tech

Using electric buses in climate fight faces hurdles, report finds

12 Comments
By Ellen Wulfhorst

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters Foundation

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

12 Comments
Login to comment

Modern diesels are actually very clean, efficient, reliable and cost effective.

Trying to reinvent the wheel here.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Thats true. Allot of these green technologies have been found to be not so green after all. For example Solar Farms take up lots of land that displaces allot of the native species. The game changer technology is just not there yet; they are working and tweaking technologies that do not have the COP that fossil fuels can deliver. Not saying give up on it, and the green revolution is helping to push it, but its not there yet when it comes to heavy lift transportation.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Burning BushToday  07:31 am JST

Modern diesels are actually very clean, efficient, reliable and cost effective.

N02 and particulate emissions from diesels are far higher than petrol engines. Diesels have improved a lot of the last few decades but they are far from 'very clean'. It took 2 minutes searching for stats. Both the outdated testing prcedures and tax breaks from EU governments ensured dirty diesels could prosper until the VW scandal. Since then the EU has run away from it and is producing hybrids and EVs. Diesel is dead for passenger cars.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Trolleybuses have existed since the 1920's at least, are proven technology and modern vehicles can run off wire for lengthy distances. Definitely trying to reinvent the wheel.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Yesterday we read an article about the three scientists who got Nobel Prizes for their developing lithium batteries.

Today we read about lithium batteries being put to use on buses.

I see a trend.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Electric buses could play a key role in combating climate change

I would like to see a rational base for that claim. Not holding my breath to see that in the propaganda media, though.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Electric buses are better. There's been too much dependence on petroleum and too many lives lost for it. Time for cleaner energy NOW.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Electric buses are better. There's been too much dependence on petroleum and too many lives lost for it. Time for cleaner energy NOW.

Electric buses don't equal cleaner energy. In fact, depending on the source of the electricity, they can actually be dirtier. Although they do move the pollution outside the city.

They also cause more pollution in the manufacturing and disposal of their batteries. And if, as the article says, the battery life is shorter than expected that means more replacements meaning more pollution.

To make them truly cleaner would first require powering them from overhead lines, which removes batteries and their problems from the equation. Then second, generating large quantities of electricity from the lowest polluting sources. Which in today's world means Gen IV reactors.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

There are already over 400,000 electric buses in operation. China is building over 9,000 every month. The rest of the world needs to catch up before China controls the entire market.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Starpunk

There's been too much dependence on petroleum and too many lives lost for it.

I would agree that there is too much dependence on petroleum. However, electric buses get their power from the grid, which is mainly supplied by coal. I fail to see how switching from petroleum (crude oil) to coal makes a difference. Both are fossil fuels.

We should research alternatve energies instead of pushing a move from crude oil to coal.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Biomass buses too. There are some in our previous city, Kobe.

Electric trucks and buses would be a big improvement. Battery technology is moving forward fast. Buses with solar panels built into the body recharging as they go in the daytime.

However, electric buses get their power from the grid, which is mainly supplied by coal. 

In Japan 30% of total power is from coal which runs 24/7 and overnight there's a big waste factor because they run the generators at a constant speed regardless of the demand.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

zichi:

Biomass buses too. There are some in our previous city, Kobe.

Fossil fuels are also biomass. Very old biomass. It is impossible to replace current fossil fuel consumption with newly grown biomass, since you would have to replace all existing food production with energy production.... and still would not come out with enough energy, seeing the vast amount of energy it takes to grow food in the first place.

So I do not see how "biomass" is a solution in any shape or form.

In Japan 30% of total power is from coal which runs 24/7

...and in Japan, another 37% comes from oil and gas, which are also fossil fuels. You forgot to mention that. Another 32% comes from geothermal, hydro, and nuclear. Among which only nuclear would be a carbon neutral option with unlimited potential for expansion. Now please tell us you are against nuclear too!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites