Future TTC Bus Orders

[drum118]

 

 

Nova's LFSe first electric bus to pass Altoona Testing

 

 

[martin607]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 3:12 AM, Xtrazsteve said:

I think they are better off with converting busy routes into trolley bus routes than to go with electric or CNG buses. Taking the cost of each vehicles and installation of infrastructure, the cost can be similar but trolley buses is a proven technology. With modern batteries, trolley buses can disconnect and detour for a short distance.

 

Good point overall. Actually in Europe most new trolleybuses are battery-trolleybuses with In Motion Charging. Some operators specify quite large batteries so that a route can require only 50% wiring. The trolleybus recharges while driving under the wires as normal and can then drive on a long unwired section of route (say 10 miles) using its batteries. 

[martin607]

On ‎6‎/‎14‎/‎2018 at 5:42 AM, drum118 said:

E Buses are the future, but years off for lower cost.

There is certainly a lot of momentum for battery electric buses ("BEB"s) at the moment, but how much of that is fashion and how much is Musk-style hype? How much is based on sound engineering and economics? 

In a way it is a good thing that the TTC is running an extensive pilot with 60 BEBs as it will expose any weaknesses in the concept. I have studied the economics and performance of BEBs in a number of countries. The most obvious potential weakness in choosing the overnight charging system for Toronto is the climate. A recent TV report in Germany explained that their trial BEBs can only run one third of the claimed range during cold winter months. So that shiny "300 km range" BEB actually  fails after only 100 km,  has to be towed back to the yard and diesel buses sent out. Alternatively, in winter the 60 BEBs will only be able to do the work of 20 diesel buses. 

Here's a very informative article with plenty of detail on the BEB program

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2018/06/ttc-buying-electric-buses-support-clean-air-targets

There is a massive investment in alterations to garages, substations, chargers, static batteries to smooth the electrical load, CNG generators as back up (how is that "green"?) etc. The total cost for the 60 buses plus all that equipment is quoted at $120m. For $120m you could also get 60 battery-trolleybuses and all the equipment for a route network of 100 km of which only 50% would be wired.

 

[smallspy]

4 hours ago, martin607 said:

Good point overall. Actually in Europe most new trolleybuses are battery-trolleybuses with In Motion Charging. Some operators specify quite large batteries so that a route can require only 50% wiring. The trolleybus recharges while driving under the wires as normal and can then drive on a long unwired section of route (say 10 miles) using its batteries. 

 

Even despite the fact that the TTC has a major head-start on the infrastructure required for trolley buses (MOW equipment, substations, knowledgebase), it still isn't cost-effective to bring them back to Toronto. The TTC commissioned a study on it almost 10 years ago, in fact: https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2009/Feb_18_2009/Reports/Trolley_Bus_Service_.pdf. And none of the costs have changed drastically since then.

 

Dan

 

[martin607]

4 hours ago, smallspy said:

 

Even despite the fact that the TTC has a major head-start on the infrastructure required for trolley buses (MOW equipment, substations, knowledgebase), it still isn't cost-effective to bring them back to Toronto. The TTC commissioned a study on it almost 10 years ago, in fact: https://www.ttc.ca/About_the_TTC/Commission_reports_and_information/Commission_meetings/2009/Feb_18_2009/Reports/Trolley_Bus_Service_.pdf. And none of the costs have changed drastically since then.

 

Dan

 

Thanks for the attachment, it is most interesting if not necessarily accurate.  I suspect it was like many consultancy reports: written to confirm the client’s existing opinion.

 

The report includes an absolutely outrageous claim. It alleges that to provide 42 km of one-way wiring (including substations and feeder cables) would cost $303,555,000.  All experience shows that taken over a system as a whole, a trolleybus catenary system would cost a maximum of $2m per km.  In this case that would be $84m, but even allowing for any special circumstances, I cannot see how the electrification cost was estimated at anything over $100m.  I’ve had my general estimate  for electrification at $2m per km max confirmed by people in the industry.

 

It may well be that even adjusting for the above, the trolleybus option would have been more expensive than diesels. But what we are discussing here is trying trolleybuses as well as/instead of battery buses. As the document I attached above showed, the total cost of setting up a system of 60 battery buses was quoted at $120 m of which probably less than $60m is for the buses themselves and say $70 to $80m is for the electrical installation.

