DOCSLIB.ORG

King County Metro Battery Electric Buses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
King County Metro Battery Electric Buses Zero-Emission Bus Evaluation Results: King County Metro Battery Electric Buses FEBRUARY 2018 FTA Report No. 0118 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Leslie Eudy Matthew Jeffers National Renewable Energy Laboratory COVER PHOTO Courtesy of King County Metro (Seattle) Proterra Catalyst fast-charge battery electric bus. Photo courtesy of National Renewable Energy Laboratory. DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products of manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Zero-Emission Bus Evaluation Results: King County Metro Battery Electric Buses FEBRUARY 2018 FTA Report No. 0118 PREPARED BY Leslie Eudy Matthew Jeffers National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i MetricMetric Conversion Conversion Table Table Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liters L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg megagrams T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 Mg (or "t") (or "metric ton") TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) 5 (F-32)/9 oF Fahrenheit Celsius oC or (F-32)/1.8 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION iv FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruc- tions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED February 2018 April 2016–March 2017 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS Zero-Emission Bus Evaluation Results: King County Metro Battery Electric Buses 6. AUTHOR(S) Leslie Eudy, Matthew Jeffers 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESSE(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER National Renewable Energy Laboratory 15013 Denver West Parkway FTA Report No. 0118 Golden, CO 80401 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY REPORT U.S. Department of Transportation NUMBER Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation FTA Report No. 0118 East Building 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES [https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation] 12A. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12B. DISTRIBUTION CODE Available from: National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161. Phone 703.605.6000, Fax 703.605.6900, email [[email protected]] TRI 13. ABSTRACT This report summarizes the experience and results from a battery electric bus (BEB) demonstration funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) under the Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) program. In 2010, King County Metro transit agency in Seattle, Washington, received funding from a TIGGER award to add three zero-emission BEBs to its fleet. The BEBs in service at King County Metro are 40-foot fast-charge electric transit buses built by Proterra. FTA is collaborating with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and DOE’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to conduct in-service evaluations of advanced technology buses developed under its programs. This report presents evaluation results for the BEBs in comparison to a selection of baseline buses. The focus of the analysis is on one year of data from April 2016 through March 2017. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES Federal Transit Administration; Office of Research, Demonstration, and Innovation; 67 Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction; TIGGER 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION v TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary 6 Section 1: Introduction 7 Section 2: Zero-Emission Bus Evaluations Planned 7 Select Projects 8 Evaluation Protocol 15 Section 3: KC Metro BEB Evaluation Results 15 Fleet Profile—KC Metro 16 Bus Technology Descriptions 18 Charging and Maintenance Facilities 19 In-Service Operations Evaluation Results 45 Summary of Achievements and Challenges 48 Appendix: KC Metro Fleet Summary Statistics 53 Fleet Summary Statistics—SI Units 54 Additional Charts for KC Metro Evaluation 55 Acronyms and Abbreviations 56 Glossary FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION vi LIST OF FIGURES 5 1 Figure 3-1: KC Metro Service Area Map with Shaded Bellevue Region 7 1 Figure 3-2: KC Metro Proterra Catalyst Battery Electric Bus 7 1 Figure 3-3: KC Metro New Flyer Diesel Hybrid Bus 7 1 Figure 3-4: Gillig Diesel Bus Operated by KC Metro for Sound Transit 8 1 Figure 3-5: KC Metro New Flyer Electric Trolley Bus 9 1 Figure 3-6: Fast-Charge Station at KC Metro Park-and-Ride 0 2 Figure 3-7: Route Map for KC Metro Routes 226 and 241 1 2 Figure 3-8: Battery Charge and Discharge Power and State of Charge for One Example Charge Cycle 22 Figure 3-9: Cumulative Miles and Hours for Battery Bus Fleet 3 2 Figure 3-10: Average Monthly Miles for All Four Bus Fleets 6 2 Figure 3-11: Monthly Availability for All Four Bus Fleets and Reasons for Unavailability for Battery Fleet 7 2 Figure 3-12: Overall Availability for All Four Bus Fleets During Evaluation Period 8 2 Figure 3-13: Monthly Charges and Monthly Energy Consumption for Battery Fleet 9 2 Figure 3-14: Monthly Fuel Economy for Battery, Hybrid, and Diesel Bus Fleets 1 3 Figure 3-15: Monthly Fuel Cost per Mile for Battery, Hybrid, and Diesel Bus Fleets 32 Figure 3-16: Breakdown of Monthly Electric Utility Costs 4 3 Figure 3-17: Summary of Propulsion-Related Roadcalls for All Four Bus Fleets, Organized by Subsystem 5 3 Figure 3-18: Cumulative Bus MBRC and Propulsion-Related MBRC for All Four Bus Fleets 7 3 Figure 3-19: Monthly Scheduled and Unscheduled Maintenance Cost per Mile for All Four Bus Fleets 9 3 Figure 3-20: Monthly Maintenance Cost per Mile by System for Battery Bus Fleet 0 4 Figure 3-21: Monthly Maintenance Cost per Mile by System for Hybrid Bus Fleet 1 4 Figure 3-22: Monthly Maintenance Cost per Mile by System for Diesel Bus Fleet 2 4 Figure 3-23: Monthly Maintenance Cost per Mile by System for Trolley Bus Fleet 5 4 Figure 3-24: Monthly Operations (Maintenance and Fuel) Cost for Battery, Hybrid, and Diesel Bus Fleets 4 5 Figure A-1: Monthly Average Price for Electricity and Diesel Fuel 4 5 Figure A-2: Monthly Availability for Battery Buses FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION vii LIST OF TABLES 2 Table ES-1: Summary of Evaluation Results 8 Table 2-1: Selected Evaluation Projects 8 Table 2-2: DOE/FTA Performance, Cost, and Durability Targets for FCEBs 16 Table 3-1: System Descriptions for the Battery Electric, Hybrid, Diesel, and Trolley Buses 23 Table 3-2: Average Monthly Mileage (Evaluation Period) 25 Table 3-3: Summary of Availability by Bus for All Four Fleets 27 Table 3-4: Summary of Availability and Unavailability by Category for All Four Fleets 30 Table 3-5: Mileage, Fuel Use, and Fuel Economy 33 Table 3-6: Utility Electricity Rates 36 Table 3-7: Total Work Order Maintenance Costs 38 Table 3-8: Work Order Maintenance Cost per Mile by System 43 Table 3-9: Propulsion-Related Work Order Maintenance Costs by System 45 Table 3-10: Overall Operations (Maintenance and Fuel) Cost per Mile 48 Table A-1: Fleet Operations and Economics 48 Table A-2: Maintenance Costs 49 Table A-3: Breakdown of Maintenance Costs by System 53 Table A-4: Fleet Operations and Economics (SI) 53 Table A-5: Maintenance Costs (SI) FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report could not have been possible without the cooperation of King County Metro, Proterra, and others. King County Metro staff provided data on the electric and baseline buses, reviewed analyses and reports, and participated in meetings to discuss the agency’s overall experience. Proterra provided selected data from the on-board data loggers and reviewed reports. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Transit Administration provided funding for the evaluation. The authors thank the following individuals: King County Metro George Stites Leo Hrechanyk Jim Hunley Kim Martin Daniel Santon Cindy Sattler Bonnie Davis-Losey Larry Schwerzler Lynn Matteoni Proterra Mike Finnern Seneca Schepmann Derrick Allen U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration, Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation Sean Ricketson Mike Baltes Marcel Belanger U.S. Department of Transportation Research, Development, and Technology Office Shawn Johnson FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ix ABSTRACT This report summarizes the experience and results from a battery electric bus (BEB) demonstration funded by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) under the Transit Investments for Greenhouse Gas and Energy Reduction (TIGGER) program.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • King County Metro Transit 2017 Strategic Plan Progress Report
