Environmentally speaking, trolleybusses are way superior compared to battery electric busses, they don't require toxic rare earth metals like BEBs do. That's why, in my opinion, we should be building them whenever possible and sensical. Like, it wouldn't make much sense to build overhead electrical cables for a limited rural bus service.
@@Taladar2003 Of course! Trolleybusses would best perform in somewhere in the middle. In Helsinki regional area, we have many trunk bus lines, which are characterized by orange color from normal blue one. The busiest of them, called line 550, was just upgraded to a tram line. It hasn't opened to the public yet, but will open very soon. Other lines are busy too, but don't justify building tram tracks in the same way. It's those kinds of services that I think should be built to trolley standard. And I do think that every trolley line should be built in a way that would allow a possible future upgrade to a tram line.
Trollybusses are great for citys with a high frequency, battery-electric busses are great for low-frequency longer range routes, like in rural areas or for special services. A Public transit network should always have a few network-indipendent busses, to compensate for big events, accidents and construction on mainlines, evactuations etc. even if it usually only runs trollybusses.
In Vancouver Canada there's lots of trolley buses. I rode the number 19 which takes you to Stanley Park and I got to say, trolley buses accelerate fast! They're definitely one of my favourite type of buses second only to double deckers.
Pretty good video! Some additional comments: • Switzerland has 13 active trolleybus systems; all of them use either single- or double-articulated vehicles. There are no more standard size trolleybuses in operation in Switzerland. This can be understood in the way that trolleybus (especially the bi-articulated kind) is in the top range for the operation field of buses. If you have to get beyond the feasible capacity, you have to go rail-based. • The results of the research with the SwissTrolley Plus lead to the development of a sophisticated energy/battery management system, which takes into account the topography of the line, in order to get all energy created with regenerative braking into the battery (instead of braking resistors or the overhead wires). So, it makes sure that the battery is sufficiently discharged before a downhill section of the line, and that it is becomes fully charged at its end. The effect of this system is that the energy consumed from the overhead wires can be reduced by about 25%. • It took VBZ only a few thousand franks in infrastructure investment to electrify a specific line from diesel to BTB with IMC operation (well, this line ran under wire for about half its length already). • The video mentioned it already, the manufacturers never list range in unrestricted mode (meaning that all consumers are active), but always in restricted (or emergency) mode, where all non-essential consumers are switched off. A rule of thumb by VBZ is that you design the vehicles around unrestricted mode with 2.8 kWh/km (single-articulated). • In St. Gallen, extending the overhead line network by 20% allowed to double the network length operated with electric vehicles. So, it should be a no-brainer for systems having already trolleybuses in operation to expand with BTBs with IMC.
Thank you for giving some attention to my hometown Arnhem. Being born and raised here, I can’t imagine my city without the trolleybus network. And over the past 25 years the city and the province did a lot to invest in the quality and future of the network. Can’t wait for the hybrid trolleybus service to Wageningen to start next year. Unfortunately we also had some closures. Some disused trolley wiring in the south part of the city finally has been removed (after hanging there for more than 20 years without any trolleybus service), so chances any conventional trolleybus lines will run along the roads in question there are very slim now. The trolleybus line to Hoogkamp was cancelled back in 2017 (after they rebuilt the line only 7 years earlier), but the wiring is still there and active. If the new hybrid line to Wageningen will be a succes, I have high hopes Hoogkamp will get trolleybus services again in a similar hybrid form. I was really impressed with the speed, frequencies and reliability of the Zürich trolleybus system. Their system seems to be more focused on connecting outer areas of the city, whereas the tram is the main connector of the outer areas with the city center. And they work perfect together, also when it comes to interchangeability.
Trolleybuses should always be retained, Battery buses should only supplement them, and should be equipped with trolley poles too so they can charge while the fully charged ones can go off grid. the highest demand systems should have their lanes made exclusive or be converted to Trams like we have in Melbourne, Australia. i wish we had more trolleybuses here instead of buses, suburban/intercity ones would be amazing
@@cityforalli know its better to stick with proven technologies, but the 2 wire systems are still clumsy, theres a reason why trams quickly adopted pantographs, and while yes they have the tracks that they can use for return current, hopefully we discover some reliable way that trolleybuses (or maybe they'll be called trambuses) can use tram catenary systems
@@xymaryai8283 One advantage of trolley buses over trams is their ability to move to the curb to load/unload, and move around other road traffic. The swivelling trolley poles are adept at these manoeuvres.
1:15 Lugano, Switzerland… That’s a sad story. What looked like a great idea eventually lead to the trolleybus system’s demise. They picked a 1 kV system. That’s great, because it requires less copper (i.e. thinner cables) compared to the common 600 V or less common 750 V systems. Sadly, the world evolved to a point at which there was no manufacturer capable of making new 1 kV trolleybuses for Lugano and so they didappeared in the early 2000s. The last overhead wieres in Viale Castagnola survived until approximately 2014, but had not been used since ~2002 anyway.
The first city to operate trolleybusses (with trolley poles) was not Leeds, but Königstein(Sachsen) in Germany in 1901, but operations closed in 1904 already. The second one was the Industriebahn Wurzen (1905 - 1928), which interestingly was transporting goods, not passengers.
In-Motion-Charging (IMC) trolleybuses are the real game changers! Coming from a city where we used to have trolleybuses, and we will have them again next year with IMC-trolleybuses, I can tell for sure that you end up not paying attention anymore to overhead wires. For decades, companies specialized in overhead wires have been developing technologies enabling these wires to remain discrete. Most disturbing could be those "spider webs" implied by switches. But again, with IMC trolleybuses, we could remove these and cross these sections in battery mode like they do in Beijing next to the Tiananmen Square.
I guess there is a mistake in the video about world biggest trolleybus network: it should be Minsk, Belarus, not Kyiv, Ukraine. Minsk took the 1st place after Moscow removed its network in 2019. BTW, Minsk Trolleybus Network modernizes regularly and consist of both trolley buses and battery buses.
You point out that Britain had the first public trolley bus system and we eventually had many. Now we have none and there is apparently no serious movement towards reintroduction despite their obvious benefits. Even articulated buses have gone thanks to an earlier, idiot Prime Minister who claimed they were too big for London streets and whose vast knowledge of public transport was seemingly limited to making bus models out of cardboard boxes. It’s a question of long-term investment which, regrettably, we no longer seem capable of in some areas.
En mi opinión creó que el trolebús sirve para troncales sobre todo en las zonas donde no es posible un tranvia ya sea por el terreno complejo o la demanda no justifique la inversión de un tranvia
The white Skoda trolleybus with the covered wheels looks too futuristic to be in practical use. I miss simpler designs of the past. Solaris Trollino has stupid loud beeping doors. They are very spacious. Maybe not all of them have a hidden battery. Electric buses and hydrogen buses are probably a tool to siphon off money with kickbacks on expensive infrastructure. Corruption is everywhere. How do those batteries last 10 years? Lithium-ion batteries don't last that long if discharged often. A bus is driven all day, every day.
I have an idea to make separate video about it and even send a letter to Wellington city council for a comment, but after a few months - still no answer from them :((
You omitted the fact that battery buses are heavier and cause more road infrastructure damage. Road damage increases with the fourth power of axle weight so it is not insignificant.
A lot has to do with regulations and total vehicle lengths. One of the six is said to be extremely happy with their BTBs with IMC. Another one of the six has to be written off…
The biggest reason I love trolleybuses is when the bus gets bigger, there's no need to put a bigger battery in there because they source electricity from overhead wires. So in my opinion the bi-articulated or even tri-articulated trolleybuses are usually a better investment than the standard size ones.
And as buses with internal combustion engined buses get bigger, there is a need to make the fuel tank bigger, exactly analogous to battery only electric buses. It is not possible for a vehicle to source a liquid or gaseous fuel while moving, only when stationary. That itself puts electric traction at an advantage.
Trolley buses are unambiguously good. We should definitely have wires put up in our cities and we should also use those wires for other things as well, like the garbage trucks, postal vans, snow plows and such. We should make the batteries in those vehicles relatively small and probably interchangeable as opposed to fitting them with a gigantic battery that mostly just sits there being hauled around. With advances in robotics and sensors, it shouldn't be that difficult to design a system that can put the poles back onto the wires autonomously basically anywhere. However, I have to push back a little bit on the stuff about the mining, most of the stories are overblown and a lot of them are propaganda from oil companies. Oil companies, by the way are the biggest consumers of cobalt, it's used in diesel refining. The fire risk is definitely real, but we're starting to see interesting breakthroughs in sodium ion battery chemistry that has a much reduced fire risk. It's got a lower energy density but as I said we shouldn't be putting multiple ton batteries in the buses anyway. Good presentation overall.
Agree! In general, in my opinion, battery technology is still in the process of development, so it is a bit early for cities to invest millions in something that will most likely become obsolete in just a few years
induction charging. busses stop for a minute at bus stops. level with the road surface at bus stops is an induction charger. under the bus is an induction charge receiver. two types of electricity storage on bus; super capacitors for quick charge and initial motion inertia, plus whatever is most efficient battery cells for traction power between stops. (charge induction is only live when interfaced with charge receiver). for two reasons; no catenary and associated maintenance, and no need for on- board charging generator or the weight of all-of-trip battery capacity. possible multi-use for other electric utility vehicles.
@@GaryGraham-sx4pmbuses and trucks are to heavy for induction based systems, as they're inefficient. Meanwhile cars are not tall enough for overhead wire... On highways we might get both, but in the cities it will be mostly wires
@@jan-lukas. thanx for your reply. induction electrical energy transfer is very efficient, every transformer is an induction energy transfer device. induction suitable for buses because of predetermined and frequent charging positions at bus stops. there are about a dozen examples of viable induction charged city bus systems.
@@GaryGraham-sx4pm The efficiency of inductive charging decreases when an air gap increases. AC transformers are very large and have zero air gap. And therefore they are effective.
Trolleybuses with batteries give you the best of both: they are lighter, cheaper, autonomous, don't need dedicated chargers, do not waste time on charging, don't require overhanging cables everywhere, are able to reroute
Consider that fact that even buses with internal combustion engines need dedicated fuel dispensers and can only be refuelled while stationary. In-motion refuelling is not an option, in-motion supply of electrical power is and that itself puts electric traction at an advantage.
i've lived in Arnhem for 15 years now, all maintenance i've known to have been done in this time is when a lorry that shouldn't have been where it was drove into a bridge and smooched the wires. there was also one street that got extensively redone, and in the meantime the poles holding the wires up got redone. both were done within a few days. there is one truly ancient service lorry that is an event when it's spotted, i've seen it twice when a storm made some branches fall on the wires. wires last a long time, but if they need to be changed, the service lorry comes by at night, and changes the wires over at about 2kmh, without any noise that would wake anyone. As stated, the network is about 70 years old and doing just fine. the amount of maintenance seems to be quite minimal, as does the additional outages and delays. the worst thing that seems to happen is that someone pulls the ropes of the fishing poles to be funny, but it seems most people of questionable intelligence think that that is where the electricity is, so it doesn't happen all that often
Can't believe you didn't mention Mexico City, the system was fully renovated with brand new Yutong trolleybuses and many new kilometres of this service have been or are being created.
With the current anti-china sentiment, probably doesnt want to cover chinese products.. everything chinese is evil, even if its the worlds largest green energy producer
Great video! Here in Bratislava (Slovakia), the trolleybus network is about to be significantly expanded, and I'm really looking forward to the double-articulated vehicles which should enter operation sometime this year! However, the city still feels the need to tinker with battery electric and even hydrogen buses as well, for some reason.
Thanks for highlighting at the end, that trolley buses are also electric buses. I prefer to speak of battery buses and trolley buses to mark the real difference of both power systems. And overall, a really good video of course :-)
Not all batteries use cobalt and much more is used in oil refining and combustion engines, and you can only use the fuel once. Also some battery types are safer than others.
that's incorrect - cobalt in refining is almost - but not quite ever lasting - The equation is around 660.000 gals of fuel per ounce of cobalt used up. You are right about LFP being much safer, however at a much lower energy density
Small correction: For Switzerland, I count not 11, but 14 operating trolleybus network systems. One of which is debatable (La Chaux-de-Fonds), because it's just re-opening this year after a 10 year intermediate period of closure. These trolleybuses indeed see a revival in recent years, with a large ridership and many technical innovations. One line just passes by my house, and I don't mind the noise at all; they are more quiet than some of the cars passing. Here's the list: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trolleybus_systems_in_Switzerland
One downside of trolleybuses, they are two quiet sometimes. I almost got killed by one in Goldbrunnenplatz when I first moved to Zurich as I was going to step out onto the street but was looking the wrong way (due to being from downunder) and couldn't hear it coming. Luckily my mate grabbed me and prevented me stepping out in front of it.
Well, actually, we have to count 13 systems; while La Chaux-de-Fonds is phasing in, Schaffhausen is phasing out… Schaffhausen obviously fell for the Irizar eye candy… Somehow fortunate that La Chaux-de-Fonds left the wires up after taking them down in the city centre because of big style rebuilding. And with only very limited effort, they could re-energise them, and run tests with a vehicle borrowed from Biel. Together with the need for renewal of the more than 30 years old vehicles in Neuchâtel, transN could stitch together a substantial order, where deliveries are supposed to start later this year.
@@tintin_999 Them being quiet can also be looked at as an asset, but yes, not if you''ve recently moved from the British Isles or down-under... glad you survived the first few months on Zürich's streets!
Mexico City has a 203km trolleybus network served by 290 units on 9 lines, with two more lines under construction. Latest acquisitions have included simple and articulated units with supporting batteries and are regularly used as a support whenever the subway or other systems fail, having a ~80km battery autonomy.
My local suburb recently got a bunch of electric buses, seemingly out of the blue. You now see them everywhere and the transition has been almost unnoticeable except for seeing them drive around. While Trolley buses may be the better form of technology, they require quite a bit of political shenanigans and dealing with residents before you can even start to build a network. On the other hand it appears that battery electric buses can just be rolled out under our noses without any fanfare. At the end of the day, while it would be nice to see more trolley buses, I feel like by the time that anyone gets their act together to even consider them, we will see practically all our networks run by battery buses. Note: the buses they are using do not have quick charge capability, they simply run their route then charge back up at the depot when they run low. That doesn't work for all routes but it works for at least 75% of them. While more complex solutions will be required for the other routes, I feel as if we have just entered the mass adoption stage of battery buses where they will soon be everywhere, and cities will only have to try and solve the long routes problem in a few years.
We have trolleybuses in Naples (Italy) and we are one of the very few places in the whole world to actually be expanding our system! For example, we converted route 604 (now 204) from diesel to trolleybus, and routes R5 and 168 are shortly to follow (to be renumbered 205 and 206 respectively). Definitely think trolleybuses are the way to go. Problem with batteries is the intense amount of production required, and not environmentally friendly at all
The way to go is to combine the two, like shown with your Solingen example: Until recently, some trolley buses had auxiliary diesel motors to maneuver around bus yards, parts without overhead wires or obstacles on their regular lines. Now, these auxiliary motors can be replaced by batteries that can be recharged via the overhead wires. These batteries are rather small and lighter than an auxiliary motor with fuel, and usually don't have a wide range, but they allow the buses to reach the next functioning power lines. Unlike diesel motors they don't need start-up time nor an additional fuel supply. What makes these systems additionally attractive is their ability to recuperate energy when braking, which saves both energy and break pads abrasion. The size of the battery packs can be adapted to the specific needs of a system. In Salzburg, for example, one trolley line extends far beyond the city overhead wire system into a suburb. The bus runs and recharges first under the wire system of the city and then runs autonomously on the country road out to the suburb for a total of more than 20 km. Employing these dual mode buses offers easy solutions for example when it comes to opening routes that cross a railway line with conflicting overhead wires, or underneath low bridges with insufficient clearance to install overhead wires.
