20 miles of cornfields just for one passenger needing only 2 trips per day, possibly less if that student has after-school activities?
If this is merely subsidized electric, it says nothing about long-term sustainability of choosing it instead of diesel. Thermodynamically electricity is dubious at best - you have 50% efficiency off the top that can never be eliminated - at least with heat engines you have the option of higher compression or temperatures or pressure to boost beyond 50%. Electrical never can.
[deleted]
A niche opened up, buy ebusses, lock school boards into 10-20 year contracts to save 10-20% on fuels costs and have zero capital/maintenance costs. The bus company lives on the ~~60-70% fuels cost saving and finances the bus fleet. Typical contract to see to various users with short terms viewpoints.
I would like to see what the board savings are in a sample of a lease - most will be under NDA's I expect?
Niche is already exploited. School boards have already been contracting out busing. Diesel/CNG contractors will just retool and charge more for green tax to school boards that want to pay.
> most will be under NDA's I expect?
What are the odds that school districts are even legally allowed to sign such an NDA?
What are the odds that school districts are even legally allowed to sign such an NDA?
Hard to say. Most contracts are public access files. but I am not sure if there are redactions for competitive reasons?
To prove I'm an optimist, I'll say that most levels of government in the US must have transparency regulations that would prevent them from being bound by any kind of NDA. Otherwise the potential for corruption is pretty significant. Like I said, I'm an optimist.
If you trust google search, my 2 minute research suggests the federal government explicitly disallows NDAs from binding them, and that in government overall NDAs are really rare. But that information is worth roughly how much it cost me to search for it.
If you trust google search, my 2 minute research suggests the federal government explicitly disallows NDAs from binding them, and that in government overall NDAs are really rare. But that information is worth roughly how much it cost me to search for it.
Yes, That fits. People need transparency as far as possible. For example, prison phone systems are onerous monopolies that oppress prisoners with enormous connection fees. Apparently the various prisons accept bids = the largest fee paid to the prison system is the winner - who then extract the max fees from inmates.
The spectrum auction looks, on the face of it, to be a simple bidding process. Sadly the winners than pay billions to the feds and the winners then extort cell phone and internet users for fees - in the mean time, those billions that could have made US wideband universal and lower in cost are sucked into the political maw and wasted, oligarch style = USA lags behind dozens of countries due to this corruption.
I get a little suspicious. Are we comparing both solutions at scale, or just one at scale and the other at a smaller scale?
The question boils down to: how many people are both systems currently moving. What would it take to build up the other system to operate at the first system's scale?
The question boils down to: how many people are both systems currently moving. What would it take to build up the other system to operate at the first system's scale?
'Out of the roughly 500,000 school buses in the U.S., only about 0.2 percent — just over 1,000 — were electric as of the end of 2021'
I can see EV buses being practical for future urban short distance pickup and drop off, but the longer haul rural routes, especially in cold climates, seem a long way off to the EV obsessed as a solution to anything. Huge subsidies and grants may seduce a few school boards but the reality is diesel loads replaced by EV are no where near ready for prime time.
What could immediately help the local pollution aspects of EV heavy vehicles is some sort of tire particulate collection device to stop spread. Tire pollution is a huge problem that is probably more important than where energy is obtained from near or far https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/03/20200308-emissionsa...
I can see EV buses being practical for future urban short distance pickup and drop off, but the longer haul rural routes, especially in cold climates, seem a long way off to the EV obsessed as a solution to anything. Huge subsidies and grants may seduce a few school boards but the reality is diesel loads replaced by EV are no where near ready for prime time.
What could immediately help the local pollution aspects of EV heavy vehicles is some sort of tire particulate collection device to stop spread. Tire pollution is a huge problem that is probably more important than where energy is obtained from near or far https://www.greencarcongress.com/2020/03/20200308-emissionsa...