    ATTACHMENT A - 15241 REVISED OCTOBER 17, 2018 King County Metro Transit 2017 Strategic Plan Progress Report June 2018 King County Metro Transit 2017 Strategic Plan Progress Report June 2018 Department of Transportation Metro Transit Division King Street Center, KSC-TR-0415 201 S. Jackson St Seattle, WA 98104 206-553-3000 Relay: 711 https://kingcounty.gov/metro Alternative Formats Available 206-477-3839 Relay: 711 051518/comm/as TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ....................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 5 GOAL 1: SAFETY. ................................................................................ 6 GOAL 2: HUMAN POTENTIAL.. ........................................................... 9 GOAL 3: ECONOMIC GROWTH AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT. ............. 16 GOAL 4: ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY .................................... 20 GOAL 5: SERVICE EXCELLENCE. ....................................................... 24 GOAL 6: FINANCIAL STEWARDSHIP. ................................................. 28 GOAL 7: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT AND TRANSPARENCY. .................... 35 GOAL 8: QUALITY WORKFORCE... .................................................... 40 APPENDIX A – ACCESSIBILITY MEASURES... .................................... 43 APPENDIX B – PEER COMPARISON REPORT... .................................. 46 2017 KING COUNTY METRO TRANSIT STRATEGIC PLAN PROGRESS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Strategic Plan Progress Report
    [Show full text]
  • A-1 Electric Bus & Fleet Transition Planning
    A Proterra model battery electric powered bus (photo credit: Proterra, May 2021). 52 | page A-1 Electric Bus & Fleet Transition Planning Initiative: Assess the feasibility of transitioning Pace’s fleet toward battery electric and additional CNG technologies, as well as develop a transition plan for operations and facilities. Study other emerging technologies that can improve Pace’s environmental impact. Supports Goals: Responsiveness, Safety, Adaptability, Collaboration, Environmental Stewardship, Fiscal Solvency, and Integrity ACTION ITEM 1 Investigate and Plan for Battery Electric Bus (BEB) Pace is committed to the goals of environmental stewardship and economic sustainability, and recognizes how interest to electrify vehicles across private industry and US federal, state, and local governments has been intensifying throughout 2020-2021. Looking ahead, the agency will holistically evaluate a transition path to converting its fleet to battery electric buses (BEB). As a first step, Action Item 2 of the A-2 Capital Improvement Projects initiative describes Pace’s forthcoming Facilities Plan. This effort will include an investigation of the prerequisites that BEB technology requires to successfully operate. Once established, Pace will further plan what next steps and actions to take in pursuit of this vehicle propulsion system. A Union of Concerned Scientists 2017 study3 indicates that BEB’s have 70 percent lower global warming emissions than CNG or diesel hybrid buses even when considering the lifecycle emissions required to generate the necessary electricity. Similarly, a 2018 US PIRG Education Fund Study4 indicates that implementing BEB’s lower operational costs yields fuel and maintenance savings over a vehicle’s life cycle. Pace praises the efforts of many other transit agencies across the nation and world who are investing heavily in transitioning their fleets to BEB and other green, renewable, and environmentally-cognizant sources of vehicle propulsion.
    [Show full text]
  • S92 Orient Point, Greenport to East Hampton Railroad Via Riverhead
    Suffolk County Transit Bus Information Suffolk County Transit Fares & Information Vaild March 22, 2021 - October 29, 2021 Questions, Suggestions, Complaints? Full fare $2.25 Call Suffolk County Transit Information Service Youth/Student fare $1.25 7 DAY SERVICE Youths 5 to 13 years old. 631.852.5200 Students 14 to 22 years old (High School/College ID required). Monday to Friday 8:00am to 4:30pm Children under 5 years old FREE SCHEDULE Limit 3 children accompanied by adult. Senior, Person with Disabilities, Medicare Care Holders SCAT Paratransit Service and Suffolk County Veterans 75 cents Personal Care Attendant FREE Paratransit Bus Service is available to ADA eligible When traveling to assist passenger with disabilities. S92 passengers. To register or for more information, call Transfer 25 cents Office for People with Disabilities at 631.853.8333. Available on request when paying fare. Good for two (2) connecting buses. Orient Point, Greenport Large Print/Spanish Bus Schedules Valid for two (2) hours from time received. Not valid for return trip. to East Hampton Railroad To obtain a large print copy of this or other Suffolk Special restrictions may apply (see transfer). County Transit bus schedules, call 631.852.5200 Passengers Please or visit www.sct-bus.org. via Riverhead •Have exact fare ready; Driver cannot handle money. Para obtener una copia en español de este u otros •Passengers must deposit their own fare. horarios de autobuses de Suffolk County Transit, •Arrive earlier than scheduled departure time. Serving llame al 631.852.5200 o visite www.sct-bus.org. •Tell driver your destination.