You now could argue: “Well actually copper for the wires too is not renewable”. A Copper wire is comparable much easier to recycle, melt it down and cast it again, recycled it is. I agree with you about trolley omnibusses. I would add to the argument. The electric bus is more or less still a development platform, there are a lot more improvements to be done, meanwhile the trolley omnibus is a decades proven technology. Because we need green transport now not tomorrow, spending the extras upfront is in my opinion just worth it. Furthermore if you City also operates a tram network you could always argue that the trolley omnibuses is a 15% down payment for a tram. When the demand increases to a thresholds put in rails, remove one of the wires and you have a tram.
I see Trolleybusses every Day at Work, Our little Trolleybus system survived because Esslingen was once Test-City for the Mercedes-Benz Duobusses of the O 305 and O 405 GTD Type. Starting next year, the currently 10 Overheadwire/Battery Duobusses will be joined by 46 more Overheadwire/Battery Duobusses and the Wires will be extended in some locations. The SVE even bought back the last ever Build O 405 GTD as an historic Trolleybus. After 11 Years No. 327 was back home.
I live in the Boston area, where the MBTA has been gradually removing trolleybus lines and replacing trolleybuses with diesel buses (with a vague promise of one day replacing them with battery-only electric buses). I wish I knew any way we could prevent them doing that.
Trolley buses are VASTLY superior to battery buses for regular service. Battery buses are good for use as Peak Hours supplemental service and School supplemental service only.
...one city in the States that uses dual mode trolleybuses (electric/diesel) is Seattle. Sadly their neighbour to the south where I live (Portland) dismantled it's trolleybus network decades ago and plans to go all battery electric. by 2035. The city does have a fairly extensive LRT network (particularly for its size) as well as two street tram lines. Sadly only a handful of cities in the country here still have trolleybus networks, the largest being San Francisco followed by Seattle.
I would love to see more of these trolleybuses along regional roads in my city in Canada. We recently developed a tram line down the centre of the whole city. I personally would love to see more tram lines or even mass passenger rail service along regional roads, especially since you don't have the micro particles from rubber tires. However, if trolleybuses can get more cars off the road the better. Reduce the micropollution with one bus but removing many cars is a step in the right direction.
if you can have the trolleybuses link in to the tram network on the parts they already exist. you could have one of those more semi trolly systems. like lines above when available but you don't need lines all the time. reducing the cost of building them all at once.
Vancouver still has 13 trolley bus routes, with a fleet of 262 units, including 74 articulates. The latest of which were purchased in 2016 from Winnipeg based New Flyer Industries. Vancouver also has an extensive autonomous electric light rail system. Toronto has 9 tram lines on an 82kn network throughout the city, as well as a metro system. And Montreal also has a metro system. Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa all have light rail.
@@dougbrowning82 The current fleet of trolley buses in Vancouver came into service around 2006/2007 and should be reaching retirement by the latter half of the decade. And if I’m not mistaken, there are ~14 routes lol
I really appreciate that there are a variety of options for people getting around. Different circumstances call for different solutions. Thanks for this in depth look at these modes!
Trolley buses and electric buses are different concepts with different economics. Trolley buses make sense on trunk routes, with frequent services and enough paying customers. Just like trams and metros, it requires an investment for each piece of route or track you want to run. For example, Amsterdam has a network of metros and trams to cover the trunk routes. There is a vast network of complementary buses that serves the city, the airport and its suburbs. It wouldn't make economic sense to build wires on all these dozens of routes. Battery-powered buses made it posdible to switch from diesel to electric, which otherwise would have remained diesel. It costs infrastructure at the hubs only, which is shared between many different routes.
Great video! You didn't mention Hungary (only 3 cities have trolley busses), but Budapest has a pretty good trolley system as well, so it's worth checking out, if someone is interested. The terminus of line 74 even had a little cameo at 4:20
Good video! Still, you didn't mention Hungary it only has 3 cities. Now days it uses hybrid "trolley" and "battery" bus which it is more efficient to take detour and less consume battery.
Medium to long-term battery busses will probably win out. The cost of creating and maintaining the cable infrastructure is quite high and battery buses continue to get cheaper and more capable. Existing networks will probably survive for the next couple of years, but even there could be a point where it will no longer be economical.
Not really; the weight issue of the batteries remains, and for a urban-bus-grade battery, the prospects for weight reduction are very slow. The other problem, build garage space with sufficient power supply for Overnight Charging, remains as well. There is only very limited economy of scale when it comes to charging buses overnight. OTOH, because of the capability of autonomy, the expensive parts of a trolleybus overhead grid, complex squares with switches and crossings, can be avoided, and the overhead lines can be limited to simple linear entities, which don't cost much to build and even less to maintain.
Sadly, the trolleybus network, or trackless trolleys as we call them, has only shrunk since 2003. Only 3 routes remain today, based out of Frankford Depot. All the overhead wires in South Philly were cut down years ago, and Septa has no plans to restore any trackless routes, let alone establish new ones, saying it would be too "cost prohibitive". Not to mention all the streetcar lines that have been "suspended" and the rails paved over. Needless to say, public transit in Philadelphia is in a bit of a sad state right now. If only we had the proper funding for a world class transit system befitting of a major city...
Busses are bumpy as you can see at many points in this video and the more busses there are the more the road wears out and makes the problem worse and expensive to fix. Tram rails are smooth and last a lot longer which is much more comfortable for passengers. Trams require less energy, because steel on steel has much less friction and although trolley/battery busses aren't spewing out diesel fumes tyres still produce particle pollution and make the air in cities worse. If a route is used enough to make it worth building the infrastructure for a trolley bus then perhaps it's worth putting in tram lines. On top of that a trolley bus requires two cables: a tram only one. Which one is the future? Trams. Trolley busses are at best a budget option.
Something that, if you mentioned it, you really glossed over it, the battery buses weight really wear down roads a LOT faster than trolley buses or even diesel buses (which are already heavier than trolley buses). My local city never had a trolley bus system, but in an effort to go green has been heavily investing in (battery) electric buses. Not only did they not save nearly as much as they thought they would on up front costs due to the high costs of the vehicles and the charging infrastructure, but they aren't saving overall on maintenance, they've just swapped maintaining overhead wires for extra maintenance on the roads from extra wear and tear from super heavy buses. Also, and this is a very important thing for cities to factor in, battery buses kind of suck, let me rephrase that, they really really suck. The heater doesn't keep up in the winter, the air conditioning doesn't keep up in the summer, all because the manufacturer had to skimp on the HVAC system to maximize the range of the bus, the acceleration isn't as fast as a trolley bus, it isn't even as fast as a diesel bus, and while part of this is that it is a new tech still, they are so unreliable that our city has had to take some of our old diesels out of retirement (not even our hybrids, just straight diesels) because so many of the electrics are out of service at any given time. Of course, we've learned nothing and we're doubling down on not investing in overhead wires and instead investing in hydrogen fuel cell buses and a hydrogen electrolysis station. Oh well, at least the buses will be lighter and won't damage the roads as quickly.
@@cityforall Reno Nevada. The most recent example of the road wear and tear was a $3.25 million project that, in fairness did also include a new rather large bus shelter and sidewalk improvements, to build a multiple feet thick concrete pad at a busy bus stop because of the damage the bus sitting there while passengers were boarding did to the asphalt. I can't find anything in the public records on how much of the project cost was the bus shelter and sidewalk improvements and how much was the roadway repairs, however the funding source is listed as being from fuel taxes, so I'm fairly certain that legally the majority of the project expense had to be road repairs.
