Promoting the Trolleybus in Edmonton
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NOTICE: This pdf document contains a number of complex graphics; it has been divided into two parts in order to speed downloading times. You have downloaded Part I of a two-part document. In order to read the complete document, you require both parts. Please ensure that you also download Part II. The Trolleybus in Edmonton: A Step Toward Better Public Transit and a Cleaner Environment An Information and Materials Package Written by Kevin Brown Produced for the Edmonton Trolley Coalition Affiliated with the TBus Group May 2001 Visit the Edmonton Trolley Coalition on-line at: http://www.geocities.com/trolley_coalition/ The advice, assistance, support and encouragement of the following individuals in the creation of this document is gratefully acknowledged: Dr. Margaret-Ann Armour, PhD, Professor of Chemistry, Assistant Chair, Department of Chemistry, University of Alberta Dr. John J. Bakker, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Civil Engineering, Vice-President West and Editor for Transport 2000 Canada, member of the former Edmonton LRT Advisory Board and the former Edmonton Trolley Operation Review Committee Ernest C. Bastide, President, Amalgamated Transit Union Local 569 Irvine Bell, Eur Ing, Chartered Mechanical Engineer, BSc CEng MIMechE CDipAF PGCE Ashley Bruce, MaRCA, DipAD, Broadcast Television Producer for Earth Report and Life Robert R. Clark, former Supervisor of the Transit Development Section, Edmonton Transit System Ian Fisher, BSc, BA, MA (Planning), Engineering Assistant, City of Vancouver Dr. John A. Kernahan, PhD, Professor of Physics, member of the former Edmonton LRT Advisory Board and the former Edmonton Trolley Operation Review Committee Angus J. McIntyre, Trolley Coach Operator, Coast Mountain Bus Company Jerry Paschen, Wind Song Power Co-op Robert W. Rynerson, Director of Service Planning and Scheduling, Regional Transit District, Denver, Colorado; former Marketing Officer, Edmonton Transit System Contents 1.0 Background 1.1 Current Vehicles 1.2 Size and Value of the System 1.3 Recent Investments in the System 1.4 Condition of the Infrastructure 1.5 Extent of Use of the Infrastructure 2.0 Potential Extensions 3.0 Key Benefits of Trolleybuses 3.1 Power Consumption and Energy Efficiency 3.2 Environmental Factors 3.2.1 Air Pollution, Health and Mortality 3.2.2 Comparison of Common Air Contaminant (CAC) Emissions for Diesels and Trolleys 3.2.3 Wind Power 3.2.4 Toxins in Diesel Exhaust 3.2.5 “Clean” Diesel Engines 3.2.6 Diesel Exhaust and Cancer 3.2.7 Costs of Pollution in Health Dollars 3.2.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions 3.2.9 Future Greenhouse Gas Reduction Potential 3.2.10 Noise Pollution 3.3 Potential for Increasing Transit Ridership 4.0 Cost Issues 4.1 Modal Cost Comparisons and Hidden Biases 4.2 Trolley Costs in Relation to Overall Operating Budget 4.3 Effect of Level of System Use on Unit Costs 4.4 Return on Capital Investments 4.5 Effects of Declining Petroleum Resources 5.0 Trolleybus Usage Worldwide 5.1 General World Trend 5.2 Outside Canada and the United States 5.3 Within Canada and the United States 6.0 Alternative and New Technologies 6.1 Compressed Natural Gas 6.2 Diesel-Electric Hybrid 6.3 Hydrogen Fuel Cell 7.0 Summary 8.0 List of Key Sources 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Current Vehicles Edmonton has successfully operated trolleybuses since September 24, 1939. The current vehicles incorporate very reliable running gear manufactured by the Brown Boveri Corporation (of Swiss origin) installed in General Motors ‘New Look’ bodies and were purchased new in 1981-82.44, 35 There are 98 vehicles (out of an original 100; two were sold to Dayton, Ohio). The vehicles have comparatively low mileage vs. diesel buses their age on the system.9 As reported in November 2000, 39 vehicles are in storage, and the remainder are rotated for service on seven trolley routes.32 Peak vehicle requirement is 38 units (37% of the total number owned).32 The typical life expectancy of a trolleybus in Edmonton subjected to daily use and average mileage accumulation has been 25-30 years in the past.9, 86 (In most applications, it is generally accepted that trolleybuses last about 1/3 longer than diesels, with the average diesel life expectancy being 18-20 years. In the United States, the federal government considers funding of diesel bus purchases based on a 12 year life cycle, but an 18 year cycle applies to trolleybuses.) 