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Analysis of Battery Electric Transit Buses (PDF)
    Financial Analysis of Battery Electric Transit Buses Caley Johnson, Erin Nobler, Leslie Eudy, and Matthew Jeffers National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-74832 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC June 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 Financial Analysis of Battery Electric Transit Buses Caley Johnson, Erin Nobler, Leslie Eudy, and Matthew Jeffers National Renewable Energy Laboratory Suggested Citation Johnson, Caley, Erin Nobler, Leslie Eudy, and Matthew Jeffers. 2020. Financial Analysis of Battery Electric Transit Buses. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. NREL/TP-5400-74832. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/74832.pdf NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Technical Report Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy NREL/TP-5400-74832 Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC June 2020 This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy National Renewable Energy Laboratory Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications. 15013 Denver West Parkway Golden, CO 80401 Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NOTICE This work was authored by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, operated by Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308. Funding provided by the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Vehicle Technologies Office.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Bus Automation Risks, Barriers, & Mitigations
    Transit Bus Automation Risks, Barriers, & Mitigations Introduction In 2016, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) studied risks and barriers to transit bus automation and developed mitigations as a part of the development of its Strategic Transit Automation Research (STAR) Plan. • Risks are the potential for automated technologies, once in place, to yield negative consequences or for anticipated benefits to go unrealized. • Barriers are obstacles that could prevent or significantly challenge implementation of an automation technology. Both are challenges to the potential implementation of transit bus automation that require the development of mitigation options or strategies to overcome barriers or reduce the likelihood of a risk. This factsheet summarizes the findings of this study. For more information, please see the full report, contained in the STAR Plan. Risks Four categories of risks related to transit automation were identified: Safety and Security: Automated transit buses are at risk of potential hardware and software failures or limitations, human factor errors related to over-reliance on automated assistance or decline in driver skill, and cyber-attacks, as well as potential impedance with emergency response and communications. Operations, Maintenance, & Cost Effectiveness: Transit agencies run the risk of accumulating unrealized costs from technology and transition expenditures, workforce retraining expenses, and increased labor costs due to the need for specialized skills, and technological obsolescence. Changes in service patterns or transit funding mechanisms could lead to additional costs. In addition, automated bus transit will compete against other modes that are moving toward automation. Passenger Experience: Automation could negatively affect passenger experience, or fail to deliver expected benefits. This could include degradation in service reliability, slower travel speeds, reduced access and convenience, inadequate customer service, and poor ride quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance for Transit Agencies COVID-19 Pandemic Response
    March 27, 2020 Guidance for Transit Agencies COVID-19 Pandemic Response Public transportation is an essential element of our critical infrastructure and necessary to support required trips to work and healthcare for those that must travel during this unprecedented time. Public transportation agencies around the Commonwealth have been working very diligently in order to maintain operations and ensure the health and safety of their customers and employees. Some examples of the types of actions that have already been taken include: Extensive cleaning of transit vehicles and facilities Elimination of fares to reduce high-touch areas and maintain more social distancing for transit vehicle operators Use of rear-door-only boarding and spreading out passengers on the bus to ensure spacing Adding additional vehicles to higher volume routes to ensure appropriate passenger loads Skipping stops if vehicles are already at a capacity that would ensure social distancing Recommended guidance: Continue to communicate to the public that they should not take transit if they are sick. Message: if you are showing symptoms, please use an alternate mode of transportation. Transit use should be limited to essential trips only – trips to work for essential workers and to meet essential personal needs (e.g., grocery store and medical trips, but not if you are sick). Transit agencies should closely monitor employee absenteeism and direct employees not to come to work if they are sick. Transit agencies should suspend fare collection for fixed-route services, where practical, to reduce the interaction with transit operators and to limit contact with high-touch surfaces. Use rear-door boarding, where possible, to increase separation on buses.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (Part B)