[smallspy]

2 hours ago, martin607 said:

Thanks for the attachment, it is most interesting if not necessarily accurate.  I suspect it was like many consultancy reports: written to confirm the client’s existing opinion.

 

The report includes an absolutely outrageous claim. It alleges that to provide 42 km of one-way wiring (including substations and feeder cables) would cost $303,555,000.  All experience shows that taken over a system as a whole, a trolleybus catenary system would cost a maximum of $2m per km.  In this case that would be $84m, but even allowing for any special circumstances, I cannot see how the electrification cost was estimated at anything over $100m.  I’ve had my general estimate  for electrification at $2m per km max confirmed by people in the industry.

 

It may well be that even adjusting for the above, the trolleybus option would have been more expensive than diesels. But what we are discussing here is trying trolleybuses as well as/instead of battery buses. As the document I attached above showed, the total cost of setting up a system of 60 battery buses was quoted at $120 m of which probably less than $60m is for the buses themselves and say $70 to $80m is for the electrical installation.

Does that $2mil/km figure also include substations? Is that route-miles, or a single direction of wire?

 

One thing to consider is that the battery buses are also having huge subsidies attached to them from higher levels of government for purchasing, putting them into the same price league (or even cheaper in some cases) than diesels. There's no guarantee that they would do the same for trolley buses.

 

Dan

[martin607]

17 minutes ago, smallspy said:

Does that $2mil/km figure also include substations? Is that route-miles, or a single direction of wire?

 

One thing to consider is that the battery buses are also having huge subsidies attached to them from higher levels of government for purchasing, putting them into the same price league (or even cheaper in some cases) than diesels. There's no guarantee that they would do the same for trolley buses.

 

Dan

I was comparing like with like. The report refers to "electrification" which will include: grid connection, substations, feeder cables as well as running wires. The estimate of up to $2m per km is an average over a whole system. But there are variations. So if you wanted to extend the outer end of the line by 1 km but didn't need an additional substation, my electrification expert says it could be only a few hundred thousand dollars.

Well, my quote is for a double wired length of route. To be honest, I wasn't absolutely clear what  "Route length (1 way) " in the report implied. If it meant the routes were just over 20 km in length then it would make the cost overestimate even worse.

Your point about subsidies is well taken. I like the drive for zero emission vehicles but I don't like it if it is restricted to only one type of ZEV. I'm also wary of all these showboating mandates about "from 2025 we will ….."  What happens if real life experience shows that the technology needs another 5 or 10 years in development?

[TTC T6H-5307N 2252]

Fun fact: TTC almost ordered new trolleybuses in 1987/88, but was cancelled when Al leach came in. 

[smallspy]

13 hours ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

Fun fact: TTC almost ordered new trolleybuses in 1987/88, but was cancelled when Al leach came in. 

Fun fact: no they didn't.

 

The decision process involved in the late 1980s was way more involved than to think that one person had enough say to cancel it. There was a very serious concern about the costs involved in maintaining the system, as not only did the vehicles need to be retired and replaced, but much of the fixed plant was also in need of replacement as well (as was the fixed plant of the streetcar system - this was well before the TTC discovered RETRAC). And the vehicle purchase was going to be an expensive one, as, unlike the "rebuild" in the 1970s that resulted in the E700 project, there was no reason to salvage any of the electrical or mechanical equipment from the old vehicles - it was all well past its best before date.

 

So all that, in concert with the Province purchasing Orion and providing massive subsidies for "clean fuel" systems (such as CNG), resulted in the decision that ended up being made. Not because a new CGM came into office.

 

16 hours ago, martin607 said:

I was comparing like with like. The report refers to "electrification" which will include: grid connection, substations, feeder cables as well as running wires. The estimate of up to $2m per km is an average over a whole system. But there are variations. So if you wanted to extend the outer end of the line by 1 km but didn't need an additional substation, my electrification expert says it could be only a few hundred thousand dollars.

Well, my quote is for a double wired length of route. To be honest, I wasn't absolutely clear what  "Route length (1 way) " in the report implied. If it meant the routes were just over 20 km in length then it would make the cost overestimate even worse.