Actually, buses are always among the vehicles with the highest axle load (especially when they go into sardine can mode…). As there are (at least in the civilised world) relatively strict limitations on total vehicle weight (in Switzerland 30 t for a single-articulated and 40 t for a double-articulated), it is a tradeoff between passenger capacity and battery capacity… this translates to 200 kWh corresponding to 12 passengers capacity - which in a single-articulated vehicle is about 8% of the capacity. Therefore you will need more BatteryElectric Buses to handle the same line capacity (we talk between 15 and 30%!). And this can easily compensate the additional cost for overhead lines…
Why not both? In Lublin, Poland there are new trolley buses with batteries. They are able to go for a few kilometers only on battery where there is no electric line. When it goes back on track it connects to the line again.
The two technologies can be combined it's called in motion charging a battery electric bus can charge using the overhead wires 750v DC or 600v DC in addition to its battery charge on the Depot side. Vossloh Kipe has this.
Thank you for telling me about that if you are looking for a system in the United States that has the diesel for emergency detours it's Philadelphia @@cityforall
Trolley buses are so much better than Electric buses because if that battery on the Electric bus catches fire it'll be impossible to put out and claim that bus.
You forgot to mention that trolley busses have the big advantage of high acceleration. the 750 VDC network (also used in tramsystems) can deliver a lot of power.
Any thoughts on hydrogen buses? My city is starting to implement a system of this kind and I don't know how they compare to both battery electric buses or trolley buses.
Hydrogen (urban) buses exist only when either there is a LOT of subsidies, or the operators are mathematically challenged. Operation cost are considerably higher (findings in Montpellier came to a factor of SIX compared to Battery Buses), and they still need a traction battery. You may consider the hydrogen fuel cell subsystem as a range extender for the battery bus. In another place, Wuppertal, the energy to create hydrogen comes from the city-owned garbage incinerator fed power station, and they obviously don't take the real price for the electricity into account (or the actively forget that they could do much more with that energy, making accordingly more money). For the investments, they still need subsidies from the Land and Staat. In even another places, it is just ideology insisting on hydrogen which gives hydrogen fuel cell buses a chance. Total Lifecycle Cost simply don't matter. Note that hydrogen for transportation is one desparate attempt by the petrochemical industry to somehow remain in business.
Disappointing video; no real attempt was made to compare the true costs of either system, just a few vague generalisations about trolleybuses that anyone could have guessed at and, worse still, the unquestioning regurgitation of the standard oil-lobby anti-EV arguments. In short a complete lack of research, apart from finding a few pretty pictures and videos which would be fine by themselves and didn't need to be dressed-up as a serious comparison piece. Both systems have their place, but this video simply perpetuates anti-EV myths while saying nothing about the true state of battery science at present or indeed the environmental cost of catenary wire installation and production and the mining of the various metals, including cadmium, that are alloyed with copper to produce useable supply wires.
There is plenty of literature on this subject if you search. The general consensus is that an in-motion charging trolleybus system is cheaper to build, maintain and operate and has a higher passenger capacity than a battery bus system. City for All has summarised the current state of research very well. Of course, technology continues to develop and the equation may change in the future.
@@tonyhworks I know, and I have read some of it that seems to suggest to me at least that the best solution would be a compromise, wires over the simple parts of the system and relatively small batteries on board to take the bus across complex junctions and open squares where the wires would be particularly complex and, at least in the opinion of the majority of the population who have no particular interest in such things, unsightly. I just thought the video would have benefitted from a little more detail to assist in establishing the cases for each system to justify its title.
Actually the best one is a hybrid of the two that uses super capacitors instead of lithium ion batteries! So it can operate like a trolley bus on dedicated busway parts of their routes while being able to run off wire for a significant amount of their routes where they may have to share the road with other traffic! ::
It's unfair to compare a fuel tank with a battery. In an EV the motor is light and the battery heavy. In an ICE the engine is much heavier and the fuel tank lighter due to fuel density, also all the mechanical complexities of the powertrain needs to be added with transmission and driveshaft. All in all the difference is quite significant still but much less so. Also packaging in battery is becoming much better and chemistry also. CATL unveiled recently an NMC cell of 500 Wh/kg put into production this year for certain applications while their current topline density is 250 Wh/kg with their Qilin cell. 500 is probably one of the highest density possible with liquid electrolyte lithium-ion battery but it shows there is a lot of room to grow and hence up to half in battery's weight reduction.
Trolleybuses or battery buses: why not both? In my city (Saint-Petersburg) the battery buses are operated by the enterprise that runs buses and they replace regular buses on their routes. Trolleybuses, on the other hand, are run by a different operator and have their own routes (they often have the same number as a bus that they intersect with, but a completely different route, so an unsuspecting tourist can confuse them)
Thanks bery good video!! Only one bad take is all this "Tesla-lithium-mining" block. Its all not so bad as it shown in a media. And modern battery recycling is already proven tech what will allow in next 10 years recycle 95% of metals and not mine them over and over again.
Мені здається, чи автор зі Львова? Відео круте в будь-якому випадку, а кадри зі Львова, Франківська та Києва рідко можна побачити в англомовних відео, була така здивована!
It makes nothing but sense. In some places they have the trolley bus run partly on the tram network. I went to the trolleybus museum in the midlands and I was told that the UK government has closed their mind to it. I would combine some of the routes with kerb sided steering, which, as with trams, allows much smaller gaps between vehicles. Kerbside guided tracks have the advantage of a tram, that they can run through a large park, making impossible for ordinary vehicles to use the track and the gap in the middle can be greened with vegetation and low growth flowers. The making of the tracks can be cheap as large scale 3d printing can be employed on a seemless operation with a choice of materials like concrete or suitable plastics
Cool video, although some of your information about batteries is a little out of date. Modern battery technologies are both more energy dense and less reliant on things like cobalt. Also worth noting that when batteries reach the end of their life, they are usually converted to large batteries for the home (like the Tesla PowerWall) where they can go on serving useful lives for many, many years.
The problem with Cobalt is confined to a single type of batteries, Lithium-Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt batteries. Those are mostly used in mobile devices, because they allow for the most compact built. In car batteries. Cobalt use is far lower than 10 years ago, and now, you can get the same energy density with only a tenth of the Cobalt usage. Other battery types like Lithium-Ironphosphate don't use any Cobalt all, and no Nickel either. All they use is Ironphosphate, which is quite abundant everywhere and so harmless, that you can literally pour a teaspoon full of Ironphosphate in your morning coffee and drink it without fear of poisoning. Ironphosphate batteries don't burn. They will of course melt down if heated up, but so will the whole bus anyway. And they are mechanically stable. Drive a nail through a Lithium-Ironphosphate battery, and it will lose some of its capacity, but still be working. Biggest disadvantage: Lithium-Ironphosphate batteries have a foamy structure, making their size larger than Lithium-NMC. Thus they won't be used in mobile devices. And in low-floor busses, you have to find a place to store the large (but not necessarily heavier) batteries inside the bus. The water usage in Lithium mining is also more complex. The grade of water purity you need is far less than the quality necessary for agriculture or drinking water. You can use industrial waste water for instance. In Chile, there are legal limits on the usage of waste water, which forced the mining operater to use fresh water instead.
I wonder if a different kind of trolley bus could avoid overhead wires - instead using light poles with nearly "invisible" electric contact bars. Each electrode arm holds up the end of a wire; the other ends of the wires are held up by a drone. The point is, the wires slide against the contact bars, allowing the bus to receive power for some time as it drives past a light pole. This way, the battery only needs to provide enough power to get from one light pole to the next, and there's no visual impact on the scenery. The drone makes some noise, but I don't think it will be much noise in the big scheme of things. It might also lower infrastructure costs, because existing light poles have power supply suitable for older less efficient lights.
I’m pretty sure there’s like one or no manufacturers actually making trolley buses in the US. This makes it increasingly difficult for trolleybuses to be integrated into US urban transport, especially when you consider that federal grant programs for clean buses seem to award only battery or hydrogen buses.
Wikipedia says that there is one - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillig But Switzerland also has one but they don't have problems with that. I suppose more difficult is to deal with norms and import duties
Trolleybus with a small battery (for adequate range for exceptions) are far superior. Imagine these devices with todays modern sensors technologies for lane tracking vs...
