“New” Tram: A Transportation Breakthrough?
Here’s a video about a tram that runs without a track. Around here, that’s called a “bus.”
It runs on batteries. That’s called an “electric bus.”
The batteries can be charged with renewable energy. Are there some that can’t?
I eat with a tetra-tined comestible impaler. Some might call it a fork, but not me.
Yeah… I had similar thoughts.
It’s a segmented bus with a high quality control system to allow for easier steering.
I don’t see how that would be cheaper than light rail, unless you include the cost of the rail in the assessment.
That said. I like electric busses. As you know, I’ve never been a great fan of electric cars as an environmental solution… but I do like electric busses, and I think they’ll be a very important component in greening our society.
Well, yes, the cost of light rail needs to contemplate the cost of the rail itself, and that’s often prohibitive when you think of the real estate.
The money and politics associated with putting public transportation systems through wealthy areas are intense. Amtrak comes right through the middle of Santa Barbara’s toniest neighborhoods, but that’s because the right of way was established in the 19th Century; that would never happen today.
Craig,
There is a vast difference between a tramway and a railway line.
The suburbs of most cities in the 19th century were often built by land development speculators who built suburban railways and tramways as a means of selling plots of land or houses.
Tramways in particular were very popular with the newly affluent middle and professional classes as ownership of horses and carriages became more difficult in a suburban environment.
In most cities, the best suburbs all had streetcars or trambulator systems. The first systems were horse drawn, then cable or steam and lastly electric.
The rise of the motor-car, white flight to new suburbs, and urban decay all contributed to the financial demise of metro tramways which became too expensive to maintain and rebuild aging rolling stock and rail infrastructure.
In many cities with narrow streets and increasingly high levels of traffic congestion, tramways became viewed as unprofitable and unpopular traffic hazards.
The cost and declining usage of slow moving tram services due to the increasing distance of suburban sprawl also didn’t help.
In many cities around the world by the late 1930’s and 1950’s, cities with fast growing suburban sprawl abolished these seemingly obsolete relics of a past era in favour of more economic and versatile buses.
Very few cities not only retained trams, but expanded the systems, often in conjunction with suburban commuter electric rail.
By the end of the twentieth century, it was the turn of buses to become unpopular as people realized how superior trams and trains were as mass transport.
The advantage of Light rail and Trams is they travel on dedicated pathways unhindered by traffic congestion. modern trams are faster, quiet and clean.
Affluent nieghbourhoods welcome tram services along the main thoroughfare of the suburb as a convenience and method of reducing traffic congestion. Trams are increasingly popular with young people and the elderly.
The idea of a “Tram without rails” is interesting, since it’s obviously designed to mimic the quiet ride, comfort and other favorable aspect of a tram but without the cost of rail infrastructure.
That was the concept behind electrified Trolley-buses. Thought to be combination of the best aspects of both bus and tram.
Unfortunately, overhead cables proved to be the downfall of trolley bus systems. Trolley-buses gained a reputation for combining the worst of both vehicles. Lacking the versatility of buses,while also lacking a dedicated lane in traffic.
Breakdowns held up traffic and the bus-like structure lacked the comfort and character of trams.
I’m fortunate to live in Melbourne, Australia. My city has retained and even expanding the extensive tram network laid down in the 19th century. The City has more than 250 kilometers (160 miles) of track, making it the largest in the world, with another 40 kilometers to be added this decade.
Our tram network is unique as some routes connect differing suburbs in grid pattern without without traveling to, or through, the city centre.
The City of Melbourne has also retained and expanded an even larger and more extensive electrified suburban rail network.
In the 1950’s and ’60’s the Conservative state and city administrations were heavily criticized for retaining what seemed relics of a bygone era.
Today the Melbourne tram network is economically viable and very popular. Old historic Trams have been restored and resumed service in the inner city as popular tourist attractions! (some were even turned into popular traveling restaurants operating profitably since 1983).
Electric trams without rails, may seem a bit like a bus but if the vehicle are provided with dedicated lane-ways, especially in crowded Asian cities, the consumer experience and popularity may prove more popular than conventional buses.
(It’s interesting to note Glenn’s aversion to EV’s. That explains a lot).
Hi Craig,
Thinking about these ‘trams without wheels’, I asked my engineers and tech guys about the advantages and disadvantages.