Average total route length is 75 miles per day. A Blue Bird electric bus, as a comparison point, has a range of 120 miles. So not all routes will be feasible with that bus, but a large number will be a perfect fit.
So what you're saying is, there's a huge market opportunity between "0.2%" and "everything other than longer haul routes in cold climates"?
That 'market' is already being served by existing vehicles. If we are interested in reducing pollution read the link I posted.
School buses are one of those areas I'm surprised EV's haven't completely consumed already. They basically play to every single strength EVs have.
Cheaper for the school districts themselves maybe. I’d like to see an honest article that included the overall cost to taxpayers as well.
I believe batteries and electric motors can replace almost all applications of gas engines. However, diesel engines still are a step too far now IMO. Most people have never operated a diesel engine. Their efficiency is very impressive. My 7,000 lbs truck with a Cummins diesel engine gets better MPGs than my partner's 4,000 lbs Mini Cooper Countryman.
> Most people have never operated a diesel engine. Their efficiency is very impressive.
All else equal (vehicle class, size, performance, driving style), the operating cost per mile of an EV is 1/4 to 1/2 the operating cost per mile of a diesel or gasoline vehicle, even in states with very expensive electricity like California or Hawaii.
All else equal (vehicle class, size, performance, driving style), the operating cost per mile of an EV is 1/4 to 1/2 the operating cost per mile of a diesel or gasoline vehicle, even in states with very expensive electricity like California or Hawaii.
Is there a specific data set you are referencing? How about other components like Ownership and Support?
I've just done the math on my car operating costs. At today's gas prices (admittedly high due to the Ukraine war), the price of electricity in CA would have to more than triple for me to pay the same as I would for gas. Before the recent gas price spike it was like 2.25X to use gas.
> How about other components like Ownership and Support?
Do you mean depreciation and maintenance? Depreciation on recent EVs has been just like other types of vehicles in their respective classes. Granted, these are relatively new cars - there isn't much longitudinal data on EV maintenance, but every indication is that it should be less than ICE vehicles.
And can you put a price on the great driving experience of an EV (flat power curve, low center of gravity, silent, no combustion smell)? Probably, but I haven't tried.
> How about other components like Ownership and Support?
Do you mean depreciation and maintenance? Depreciation on recent EVs has been just like other types of vehicles in their respective classes. Granted, these are relatively new cars - there isn't much longitudinal data on EV maintenance, but every indication is that it should be less than ICE vehicles.
And can you put a price on the great driving experience of an EV (flat power curve, low center of gravity, silent, no combustion smell)? Probably, but I haven't tried.
My results are similar to yours. I don't know if you can put a price on silent, non-oil-based, clean-running driving experiences, but it does come with the charge-time pain point. I look forward to the five-minute refuel I left behind to get the other benefits of an EV...
> but it does come with the charge-time pain point. I look forward to the five-minute refuel I left behind to get the other benefits of an EV...
Since I charge at home, this is only a pain point on road trips (though diminishing with the growing number of high power chargers along highways). However, I understand how it's a pain for apartment dwellers who don't have their own charging stations.
So we need better street-side public charging infrastructure for them - but also for single-family-home dwellers with a second car that doesn't fit in the driveway. Living in a single-family-home shouldn't be a precondition for driving an EV.
Since I charge at home, this is only a pain point on road trips (though diminishing with the growing number of high power chargers along highways). However, I understand how it's a pain for apartment dwellers who don't have their own charging stations.
So we need better street-side public charging infrastructure for them - but also for single-family-home dwellers with a second car that doesn't fit in the driveway. Living in a single-family-home shouldn't be a precondition for driving an EV.
Except that a school bus tends to operate a diesel in its worst conditions.
Lots of idling. Lots of low RPM operation. Lots of stop and start wasting a lot of energy into the brakes.
A school bus is practically engineered to be an EV propaganda piece.
Lots of idling. Lots of low RPM operation. Lots of stop and start wasting a lot of energy into the brakes.