Some can't be want you think can be like BRT - Bus Lane or Busway either Trolleybus or Electric Bus with Pantagraph Just Like the Tramway and Streetcar LRT - Light rail Transit likewise with Train or Mass or Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Train and Electric Train and Fast Speed Train.
I live in a city (Geneva) in which ALL public transports are electrified, except for the peri-urban lines. We have underground rail, trams and trolleybuses. To electrify the peri-urban lines, which are mostly deserved by diesel buses, an experiment has been conducted with a solution intermediary between trolley- and battery buses. This bus technology is called TOSA (see th-cam.com/video/tWT3CwfHiBk/w-d-xo.html). It is buses with small and light batteries, just enough to drive a few km/miles. At every stop, the bus has a robotic arm that plugs onto an overhead connection, and recharges the battery for the duration of the stop (15- 30 seconds), enough to drive to the next stop. At each terminal of the line, the stop is longer (ca. 5 mn) and the battery can be replenished completely. These buses have been tested on one line for 3-4 years in a successful experiment, and the Geneva transport company recently purchased 110 units of those buses. So: - No overhead power lines to install, which is especially useful in the countryside. Only a connection is installed at each stop, over the passenger waiting shelter. - No expensive and heavy battery to haul along.
if you need to move 1500 people per hour (point a to point b) use bus(capacity 120) . if you need to move 3600 people per hour use trams or articulated buses (capacity 300 with 3 cars). but if you need to move 28,800 people per hour use the metro (capacity 2400 with 8 cars)
You skipped 7.200, 10.800, 14.400, 21.600... ;) For 30k a full metro is overkill, AGT or monorails are more economical to build and operate, and a higher frequency is better for passengers than higher capacity lower frequency trains.
The batteries should be much safer when Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries have improved in energy density (They don't catch fire, can be run until empty and fully recharged without any loss of capacity and are much less dependent on temperature. And cost around 30% less. Oh and don't forget Sodium ion batteries which are sill too low in capacity for this use case and are roughly another 30% cheaper than LiFePo cells.
In my opinion that most cities could run trolleybuses with few overhead cables if you have trolleybus with battery for ~100km range. Cheaper and easier than trying to go electric on battery only. Especially if you already have a tram system so 750v infrastructure already exist. Charge on bigger roads where multiple lines go down the same road and on big interchanges. If needed some charging infrastructure on the outskirt final stops when there's some turn around time. Also you save money on brake discs and pads. Also no need to dedicate time, work force and infrastructure for refueling. Also no oil changes etc.
Porque no los dos? Why not both? A city in my metro area (Gdynia, Polan), has had a working trolleybus network. They bought several trolleybusses with batteries - to allow for lines which only have partial coverage.
Support the channel by Patreon -
www.patreon.com/CitiesforAll
Please Made video soviet microdistrict vs USA suburb. What is better disain
I’m curious what is the price difference of a regular length trolley bus VS a regular length lithium battery powered bus
that was in the video @@jeffwindrim975
@@CosmicSeeker69 The Bay Street Bus I believe was the last running trolley bus in Toronto.
Environmentally speaking, trolleybusses are way superior compared to battery electric busses, they don't require toxic rare earth metals like BEBs do. That's why, in my opinion, we should be building them whenever possible and sensical. Like, it wouldn't make much sense to build overhead electrical cables for a limited rural bus service.
Obviously in areas with heavy traffic tram or metro lines might make more sense than trolley buses too.
@@Taladar2003 Of course! Trolleybusses would best perform in somewhere in the middle. In Helsinki regional area, we have many trunk bus lines, which are characterized by orange color from normal blue one. The busiest of them, called line 550, was just upgraded to a tram line. It hasn't opened to the public yet, but will open very soon. Other lines are busy too, but don't justify building tram tracks in the same way. It's those kinds of services that I think should be built to trolley standard. And I do think that every trolley line should be built in a way that would allow a possible future upgrade to a tram line.
In rural areas we should have diesel buses or trains, it's not efficient for an electric bus to cover large distances
There are batteries nowadays that don't use toxic rare earth metals. Just Lithium, Iron and Phosphate
What is the environmental (and financial) overhead of setting up and maintaining the overhead lines?
Trollybusses are great for citys with a high frequency, battery-electric busses are great for low-frequency longer range routes, like in rural areas or for special services. A Public transit network should always have a few network-indipendent busses, to compensate for big events, accidents and construction on mainlines, evactuations etc. even if it usually only runs trollybusses.
In Vancouver Canada there's lots of trolley buses. I rode the number 19 which takes you to Stanley Park and I got to say, trolley buses accelerate fast! They're definitely one of my favourite type of buses second only to double deckers.
But imagine, double decker trolley bus.
@@AlRoderickthey have existed before. They were really common in the UK, however had a similar fate as trams in America.
I'm trying to imagine double-decker and bi-articulated trolleybus - that will be a thing!
@@DanTheCaptain worse... because no trolleybus system survived after 1972 in UK.
@@MarceloBenoit-trenesodd, that was the time of the oil crisis. You would think the opposite for people who drove less would take transit.
I 100% agree. Sometimes the solution to future problems is unappretiated technologies of the past.
Pretty good video!
Some additional comments:
• Switzerland has 13 active trolleybus systems; all of them use either single- or double-articulated vehicles. There are no more standard size trolleybuses in operation in Switzerland. This can be understood in the way that trolleybus (especially the bi-articulated kind) is in the top range for the operation field of buses. If you have to get beyond the feasible capacity, you have to go rail-based.
• The results of the research with the SwissTrolley Plus lead to the development of a sophisticated energy/battery management system, which takes into account the topography of the line, in order to get all energy created with regenerative braking into the battery (instead of braking resistors or the overhead wires). So, it makes sure that the battery is sufficiently discharged before a downhill section of the line, and that it is becomes fully charged at its end. The effect of this system is that the energy consumed from the overhead wires can be reduced by about 25%.
• It took VBZ only a few thousand franks in infrastructure investment to electrify a specific line from diesel to BTB with IMC operation (well, this line ran under wire for about half its length already).
• The video mentioned it already, the manufacturers never list range in unrestricted mode (meaning that all consumers are active), but always in restricted (or emergency) mode, where all non-essential consumers are switched off. A rule of thumb by VBZ is that you design the vehicles around unrestricted mode with 2.8 kWh/km (single-articulated).
• In St. Gallen, extending the overhead line network by 20% allowed to double the network length operated with electric vehicles. So, it should be a no-brainer for systems having already trolleybuses in operation to expand with BTBs with IMC.
This is an excellent video, it lays out all the important points in enough detail without being too long, and is balanced with pros and cons.
Thanks! Nice to hear that!
Thank you for giving some attention to my hometown Arnhem. Being born and raised here, I can’t imagine my city without the trolleybus network. And over the past 25 years the city and the province did a lot to invest in the quality and future of the network. Can’t wait for the hybrid trolleybus service to Wageningen to start next year.
Unfortunately we also had some closures. Some disused trolley wiring in the south part of the city finally has been removed (after hanging there for more than 20 years without any trolleybus service), so chances any conventional trolleybus lines will run along the roads in question there are very slim now. The trolleybus line to Hoogkamp was cancelled back in 2017 (after they rebuilt the line only 7 years earlier), but the wiring is still there and active. If the new hybrid line to Wageningen will be a succes, I have high hopes Hoogkamp will get trolleybus services again in a similar hybrid form.
I was really impressed with the speed, frequencies and reliability of the Zürich trolleybus system. Their system seems to be more focused on connecting outer areas of the city, whereas the tram is the main connector of the outer areas with the city center. And they work perfect together, also when it comes to interchangeability.
Trolleybuses should always be retained, Battery buses should only supplement them, and should be equipped with trolley poles too so they can charge while the fully charged ones can go off grid. the highest demand systems should have their lanes made exclusive or be converted to Trams like we have in Melbourne, Australia. i wish we had more trolleybuses here instead of buses, suburban/intercity ones would be amazing
Yep, that's very good synergy
@@cityforalli know its better to stick with proven technologies, but the 2 wire systems are still clumsy, theres a reason why trams quickly adopted pantographs, and while yes they have the tracks that they can use for return current, hopefully we discover some reliable way that trolleybuses (or maybe they'll be called trambuses) can use tram catenary systems
@@xymaryai8283 you are talking about Translohr system, but it's actually worse than normal tram.