    7UDQVLW&DSDFLW\DQG4XDOLW\RI6HUYLFH0DQXDO PART 2 BUS TRANSIT CAPACITY CONTENTS 1. BUS CAPACITY BASICS ....................................................................................... 2-1 Overview..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Definitions............................................................................................................... 2-1 Types of Bus Facilities and Service ............................................................................ 2-3 Factors Influencing Bus Capacity ............................................................................... 2-5 Vehicle Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-5 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-13 Fundamental Capacity Calculations .......................................................................... 2-15 Vehicle Capacity................................................................................................... 2-15 Person Capacity..................................................................................................... 2-22 Planning Applications ............................................................................................... 2-23 2. OPERATING ISSUES............................................................................................ 2-25 Introduction..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Attractive Value Proposition for Zero-Emission Buses in Denmark
    Fuel Cell Electric Buses An attractive Value Proposition for Zero-Emission Buses In Denmark - April 2020 - Photo: An Attractive Line Bloch Value Klostergaard, Proposition North for Denmark Zero-Emission Region Buses. in Denmark Executive Summary Seeking alternatives to diesel buses are crucial for realizing the Danish zero Zero–Emission Fuel Cell emission reduction agenda in public transport by 2050. In Denmark alone, public transport and road-transport of cargo account for ap- proximately 25 per cent of the Danish CO2 emissions. Thus, the deployment of zero emission fuel cell electric buses (FCEBs) will be an important contribution Electric Buses for Denmark. to the Danish climate law committed to reaching 70 per cent below the CO2 emissions by 2030 and a total carbon neutrality by 2050. In line with the 2050 climate goals, Danish transit agencies and operators are being called to implement ways to improve air quality in their municipalities while maintaining quality of service. This can be achieved with the deployment of FCEBs and without compromising on range, route flexibility and operability. As a result, FCEBs are now also being included as one of the solutions in coming zero emission bus route tenders Denmark. Danish municipalities play an important role in establishing the public transport system of the future, however it is also essential that commercial players join forces to realize the deployment of zero-emission buses. In order to push the de- velopment forward, several leading players in the hydrogen fuel cell value chain have teamed up and formed the H2BusEurope consortium committed to support the FCEB infrastructure.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Technology Equipment Manufacturers*
    Advanced Technology Equipment Manufacturers* Revised 04/21/2020 On-Road (Medium/Heavy Duty, Terminal Tractors) OEM Model Technology Vocations GVWR Type Altec Industries, Inc Altec 12E8 JEMS ePTO ePTO ePTO, Utility > 33,000, 26,001 - 33,000 New Altec Industries, Inc Altec JEMS 1820 and 18E20 ePTO ePTO ePTO, Utility > 33,000, 26,001 - 33,000 New Altec Industries, Inc Altec JEMS 4E4 with 3.6 kWh Battery ePTO ePTO, Utility 16,001-19,500, 19,501-26,000 New Altec Industries, Inc Altec JEMS 6E6 with 3.6 kWh Battery ePTO ePTO, Utility 16,001-19,500, 19,501-26,000 New Autocar Autocar 4x2 and 6x4 Xpeditor with Cummins-Westport ISX12N Engine Near-Zero Engine Truck > 33,001 New Autocar Autocar 4x2 and 6x4 Xpeditor with Cummins-Westport L9N Engine Near-Zero Engine Refuse > 33,001 New Blue Bird Blue Bird Electric Powered All American School Bus Zero Emission Bus, School Bus > 30,000 New Blue Bird Blue Bird Electric Powered Vision School Bus 4x2 Configuration Zero Emission Bus, School Bus > 30,000 New BYD Motors BYD 8Y Electric Yard Tractor Zero Emission Terminal Truck 81,000 New BYD Motors BYD C10 45' All-Electric Coach Bus Zero Emission Bus 49,604 New BYD Motors BYD C10MS 45' All-Electric Double-Decker Coach Bus Zero Emission Transit Bus 45' New BYD Motors BYD C6 23' All-Electric Coach Bus Zero Emission Bus 18,331 New BYD Motors BYD K11 60' Articulated All-Electric Transit Bus Zero Emission Bus 65,036 New BYD Motors BYD K7M 30' All-Electric Transit Bus Zero Emission Bus, Transit Bus 30' New BYD Motors BYD K9 40' All-Electric Transit Bus Zero Emission