 

While I too am led to believe that the costs in the report are overly inflated, I'll admit that don't have a good enough frame of reference with which to gauge them. Thus, I have to take them more-or-less at face value.

 

By that same token, I'm concerned that your "$2mil/route mile" as an all-in cost is too low. For instance, substations, with all of their requisite connections to the grid, are not cheap items - and in a 600Vdc system, they are certainly not limited to just needing one or two unless the route is particularly short.

 

For instance - the TTC paid more than $9.5mil to Black & MacDonald for the installation of the 4 electrical substations feeding 600Vdc traction power and low-voltage AC for the station systems on the recent subway extension. That didn't even include the actual substations themselves - just the installation of them and all of their required switchgear.

 

16 hours ago, martin607 said:

Your point about subsidies is well taken. I like the drive for zero emission vehicles but I don't like it if it is restricted to only one type of ZEV. I'm also wary of all these showboating mandates about "from 2025 we will ….."  What happens if real life experience shows that the technology needs another 5 or 10 years in development?

 

Well, this is why the TTC is limiting themselves to just 60 vehicles. Out of a fleet of approaching 2000, it's both a small drop in the bucket in terms of total fleet, and yet large enough to get some meaningful data from their testing.

Dan

[Ed T.]

18 hours ago, smallspy said:

One thing to consider is that the battery buses are also having huge subsidies attached to them from higher levels of government for purchasing, putting them into the same price league (or even cheaper in some cases) than diesels. There's no guarantee that they would do the same for trolley buses.

Yes, a similar subsidy drove the purchase of hybrid buses.

I'm not sure how well that worked out for the TTC in the end.

But certainly, for Canadian taxpayers who provided the subsidy funds in the first place, it was a large expense that provided minimal environmental benefits, if at all. The only beneficiaries were whoever profited from hybrid buses....and given Orion's exit from bus manufacturing, there may not have been anyone there either.

Hopefully the subsidies for the battery-powered buses won't be an equal waste of money all 'round.

The annoying thing is that trolley coaches running on overhead wire are totally proven technology. The TTC knows how to maintain overhead, and unless the propulsion and control systems are made too fancy for their own good, they will be reliable as well. A question that the TTC is not likely to ask, let alone answer (honestly), is, what if the trolley coach system got the funds that went into first CNG, then hybrids? I suspect that the value for the money spent would have been much greater if the trolley coach system was renewed and expanded.

[TTC T6H-5307N 2252]

9 hours ago, smallspy said:

Fun fact: no they didn't.

 

The decision process involved in the late 1980s was way more involved than to think that one person had enough say to cancel it. There was a very serious concern about the costs involved in maintaining the system, as not only did the vehicles need to be retired and replaced, but much of the fixed plant was also in need of replacement as well (as was the fixed plant of the streetcar system - this was well before the TTC discovered RETRAC). And the vehicle purchase was going to be an expensive one, as, unlike the "rebuild" in the 1970s that resulted in the E700 project, there was no reason to salvage any of the electrical or mechanical equipment from the old vehicles - it was all well past its best before date.

 

So all that, in concert with the Province purchasing Orion and providing massive subsidies for "clean fuel" systems (such as CNG), resulted in the decision that ended up being made. Not because a new CGM came into office.

Actually TTC put out a Tender on New 100 trolleybuses in 1987 according to AlbertHWagstaff on Urban Toronto

[martin607]

 

8 hours ago, smallspy said:

While I too am led to believe that the costs in the report are overly inflated, I'll admit that don't have a good enough frame of reference with which to gauge them. Thus, I have to take them more-or-less at face value.

 

By that same token, I'm concerned that your "$2mil/route mile" as an all-in cost is too low. For instance, substations, with all of their requisite connections to the grid, are not cheap items - and in a 600Vdc system, they are certainly not limited to just needing one or two unless the route is particularly short.

 

First, neither of us knows any detail of the proposed system. So everything is hypothetical and we shouldn't get too wound up about it.

As I said: "The report refers to "electrification" which will include: grid connection, substations, feeder cables as well as running wires. The estimate of up to $2m per km is an average over a whole system." The expensive bits are grid connections and substations and these indeed could cost up to $10 for a large unit. On the other hand one km of plain double wire can be as cheap as $400,000 per km. You then have to average out over a whole system. My estimate of an overall average of $2m per km is based on costings of other completed projects  and advice from a contact in the transport electrification industry.