@@xymaryai8283 One advantage of trolley buses over trams is their ability to move to the curb to load/unload, and move around other road traffic. The swivelling trolley poles are adept at these manoeuvres.
@@cityforall oh, nevermind then i am not a fan of the Translohr
1:15 Lugano, Switzerland… That’s a sad story. What looked like a great idea eventually lead to the trolleybus system’s demise. They picked a 1 kV system. That’s great, because it requires less copper (i.e. thinner cables) compared to the common 600 V or less common 750 V systems. Sadly, the world evolved to a point at which there was no manufacturer capable of making new 1 kV trolleybuses for Lugano and so they didappeared in the early 2000s. The last overhead wieres in Viale Castagnola survived until approximately 2014, but had not been used since ~2002 anyway.
The first city to operate trolleybusses (with trolley poles) was not Leeds, but Königstein(Sachsen) in Germany in 1901, but operations closed in 1904 already. The second one was the Industriebahn Wurzen (1905 - 1928), which interestingly was transporting goods, not passengers.
In-Motion-Charging (IMC) trolleybuses are the real game changers!
Coming from a city where we used to have trolleybuses, and we will have them again next year with IMC-trolleybuses, I can tell for sure that you end up not paying attention anymore to overhead wires. For decades, companies specialized in overhead wires have been developing technologies enabling these wires to remain discrete.
Most disturbing could be those "spider webs" implied by switches. But again, with IMC trolleybuses, we could remove these and cross these sections in battery mode like they do in Beijing next to the Tiananmen Square.
i live in Switzerland, the country of trolleybuses (there are some even in small cities), and i fully agree
I guess there is a mistake in the video about world biggest trolleybus network: it should be Minsk, Belarus, not Kyiv, Ukraine. Minsk took the 1st place after Moscow removed its network in 2019. BTW, Minsk Trolleybus Network modernizes regularly and consist of both trolley buses and battery buses.
As far as I remember, Minsk is the biggest by number of routes while Kyiv - by the total lengh. IMHO total lengh is more important in this regard.
Well done video, interesting and well presented, with also many interesting comments
Thank you very much!
it reminded me of Kharkiv mayor who wants to replace "obsolete" and "uncomfortable" trams and trollyebuses with electric busses🤡🤡🤡 he's so silly
I'm sorry to hear that :(
While mayor is a corrupt crook driving Bugatti instead of setting a foot in public Transit. 😂
You point out that Britain had the first public trolley bus system and we eventually had many. Now we have none and there is apparently no serious movement towards reintroduction despite their obvious benefits. Even articulated buses have gone thanks to an earlier, idiot Prime Minister who claimed they were too big for London streets and whose vast knowledge of public transport was seemingly limited to making bus models out of cardboard boxes. It’s a question of long-term investment which, regrettably, we no longer seem capable of in some areas.
Love your videos! Just subscribed!
That's great! I'm happy!
0:26 wish the US had 3 door buses.
The current mayor of São Paulo, Brazil wants to ditch the city's trolleybus system and replace it with diesel powered ones.
That's sad. Not even the battery ones?
Why do countries not use a double-decker trolleybuses anymore?
En mi opinión creó que el trolebús sirve para troncales sobre todo en las zonas donde no es posible un tranvia ya sea por el terreno complejo o la demanda no justifique la inversión de un tranvia
In São Paulo city Trólebus since 1930s today , now Trólebus and eletric bus partners in street of São Paulo City 😂😂😂😂❤❤❤❤
The white Skoda trolleybus with the covered wheels looks too futuristic to be in practical use. I miss simpler designs of the past. Solaris Trollino has stupid loud beeping doors. They are very spacious. Maybe not all of them have a hidden battery.
Electric buses and hydrogen buses are probably a tool to siphon off money with kickbacks on expensive infrastructure. Corruption is everywhere.
How do those batteries last 10 years? Lithium-ion batteries don't last that long if discharged often. A bus is driven all day, every day.
Wellington New Zealand downgraded its Trams to Electric Trolleybuses, then downgraded these to diesel buses!
I have an idea to make separate video about it and even send a letter to Wellington city council for a comment, but after a few months - still no answer from them :((
Winnipeg, Canada did the same. In 1955, we converted our tram network to trolley buses, which were phased out in 1970, 15 years later.
You omitted the fact that battery buses are heavier and cause more road infrastructure damage. Road damage increases with the fourth power of axle weight so it is not insignificant.
Pls make uk trams video
Thanks for the suggestion. I'll think about it.
There are zero bi articulated buses on the North American continent, and only 6 cities throughout North America still have Trolleybuses.
Too narrow streets I guess :)
@@cityforall Sarcasm off…
A lot has to do with regulations and total vehicle lengths.
One of the six is said to be extremely happy with their BTBs with IMC.
Another one of the six has to be written off…
Save trolleybuses!
We have trolley buses in Lyon, aswell as trams, bendy buses and a great metro system.
The biggest trolleybus network is in Kyiv and I'm sure it won't be replaced for very long
Are you sure? Moscow was the biggest and after a few years... One idiot and go done...
@@andrewdubs5664biggest and most fckd. I live here and I know what im saying
Yes
The biggest reason I love trolleybuses is when the bus gets bigger, there's no need to put a bigger battery in there because they source electricity from overhead wires. So in my opinion the bi-articulated or even tri-articulated trolleybuses are usually a better investment than the standard size ones.
And as buses with internal combustion engined buses get bigger, there is a need to make the fuel tank bigger, exactly analogous to battery only electric buses. It is not possible for a vehicle to source a liquid or gaseous fuel while moving, only when stationary. That itself puts electric traction at an advantage.
Bi-articulated is already 24-25 meters, if there's a need for larger capacity, at that point you either need more units or a tram
@@deathblade2639 You might also need a tram if you would like to use alternatives to street running.
Trolley buses are unambiguously good. We should definitely have wires put up in our cities and we should also use those wires for other things as well, like the garbage trucks, postal vans, snow plows and such. We should make the batteries in those vehicles relatively small and probably interchangeable as opposed to fitting them with a gigantic battery that mostly just sits there being hauled around.
With advances in robotics and sensors, it shouldn't be that difficult to design a system that can put the poles back onto the wires autonomously basically anywhere.
However, I have to push back a little bit on the stuff about the mining, most of the stories are overblown and a lot of them are propaganda from oil companies. Oil companies, by the way are the biggest consumers of cobalt, it's used in diesel refining. The fire risk is definitely real, but we're starting to see interesting breakthroughs in sodium ion battery chemistry that has a much reduced fire risk. It's got a lower energy density but as I said we shouldn't be putting multiple ton batteries in the buses anyway.
Good presentation overall.
Agree! In general, in my opinion, battery technology is still in the process of development, so it is a bit early for cities to invest millions in something that will most likely become obsolete in just a few years
induction charging. busses stop for a minute at bus stops. level with the road surface at bus stops is an induction charger.
under the bus is an induction charge receiver. two types of electricity storage on bus; super capacitors for quick charge and
initial motion inertia, plus whatever is most efficient battery cells for traction power between stops. (charge induction is only
live when interfaced with charge receiver). for two reasons; no catenary and associated maintenance, and no need for on-
board charging generator or the weight of all-of-trip battery capacity. possible multi-use for other electric utility vehicles.
@@GaryGraham-sx4pmbuses and trucks are to heavy for induction based systems, as they're inefficient. Meanwhile cars are not tall enough for overhead wire... On highways we might get both, but in the cities it will be mostly wires
@@jan-lukas. thanx for your reply. induction electrical energy transfer is very efficient, every transformer is an induction energy transfer device. induction suitable for buses because of predetermined and frequent charging positions at bus stops. there are about a dozen examples of viable induction charged city bus systems.
@@GaryGraham-sx4pm The efficiency of inductive charging decreases when an air gap increases. AC transformers are very large and have zero air gap. And therefore they are effective.
Trolleybuses with batteries give you the best of both: they are lighter, cheaper, autonomous, don't need dedicated chargers, do not waste time on charging, don't require overhanging cables everywhere, are able to reroute
Consider that fact that even buses with internal combustion engines need dedicated fuel dispensers and can only be refuelled while stationary. In-motion refuelling is not an option, in-motion supply of electrical power is and that itself puts electric traction at an advantage.
Trolleybus is the real Eco-friendly bus.
i've lived in Arnhem for 15 years now, all maintenance i've known to have been done in this time is when a lorry that shouldn't have been where it was drove into a bridge and smooched the wires. there was also one street that got extensively redone, and in the meantime the poles holding the wires up got redone. both were done within a few days. there is one truly ancient service lorry that is an event when it's spotted, i've seen it twice when a storm made some branches fall on the wires. wires last a long time, but if they need to be changed, the service lorry comes by at night, and changes the wires over at about 2kmh, without any noise that would wake anyone. As stated, the network is about 70 years old and doing just fine. the amount of maintenance seems to be quite minimal, as does the additional outages and delays. the worst thing that seems to happen is that someone pulls the ropes of the fishing poles to be funny, but it seems most people of questionable intelligence think that that is where the electricity is, so it doesn't happen all that often
They usually don't want to be funny but want to sell the cables.
I live in Kyiv and the main public transport option that I use is trolleybus! Kyiv trolleybuses are just iconic
Long live Ukrainian trolleybusses!
Can't believe you didn't mention Mexico City, the system was fully renovated with brand new Yutong trolleybuses and many new kilometres of this service have been or are being created.
That's for the next videos :)
And instead of buying electric buses for BRT lines they should have upgraded them to trolleybuses, which WILL last longer.
With the current anti-china sentiment, probably doesnt want to cover chinese products.. everything chinese is evil, even if its the worlds largest green energy producer
This video's title should be rewritten as: Why are Trolleybuses so great. And why I don't like electric buses.
Trolley buses ARE electric.
Great video! Here in Bratislava (Slovakia), the trolleybus network is about to be significantly expanded, and I'm really looking forward to the double-articulated vehicles which should enter operation sometime this year! However, the city still feels the need to tinker with battery electric and even hydrogen buses as well, for some reason.
Thanks! Bratislava is very interesting in terms of public transport with all it's trams and trolleybuses :)
Thanks for highlighting at the end, that trolley buses are also electric buses. I prefer to speak of battery buses and trolley buses to mark the real difference of both power systems. And overall, a really good video of course :-)
Thank you! That's a good point about a battery bus, it's really more clear.
Not all batteries use cobalt and much more is used in oil refining and combustion engines, and you can only use the fuel once. Also some battery types are safer than others.
that's incorrect - cobalt in refining is almost - but not quite ever lasting - The equation is around 660.000 gals of fuel per ounce of cobalt used up. You are right about LFP being much safer, however at a much lower energy density
Small correction: For Switzerland, I count not 11, but 14 operating trolleybus network systems. One of which is debatable (La Chaux-de-Fonds), because it's just re-opening this year after a 10 year intermediate period of closure. These trolleybuses indeed see a revival in recent years, with a large ridership and many technical innovations. One line just passes by my house, and I don't mind the noise at all; they are more quiet than some of the cars passing.
Here's the list: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_trolleybus_systems_in_Switzerland
One downside of trolleybuses, they are two quiet sometimes. I almost got killed by one in Goldbrunnenplatz when I first moved to Zurich as I was going to step out onto the street but was looking the wrong way (due to being from downunder) and couldn't hear it coming. Luckily my mate grabbed me and prevented me stepping out in front of it.
Well, actually, we have to count 13 systems; while La Chaux-de-Fonds is phasing in, Schaffhausen is phasing out…
Schaffhausen obviously fell for the Irizar eye candy…
Somehow fortunate that La Chaux-de-Fonds left the wires up after taking them down in the city centre because of big style rebuilding. And with only very limited effort, they could re-energise them, and run tests with a vehicle borrowed from Biel. Together with the need for renewal of the more than 30 years old vehicles in Neuchâtel, transN could stitch together a substantial order, where deliveries are supposed to start later this year.
@@tintin_999 Them being quiet can also be looked at as an asset, but yes, not if you''ve recently moved from the British Isles or down-under... glad you survived the first few months on Zürich's streets!
Prior to the pandemic, Winnipeg was testing battery electric buses. Since the pandemic, nothing has been seen or heard of them.
Mexico City has a 203km trolleybus network served by 290 units on 9 lines, with two more lines under construction. Latest acquisitions have included simple and articulated units with supporting batteries and are regularly used as a support whenever the subway or other systems fail, having a ~80km battery autonomy.
Mexico City strong. It's worth a separate video
My local suburb recently got a bunch of electric buses, seemingly out of the blue. You now see them everywhere and the transition has been almost unnoticeable except for seeing them drive around. While Trolley buses may be the better form of technology, they require quite a bit of political shenanigans and dealing with residents before you can even start to build a network. On the other hand it appears that battery electric buses can just be rolled out under our noses without any fanfare. At the end of the day, while it would be nice to see more trolley buses, I feel like by the time that anyone gets their act together to even consider them, we will see practically all our networks run by battery buses.
Note: the buses they are using do not have quick charge capability, they simply run their route then charge back up at the depot when they run low. That doesn't work for all routes but it works for at least 75% of them. While more complex solutions will be required for the other routes, I feel as if we have just entered the mass adoption stage of battery buses where they will soon be everywhere, and cities will only have to try and solve the long routes problem in a few years.
Wait until batteries run out and they will need to start changing them at a lot of cost.
We have trolleybuses in Naples (Italy) and we are one of the very few places in the whole world to actually be expanding our system! For example, we converted route 604 (now 204) from diesel to trolleybus, and routes R5 and 168 are shortly to follow (to be renumbered 205 and 206 respectively).
Definitely think trolleybuses are the way to go. Problem with batteries is the intense amount of production required, and not environmentally friendly at all
The way to go is to combine the two, like shown with your Solingen example: Until recently, some trolley buses had auxiliary diesel motors to maneuver around bus yards, parts without overhead wires or obstacles on their regular lines. Now, these auxiliary motors can be replaced by batteries that can be recharged via the overhead wires.
These batteries are rather small and lighter than an auxiliary motor with fuel, and usually don't have a wide range, but they allow the buses to reach the next functioning power lines. Unlike diesel motors they don't need start-up time nor an additional fuel supply.
What makes these systems additionally attractive is their ability to recuperate energy when braking, which saves both energy and break pads abrasion.
The size of the battery packs can be adapted to the specific needs of a system. In Salzburg, for example, one trolley line extends far beyond the city overhead wire system into a suburb. The bus runs and recharges first under the wire system of the city and then runs autonomously on the country road out to the suburb for a total of more than 20 km.
Employing these dual mode buses offers easy solutions for example when it comes to opening routes that cross a railway line with conflicting overhead wires, or underneath low bridges with insufficient clearance to install overhead wires.
You now could argue: “Well actually copper for the wires too is not renewable”.
A Copper wire is comparable much easier to recycle, melt it down and cast it again, recycled it is.
I agree with you about trolley omnibusses. I would add to the argument. The electric bus is more or less still a development platform, there are a lot more improvements to be done, meanwhile the trolley omnibus is a decades proven technology.
Because we need green transport now not tomorrow, spending the extras upfront is in my opinion just worth it.
Furthermore if you City also operates a tram network you could always argue that the trolley omnibuses is a 15% down payment for a tram. When the demand increases to a thresholds put in rails, remove one of the wires and you have a tram.