Like all battery electric vehicles, the vehicle pictured would suffer from problems associated with gradients, braking, continual stop-start acceleration under load, overcoming inertia, variances in road surfaces, other traffic,variances of load and weight etc.
These factors are very significant in calculating the performance of an electric vehicle.
In addition, is competition from the hugely more efficient vehicle able to travel on tracks. Trams are far more energy-efficient than buses.
The weight of buses damages road surfaces. Because the road cradles flattened tyres, the increased surface-area creates more friction requiring more energy. Trams run on calculated constructed gradients. The steel tram wheels run along steel rails creating vastly less friction and pssessing great longevity.
The cost of building light rail is initially higher than buying buses, even electric buses, but the capital investment is soon recovered over the life of the service and well worth the investment.
Interestingly a five year study involving 20 countries and canvassing the opinions of more than 200,000 public transport users and 40,000 motorists has just been completed.
Among other things, the study monitored attitudes concerning train, tram and light rail, v/s Buses (including electric buses).
The Study found the general public preferred tram, train and light rails over buses by a ratio of more than 20 : 1. (although EV buses were marginally more popular than their conventional counter-parts).
Perhaps a mass transit bus with the look an feel of Tram, could overcome the stigma attached to bus travel. Buses are often regarded as the transport choice for a poor, failed, underclass.
Like the much loathed articulated London “bendy” buses, Electric buses have also received a mixed reception among passengers, transit operators and road users.
Curiously, just like EV’s, the biggest fans of EV buses are often people who never travel by bus!)
Some cities in Europe still retain modern fleets of Trolley-buses.
In Switzerland many are equipped with IMC (in-motion charging) to extend the range several miles beyond overhead wires.
These vehicles are more popular since they tend to have a similar appearance and facilities to the “trackless” tram in your photo.
BEV Electric buses, particularly those made by BYD struggle to meet the demands of Transit requirements outside their native China. Even in flat, well behaved Holland, early trials showed the buses to be unreliable, uneconomic and insufficiently robust.
US tests revealed EV buses struggled to cope with heat and cold, variances in recharging, overloading, gradients, poor road surfaces,traffic conditions. scheduling and other difficulties.
Result from tests using real world operating conditions have been mixed, but unfortunately most are very pessimistic.
Unfortunately, that hasn’t dampened the enthusiasm of arm chair supporters,green leaning politicians and activists. Regrettably this sort of overly idealistic attitude has retarded the introduction of modern reliable hybrid and PHEV bus designs from makers such manufacturers as as Hino (Toyota) and IVECO.
Studies reveal EV buses such as BYD perform to less than 40% of claimed operating range. An urban bus has far more energy-intensive driving cycle requirements than normal vehicles, usually totaling 100 to 200 miles day. (40-50,000 per year).
In the US, the City of Albuquerque found its BYD buses, apart from being unreliable and in constant need of repair, the contractually promised of range of 275 miles per charge, in reality averaged only 121, with highest achieved being 177 and the lowest 58 !
Even if the BYD buses had achieved a 275 mile range, it wouldn’t be enough to run a full day’s service, requiring either a replacement bus or a failure in service.
Even in Vancouver, trial results revealed it was impossible to run an electric bus for an entire day without recharging.
Rapid mid-day recharging is labor-intensive, since unlike recharging or refueling overnight, a worker must supervise the operation.
Trails of EV buses have taken place in many cities, from Australia to Moscow. Unfortunately, nearly all the trails have proved very disappointing for pure BEV buses.
These extensively documented studies haven’t stopped enthusiastic advocates and the “green” media promoting wild claims and overly optimistic expectations.
Transit buses are really just boxes on wheels. Construction presents many challenges. The design must be very strong, yet commodious with easy access. Construction requires robust design including being vandal proofing and safety, anti-discrimination features such as access, seating design etc all must be accommodated, while not increasing weight and maintenance.
All these requirement work against the limitations of electric bus design, but in favour of Tram and Trolly-bus construction.
R&D trials of steel rail and wheel coatings to render Tram and light rail silent, are yielding very promising results. Such developments will make acceptance of infrastructure installation (even in the best neighborhoods) easier.
The cost of installing overhead wires has dropped considerably, while IMC “inductive in ground” charging technology is becoming economically viable.