I recognise the point about DC systems. For the sake of comparison the Vancouver trolleybus system is just over 150 km long and has just 20 rectifier stations. these are  a mix of traditional large units but some of the outer extensions has smaller cheaper  units feeding  just a couple of km of line. But based on this average, the proposed network of 42 km probably would not have needed more than four or five substations.

Anyway, the capital cost estimate of over $300m for electrification looks highly exaggerated- maybe by a factor of 3. Strangely the estimate for annual maintenance looks quite reasonable.

8 hours ago, Ed T. said:

The annoying thing is that trolley coaches running on overhead wire are totally proven technology. The TTC knows how to maintain overhead, and unless the propulsion and control systems are made too fancy for their own good, they will be reliable as well. A question that the TTC is not likely to ask, let alone answer (honestly), is, what if the trolley coach system got the funds that went into first CNG, then hybrids? I suspect that the value for the money spent would have been much greater if the trolley coach system was renewed and expanded.

It's so annoying that nobody in Canada or the USA is paying attention to the technical development of trolleybuses in Europe. There are various models of battery-trolleybus which have In Motion Charging. The batteries can be chosen for various ranges, say 20 km off-wire, meaning you can have a system that is 50:50 wired or battery. The trolleybuses charge under the wires so that there are no 10 minute charging waits. Capital costs are lower than traditional trolleybus systems but you get greater productivity than for battery buses.

But why use something proven (yet updated to the same electronics etc.) when you can re-invent the wheel - at great expense.

[smallspy]

On 7/6/2018 at 7:50 PM, martin607 said:

As I said: "The report refers to "electrification" which will include: grid connection, substations, feeder cables as well as running wires. The estimate of up to $2m per km is an average over a whole system." The expensive bits are grid connections and substations and these indeed could cost up to $10 for a large unit. On the other hand one km of plain double wire can be as cheap as $400,000 per km. You then have to average out over a whole system. My estimate of an overall average of $2m per km is based on costings of other completed projects  and advice from a contact in the transport electrification industry.

 

I understand that it is an average. That doesn't change the fact that, as I wrote earlier, I think that it is too low in the context of a Toronto installation. It may be applicable elsewhere, but in Toronto where the TTC owns the wires, poles and power distribution and thus is responsible for both the installation and maintenance of same, there may be higher costs borne here than elsewhere because there is more to the fixed plant here than elsewhere.

 

Quote

I recognise the point about DC systems. For the sake of comparison the Vancouver trolleybus system is just over 150 km long and has just 20 rectifier stations. these are  a mix of traditional large units but some of the outer extensions has smaller cheaper  units feeding  just a couple of km of line. But based on this average, the proposed network of 42 km probably would not have needed more than four or five substations.

 

Maybe...but more than likely not. It depends on a lot of things, like for instance the potential network layout and architecture. In this case, one of the routes that they studied has an end a great distance away from the core closer to the subway (and thus the pre-existing 600Vdc distribution system). The TTC has already found - and repaired - shortcomings in its existing distribution network for its 600Vdc surface system by building a couple of new substations and upgrading others in an effort to reduce low-voltage situations. Because of the great length of that one route, the Lawrence West bus, I'd suspect that they would need 3 or 4 substations just to handle it.

 

 

Quote

Anyway, the capital cost estimate of over $300m for electrification looks highly exaggerated- maybe by a factor of 3. Strangely the estimate for annual maintenance looks quite reasonable.

 

Again, I concede that it does look exaggerated - but not nearly to the extent that you feel it does.

 

Quote

It's so annoying that nobody in Canada or the USA is paying attention to the technical development of trolleybuses in Europe. There are various models of battery-trolleybus which have In Motion Charging. The batteries can be chosen for various ranges, say 20 km off-wire, meaning you can have a system that is 50:50 wired or battery. The trolleybuses charge under the wires so that there are no 10 minute charging waits. Capital costs are lower than traditional trolleybus systems but you get greater productivity than for battery buses.

But why use something proven (yet updated to the same electronics etc.) when you can re-invent the wheel - at great expense.