A school bus is practically engineered to be an EV propaganda piece.
Right. Plus it travels a known number of miles per day, and recharges at the same place each day.
(Although, field trips?)
(Although, field trips?)
How much will they weigh compared to a Diesel bus? Road damage is to the fourth power of axle weight. Any cost savings may be just shifted to the road department for fixing pot holes. I think the VW EV is almost twice the weight of a same size ICE car. 16x the road damage.
Plus, how much damage when this EV bus slides on the ice and hits something? Twice the damage if twice the weight.
It seems that these are the same weight. That's probably not a coincidence.
This lists the GVWR for the diesels at up to 36,200 lbs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Bird_All_American
This lists the GVWR for electrics at the same: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418cgcnau/362sQcGinJzFxVqFh0...
Electrics also tend to benefit from better traction in crummy conditions because the batteries create a fixed, lower center of gravity.
Do note that the drive system for these EV buses is apparently built by Cummins. For Cummins to put the effort in, they see a reason.
This lists the GVWR for the diesels at up to 36,200 lbs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Bird_All_American
This lists the GVWR for electrics at the same: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418cgcnau/362sQcGinJzFxVqFh0...
Electrics also tend to benefit from better traction in crummy conditions because the batteries create a fixed, lower center of gravity.
Do note that the drive system for these EV buses is apparently built by Cummins. For Cummins to put the effort in, they see a reason.
The battery doesn’t necessarily need to be that large, since the range can be small (<25 miles for most school districts assuming that they can charge during the day). Probably a school bus could get away with an battery the same size as one in a Tesla, so the weight of the rest of the bus probably dominates. Probably the weight of the students alone is a lot more when fully loaded.
School bus weight is generally seen as a good thing, because we care more about keeping kids safe than road damage or damage to other vehicles.
What is your truck? RAM 3500s with Cummins diesels come in 7000lb configurations, but we're talking ~15mpg, nowhere close to a countryman.
My 03 Ram 2500 gets 24 MPG
That's incredible. https://www.fuelly.com/car/dodge/ram_2500/2003
Maybe they call him fasteddie because he drives so slow.
If he buys an electric truck he can change his name to Crazy Eddie when he sells it
Yes, without any really careful data, I've guessed that electric could be cheaper. But already??? Really???? Or are we talking some subsidies???
So, in the OP, now I see:
"A 2020 study conducted by Atlas Public Policy for Washington state indicated that falling battery costs and rising manufacturing volumes should bring electric school buses within total-cost-of-ownership (TCO) parity with fossil-fueled buses by 2030."
Hmm ... 2030???
Then I notice:
"While most of its projects have started small, CEO Duncan McIntyre sees the Montgomery County project — now at 25 electric buses and set to expand to 326 over the next four years — as the model for the future."
So, from
100 * 25 / 326 = 7.669%
we're talking so far a little less than 8% of the fleet. So full EV (electric vehicle) has a way to go.
Now I'm wondering ....
Now I notice near the beginning:
"Billions of dollars of federal and state grants and incentives are flowing to U.S. school districts to help them electrify their fleets."
"Billions"? Now I understand!
Same as usual: (1) Always look for the hidden agenda. (2) Follow the money.
Next, the bus fleet is in Montgomery County, Maryland. I used to live there. Relatively wealthy place! Lot of money! Lot of interest in social issues! Close to DC, the main money pot!
Next, what's this with a fleet of 326 busses??? What the ...??? So many busses? Are they in the school business or the bus business? Sounds like could run quite a good school system just for the costs of 326 busses. In my school, grades 1-12, there were no busses. 97+% of the kids went on to college -- not a bad school system. The year before me, three guys went to Princeton and two of them ran against some third guy for President of the Freshman Class. In my year, MIT came recruiting. The guy who did go to MIT -- I beat him by a little on the Math SAT. Must have been an OK school. Kids got to and from school on their own, rain, shine, hot, cold, ice, snow, or clear. One good way was to WALK. Another was a bicycle. But, no school busses.