1.2 Size and Value of the System Edmonton has a comparatively extensive trolley system for its population. With about 0.26 trolley route km per thousand population, our system ranked third among selected systems around the world examined recently in a Hong Kong study, as illustrated on Chart 1.93 The system comprises just over 130 one-way route kilometres of overhead wire and eight rectifier substations that convert AC current to the DC power required for the vehicles.86 The system operates at 600 Volts. Most feeder cable (feeding power to the system) is of the aerial type, suspended at street-side, with some underground feeder cable in the Downtown area.86 A conservative estimate of the cost to build such a system today would be in the range of $70 to 90 million dollars. (A ballpark figure for trolley infrastructure today is $1 million per two-way km. This can vary depending on the amount of “special work” required—e.g. switches and crossovers—as well as on the type of feeder system, size and type of substations used, etc.) 83 1.3 Recent Investments in the System Since about 1980, over $47 million in capital investments have been put into the Edmonton trolley system. This includes $21 million for the purchase of 100 Brown Boveri trolley coaches (@ $210,000 each),62 with the remainder going into upgrades of the network. The rewiring of considerable stretches of the system as well as the replacement of power- on/power-off and a number of directional switches with radio induction controlled types took place in the early 1980’s. (The life-expectancy of trolley infrastructure is upwards of 30 to 50 years with proper maintenance.)83 At that time, extensions were also built west along 107 Avenue as well as on 118 Avenue to 156 Street and south along 156 Street to Jasper Place. An extra set of wires was installed on Stony Plain Road for a planned express service to West Jasper Place (WEM), and support (traction) pole installation was completed along 97 Street from 118 Avenue to Northgate. These two projects, as well as a planned extension to Abbotsfield,88 were never completed. In 1993, City Council issued a directive that the trolley system and vehicles be used to the maximum extent possible.31 Shortly thereafter, funding for an ongoing “pro- active” overhead maintenance and upgrade program was also approved by Council. There have been no significant proposals put forth by the Department of Transportation and Streets to extend the trolley overhead since the matter was last deliberated in 1993-94 despite the underutilization of the existing vehicles and the increased utility value that extensions would give to the system. (Chart 1) Trolleybus Route Length per 1,000 Inhabitants in selected Cities (in Kilometres) Dayton Zurich Edmonton ◄ Edmonton has significant Sao Paulo trolleybus infrastructure for its Lausanne population base. Brno Athens San Francisco Quito Mexico City 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Source: Trolleybus Study for Hong Kong (Ecotraffic, 1999) 1.4 Condition of the Infrastructure A 1992 report by Edmonton Power assessed the condition of the overhead network and described the overall condition as fair to good.86 Improvements completed since that time under the “pro-active” upgrade program, in addition to a new substation built in the Rossdale area in 2000, mean that the system itself is in good order. Chart 2 illustrates the areas in which upgrades have been made since the early 1980’s. (Note that the chart is not all-inclusive or meant to imply that all upgrades necessary in the long-term have been completed in the shaded areas.) 1.5 Extent of Use of the Infrastructure There are two significant sections of the overhead network that are not currently used or not used extensively for regular service. These are the Highlands section east of 82 Street and the 109 Street extension to Southgate, indicated by the shaded areas on Chart 3. Trolley runs to Southgate ceased in 1994 when diesel buses were substituted on Route 9 and the service was combined with the former Route 29 to serve Northgate.71 One run to Southgate in the AM peak was re-introduced in 1998. The use of trolleybuses had originally been a deciding factor in persuading Southgate residents to consent to transit service on the southernmost portion of 109 Street 19 years earlier.44 Trolley service to the Highlands was terminated with the revamping of the Transit System known as “Horizon 2000” which was launched on June 29, 1997. It is noteworthy that in neither case did planners specifically ask area residents whether electric or diesel service was preferred before these changes were introduced. A number of possibilities exist for utilizing these disused sections for transit service given present-day considerations and route patterns, in addition to a section of service wire Downtown on 102 Avenue—also shaded on Chart 3--that was originally built for detours. Temporary special events services that one might institute for events like the 2001 Games could also make use of these sections. Currently, the Southgate and Highlands sections are used for operator training and the 102 Avenue section for turnbacks. 2.0 POTENTIAL EXTENSIONS The issue of building extensions to the trolley system, though rejected in the past for various reasons, is one which still merits consideration today.