 

I don't think that's the case at all. Vancouver's trolley buses - many of which are over 10 years old now - have exactly that kind of in-motion charging capability, although with a much more limited battery capacity because of the capabilities of the technology at the time. Two of the trolleys purchased and tested by Dayton from their four unit order used a similar system. And both of those examples are using off-the-shelf hardware and software from a European company - Vossloh-Kiepe. I think that the difference is that there are so many fewer trolley buses being built here that we just celebrate the fact that there is even an order.

 

On 7/6/2018 at 1:31 PM, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

Actually TTC put out a Tender on New 100 trolleybuses in 1987 according to AlbertHWagstaff on Urban Toronto

I have found absolutely no indication that there was ever a tender released for trolley buses.

 

There was an RFI, but that's not a tender.

 

Dan

[TTC T6H-5307N 2252]

9 hours ago, smallspy said:

I have found absolutely no indication that there was ever a tender released for trolley buses.

 

There was an RFI, but that's not a tender.

 

Dan

AlbertHWagstaff meant TTC was so close to put out a tender

[Bus_Medic]

1 hour ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

AlbertHWagstaff meant TTC was so close to put out a tender

That name means absolutely nothing to me, and likely anyone else here.

Might as well have quoted Hugh Jass, or I.P. Freely.

[smallspy]

13 hours ago, TTC T6H-5307N 2252 said:

AlbertHWagstaff meant TTC was so close to put out a tender

"Close to putting out a tender" is a very different thing than "putting out a tender". One means nothing, and the other means that the TTC had actually put out the paperwork to receive bids against.

 

Dan

 

[Kobayashi]

Feast your eyes everyone, the first TTC LFS Hybrid #3411 is now complete with a BRT-like roofline. Photo courtesy of @anyfong.

 

[anyfong]

3 minutes ago, BYD said:

Feast your eyes everyone, the first TTC LFS Hybrid #3411 is now complete with a BRT-like roofline. Photo courtesy of @anyfong.

 

I've already shared my picture to other topics. Thanks for the credit.

[Shaun]

Where will they be allocated to?

Instead of running trolley wires why not fast charging stations at terminals? 

Using CNG to generate electricity as a backup is still green provided that once charged the amount of fuel used to charge those batteries was less than a Hybrid CNG bus. 

Since the generator runs at peak performace at a consistent RPM, it would be more efficient than the loads based on stop and go traffic. To take it another step if they used battery banks to store the power, the generator could run at peak rpm for longer periods of time making it more efficient. 

[Kelvin3157]

11 hours ago, Shaun said:

Where will they be allocated to?

Instead of running trolley wires why not fast charging stations at terminals? 

Using CNG to generate electricity as a backup is still green provided that once charged the amount of fuel used to charge those batteries was less than a Hybrid CNG bus. 

They're hybrids, not fully electric. I'm pretty sure the TTC will know how to recharge the batteries.

Rumours say the Nova hybrids are going to Malvern.

[Bus_Medic]

12 hours ago, Shaun said:

Where will they be allocated to?

Instead of running trolley wires why not fast charging stations at terminals? 

Using CNG to generate electricity as a backup is still green provided that once charged the amount of fuel used to charge those batteries was less than a Hybrid CNG bus. 

Since the generator runs at peak performace at a consistent RPM, it would be more efficient than the loads based on stop and go traffic. To take it another step if they used battery banks to store the power, the generator could run at peak rpm for longer periods of time making it more efficient. 

Trolley wires? CNG hybrid?

what the hell are you talking about?

[Transit geek]

3 hours ago, Kelvin3157 said:

Rumours say the Nova hybrids are going to Malvern.

But I heard that Malvern won't be deploying VISION by year's end. Maybe Mount Dennis?

[Bus_Medic]

23 minutes ago, Transit geek said:

But I heard that Malvern won't be deploying VISION by year's end. Maybe Mount Dennis?

It is possible, especially in the short term. Haven’t heard if the intstallation work for vision has progressed in the building itself.

nothing was ready besides the WiFi as of early July.

[Shaun]

4 hours ago, Bus_Medic said:

Trolley wires? CNG hybrid?

what the hell are you talking about?

I was responding to an earlier comment. 

[T3G]

7 minutes ago, Shaun said:

I was responding to an earlier comment. 

In future, it would be helpful if you quoted the comment you're responding to.