Want to save money on 326 Diesel busses? Good. Here's a way, and get to save on not just 8% of the fleet but all of it, and get the savings tomorrow and don't have to wait until 2030. Uh, and save $billions. How to do this magic, more amazing than anything electrical??? Easy: Junk all the busses. Done.
Lesson: No matter how productive the US economy might be from automation or whatever, various interest groups can get with government and waste the gains. E.g., there in Monkey County, a lot of the people were, likely are, living in apartments they RENT. They'd be MUCH better off OWNING a single family detached house.
Next, I just got a direct message from Darwin: The birth rate in Monkey County is less than 2 per woman. Sooooo, the population is shrinking. The people of Monkey County who want busses instead of schooling are going -- I have the word right here -- extinct. If the government were wasting less, there could be more motherhood, and the moms could work out how to get the kids to/from school without 326 busses.
So, in the OP, now I see:
"A 2020 study conducted by Atlas Public Policy for Washington state indicated that falling battery costs and rising manufacturing volumes should bring electric school buses within total-cost-of-ownership (TCO) parity with fossil-fueled buses by 2030."
Hmm ... 2030???
Then I notice:
"While most of its projects have started small, CEO Duncan McIntyre sees the Montgomery County project — now at 25 electric buses and set to expand to 326 over the next four years — as the model for the future."
So, from
100 * 25 / 326 = 7.669%
we're talking so far a little less than 8% of the fleet. So full EV (electric vehicle) has a way to go.
Now I'm wondering ....
Now I notice near the beginning:
"Billions of dollars of federal and state grants and incentives are flowing to U.S. school districts to help them electrify their fleets."
"Billions"? Now I understand!
Same as usual: (1) Always look for the hidden agenda. (2) Follow the money.
Next, the bus fleet is in Montgomery County, Maryland. I used to live there. Relatively wealthy place! Lot of money! Lot of interest in social issues! Close to DC, the main money pot!
Next, what's this with a fleet of 326 busses??? What the ...??? So many busses? Are they in the school business or the bus business? Sounds like could run quite a good school system just for the costs of 326 busses. In my school, grades 1-12, there were no busses. 97+% of the kids went on to college -- not a bad school system. The year before me, three guys went to Princeton and two of them ran against some third guy for President of the Freshman Class. In my year, MIT came recruiting. The guy who did go to MIT -- I beat him by a little on the Math SAT. Must have been an OK school. Kids got to and from school on their own, rain, shine, hot, cold, ice, snow, or clear. One good way was to WALK. Another was a bicycle. But, no school busses.
Want to save money on 326 Diesel busses? Good. Here's a way, and get to save on not just 8% of the fleet but all of it, and get the savings tomorrow and don't have to wait until 2030. Uh, and save $billions. How to do this magic, more amazing than anything electrical??? Easy: Junk all the busses. Done.
Lesson: No matter how productive the US economy might be from automation or whatever, various interest groups can get with government and waste the gains. E.g., there in Monkey County, a lot of the people were, likely are, living in apartments they RENT. They'd be MUCH better off OWNING a single family detached house.
Next, I just got a direct message from Darwin: The birth rate in Monkey County is less than 2 per woman. Sooooo, the population is shrinking. The people of Monkey County who want busses instead of schooling are going -- I have the word right here -- extinct. If the government were wasting less, there could be more motherhood, and the moms could work out how to get the kids to/from school without 326 busses.
Do schools rent busses today, or is this new?
Have met the owner. Stand up guy
at 4 miles per gallon and skyrocketing gas prices, it doesn't surprise me....
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC121970/
Even if an electric fleet is the same cost, changing over would save tons of money and alleviate tons of suffering. It's the right thing to do for any ethical reason you can consider.
Unless, I suppose, you're intent on making the poor suffer. Diesel buses are very cost-effective at accomplishing that.