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Bus Electrification on Carbon Emissions: the Case of Stockholm
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) Accepted Manuscript Impact of bus electrification on carbon emissions: the case of Stockholm Maria Xylia, Sylvain Leduc, Achille-B. Laurent, Piera Patrizio, Yvonne van der Meer, Florian Kraxner, Semida Silveira PII: S0959-6526(18)33099-3 DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.085 Reference: JCLP 14487 To appear in: Journal of Cleaner Production Received Date: 29 January 2018 Accepted Date: 09 October 2018 Please cite this article as: Maria Xylia, Sylvain Leduc, Achille-B. Laurent, Piera Patrizio, Yvonne van der Meer, Florian Kraxner, Semida Silveira, Impact of bus electrification on carbon emissions: the case of Stockholm, Journal of Cleaner Production (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.10.085 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Impact of bus electrification on carbon emissions: the case of Stockholm Maria Xyliaa,b *, Sylvain Leducc, Achille-B. Laurentd, Piera Patrizioc, Yvonne van der Meerd, Florian Kraxnerc, Semida Silveiraa a Energy and Climate Studies Unit, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden b Integrated Transport Research Lab (ITRL), KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden c International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria d Biobased Materials department, Maastricht University, Geleen, The Netherlands *corresponding author, e-mail: [email protected] ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry
    Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry Michael Renner and Gary Gardner Global Competitiveness in the Rail and Transit Industry Michael Renner and Gary Gardner September 2010 2 GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS IN THE RAIL AND TRANSIT INDUSTRY © 2010 Worldwatch Institute, Washington, D.C. Printed on paper that is 50 percent recycled, 30 percent post-consumer waste, process chlorine free. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Worldwatch Institute; of its directors, officers, or staff; or of its funding organizations. Editor: Lisa Mastny Designer: Lyle Rosbotham Table of Contents 3 Table of Contents Summary . 7 U.S. Rail and Transit in Context . 9 The Global Rail Market . 11 Selected National Experiences: Europe and East Asia . 16 Implications for the United States . 27 Endnotes . 30 Figures and Tables Figure 1. National Investment in Rail Infrastructure, Selected Countries, 2008 . 11 Figure 2. Leading Global Rail Equipment Manufacturers, Share of World Market, 2001 . 15 Figure 3. Leading Global Rail Equipment Manufacturers, by Sales, 2009 . 15 Table 1. Global Passenger and Freight Rail Market, by Region and Major Industry Segment, 2005–2007 Average . 12 Table 2. Annual Rolling Stock Markets by Region, Current and Projections to 2016 . 13 Table 3. Profiles of Major Rail Vehicle Manufacturers . 14 Table 4. Employment at Leading Rail Vehicle Manufacturing Companies . 15 Table 5. Estimate of Needed European Urban Rail Investments over a 20-Year Period . 17 Table 6. German Rail Manufacturing Industry Sales, 2006–2009 . 18 Table 7. Germany’s Annual Investments in Urban Mass Transit, 2009 . 19 Table 8.
    [Show full text]
  • ST Express 590 (Tacoma – Seattle) And
    Eastlake Ave E ST Express Eastlake Ave E StewartStewart StSt Yale Ave N Yale Yale Ave N Yale 6th Ave 6th Ave 9th Ave 9th Ave HowellHowell StSt 7th Ave 590 TacomaDOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN – Seattle 7th Ave Adult fares $3.25 4th Ave SEATTLESEATTLE 4th Ave 594 Lakewood – Seattle Olive Way 2nd Ave Olive Way 2nd Ave Effective September 19, 2021 – March 19, 2022 PikePike StSt SenecaSeneca StSt ConnectingConnecting routesroutes 2nd2nd AveAve ExtExt CherryCherry StSt LakewoodLakewood StationStation Eastlake Ave E SS WashingtonWashington StSt ITIT Stewart St Yale Ave N Yale 612612 620620 SS JacksonJackson StSt 6th Ave STST 9th Ave Howell St 580580 592592 7th Ave Lumen Field Lumen Field SS RoyalRoyal BroughamBrougham WyWy SS LineLine DOWNTOWN T-MobileT-Mobile ParkPark 4th Ave SR 512 Park & Ride SEATTLE SS HolgateHolgate StSt SR 512 Park & Ride IT Olive Way IT 2nd Ave 612612 620620 PugetPuget SS LanderLander StSt PT SoundSoundPike St PT SS SpokaneSpokane StSt 33 44 Seneca St STST STST STST Connecting routes 574574 580580 592592 2nd Ave Ext Cherry St 590590 Lakewood Station594 Downtown Tacoma/ S Washington St IT 594 Downtown Tacoma/ SODO Busway SODO Busway 612 620 CommerceCommerce StSt Commerce St S Jackson St Commerce St Downtown Tacoma/ ST PTPT Downtown Tacoma/ 580 592 CommerceCommerce StSt SS 10th10th StSt 11 1313 4545 400400 Lumen Field S Royal Brougham Wy S Line 22 1616 4848 500500 T-Mobile Park DOWNTOWNDOWNTOWN 33 4141 5757 501501 1111 4242 6363 S Holgate St TACOMATACOMA SR 512 Park & Ride 594594IT STST Pacific Ave Pacific Pacific Ave Pacific 612 620
    [Show full text]