I see Trolleybusses every Day at Work, Our little Trolleybus system survived because Esslingen was once Test-City for the Mercedes-Benz Duobusses of the O 305 and O 405 GTD Type.
Starting next year, the currently 10 Overheadwire/Battery Duobusses will be joined by 46 more Overheadwire/Battery Duobusses and the Wires will be extended in some locations.
The SVE even bought back the last ever Build O 405 GTD as an historic Trolleybus. After 11 Years No. 327 was back home.
I live in the Boston area, where the MBTA has been gradually removing trolleybus lines and replacing trolleybuses with diesel buses (with a vague promise of one day replacing them with battery-only electric buses). I wish I knew any way we could prevent them doing that.
Trolley buses are VASTLY superior to battery buses for regular service. Battery buses are good for use as Peak Hours supplemental service and School supplemental service only.
...one city in the States that uses dual mode trolleybuses (electric/diesel) is Seattle. Sadly their neighbour to the south where I live (Portland) dismantled it's trolleybus network decades ago and plans to go all battery electric. by 2035. The city does have a fairly extensive LRT network (particularly for its size) as well as two street tram lines.
Sadly only a handful of cities in the country here still have trolleybus networks, the largest being San Francisco followed by Seattle.
I would love to see more of these trolleybuses along regional roads in my city in Canada. We recently developed a tram line down the centre of the whole city. I personally would love to see more tram lines or even mass passenger rail service along regional roads, especially since you don't have the micro particles from rubber tires. However, if trolleybuses can get more cars off the road the better. Reduce the micropollution with one bus but removing many cars is a step in the right direction.
if you can have the trolleybuses link in to the tram network on the parts they already exist. you could have one of those more semi trolly systems. like lines above when available but you don't need lines all the time. reducing the cost of building them all at once.
Vancouver still has 13 trolley bus routes, with a fleet of 262 units, including 74 articulates. The latest of which were purchased in 2016 from Winnipeg based New Flyer Industries. Vancouver also has an extensive autonomous electric light rail system. Toronto has 9 tram lines on an 82kn network throughout the city, as well as a metro system. And Montreal also has a metro system. Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa all have light rail.
@@dougbrowning82 The current fleet of trolley buses in Vancouver came into service around 2006/2007 and should be reaching retirement by the latter half of the decade. And if I’m not mistaken, there are ~14 routes lol
I really appreciate that there are a variety of options for people getting around. Different circumstances call for different solutions.
Thanks for this in depth look at these modes!
Thanks for watching!
Trolleybus chads represent! Battery-extended trolleybus chads represent! Hilly terrain -> trolleybuses without question
Trolley buses and electric buses are different concepts with different economics.
Trolley buses make sense on trunk routes, with frequent services and enough paying customers. Just like trams and metros, it requires an investment for each piece of route or track you want to run.
For example, Amsterdam has a network of metros and trams to cover the trunk routes. There is a vast network of complementary buses that serves the city, the airport and its suburbs. It wouldn't make economic sense to build wires on all these dozens of routes. Battery-powered buses made it posdible to switch from diesel to electric, which otherwise would have remained diesel. It costs infrastructure at the hubs only, which is shared between many different routes.
Only advantaged ev buses have are can go more routes like a fuel powered bus not tied to overhead wires.
Okay, I must admit that I only clicked on this video because I saw Kyiv in the preview. Cheers!
Great video! You didn't mention Hungary (only 3 cities have trolley busses), but Budapest has a pretty good trolley system as well, so it's worth checking out, if someone is interested. The terminus of line 74 even had a little cameo at 4:20
Budapest also has the longest trams in the world.
Trolley bus is better but duo trolley / battery or even diesel backup seems ok . Pure battery is just too heavy and inefficeint .
Good video! Still, you didn't mention Hungary it only has 3 cities. Now days it uses hybrid "trolley" and "battery" bus which it is more efficient to take detour and less consume battery.
I can't believe you didn't mention Santiago de Chile, the city with the most electric buses in the world outside of China
Cheap af transportation exist
Politicians : i can't see it im blind
16:30
The metals are used again and again unlike oil which is used only once.
*if you have recycling industry
Light rail always is more efficient due to elimination of the rolling resistance of tyres
Medium to long-term battery busses will probably win out. The cost of creating and maintaining the cable infrastructure is quite high and battery buses continue to get cheaper and more capable. Existing networks will probably survive for the next couple of years, but even there could be a point where it will no longer be economical.
Not really; the weight issue of the batteries remains, and for a urban-bus-grade battery, the prospects for weight reduction are very slow. The other problem, build garage space with sufficient power supply for Overnight Charging, remains as well. There is only very limited economy of scale when it comes to charging buses overnight.
OTOH, because of the capability of autonomy, the expensive parts of a trolleybus overhead grid, complex squares with switches and crossings, can be avoided, and the overhead lines can be limited to simple linear entities, which don't cost much to build and even less to maintain.
In Philadelphia trolley buses are being used as trams are being phased out. It’s great with a trolley system already built in
Sadly, the trolleybus network, or trackless trolleys as we call them, has only shrunk since 2003. Only 3 routes remain today, based out of Frankford Depot. All the overhead wires in South Philly were cut down years ago, and Septa has no plans to restore any trackless routes, let alone establish new ones, saying it would be too "cost prohibitive". Not to mention all the streetcar lines that have been "suspended" and the rails paved over. Needless to say, public transit in Philadelphia is in a bit of a sad state right now. If only we had the proper funding for a world class transit system befitting of a major city...
The future will be the combination of both technologies.
Mention could be made of gyrobusses. Oerlikon of Switzerland produced these in the mid-20th century,, and wete extensively used in Belgium.
I have an idea of video about different strange technologies in public transport and girobus definitely should be one of them
Busses are bumpy as you can see at many points in this video and the more busses there are the more the road wears out and makes the problem worse and expensive to fix. Tram rails are smooth and last a lot longer which is much more comfortable for passengers. Trams require less energy, because steel on steel has much less friction and although trolley/battery busses aren't spewing out diesel fumes tyres still produce particle pollution and make the air in cities worse. If a route is used enough to make it worth building the infrastructure for a trolley bus then perhaps it's worth putting in tram lines. On top of that a trolley bus requires two cables: a tram only one.
Which one is the future? Trams. Trolley busses are at best a budget option.
electric bus is trolleybus without heritage and culture
Something that, if you mentioned it, you really glossed over it, the battery buses weight really wear down roads a LOT faster than trolley buses or even diesel buses (which are already heavier than trolley buses). My local city never had a trolley bus system, but in an effort to go green has been heavily investing in (battery) electric buses. Not only did they not save nearly as much as they thought they would on up front costs due to the high costs of the vehicles and the charging infrastructure, but they aren't saving overall on maintenance, they've just swapped maintaining overhead wires for extra maintenance on the roads from extra wear and tear from super heavy buses.
Also, and this is a very important thing for cities to factor in, battery buses kind of suck, let me rephrase that, they really really suck. The heater doesn't keep up in the winter, the air conditioning doesn't keep up in the summer, all because the manufacturer had to skimp on the HVAC system to maximize the range of the bus, the acceleration isn't as fast as a trolley bus, it isn't even as fast as a diesel bus, and while part of this is that it is a new tech still, they are so unreliable that our city has had to take some of our old diesels out of retirement (not even our hybrids, just straight diesels) because so many of the electrics are out of service at any given time.
Of course, we've learned nothing and we're doubling down on not investing in overhead wires and instead investing in hydrogen fuel cell buses and a hydrogen electrolysis station. Oh well, at least the buses will be lighter and won't damage the roads as quickly.
Wow, that's really interesting, thanks for sharing this. May I ask you what city are you talking about?
@@cityforall Reno Nevada. The most recent example of the road wear and tear was a $3.25 million project that, in fairness did also include a new rather large bus shelter and sidewalk improvements, to build a multiple feet thick concrete pad at a busy bus stop because of the damage the bus sitting there while passengers were boarding did to the asphalt.
I can't find anything in the public records on how much of the project cost was the bus shelter and sidewalk improvements and how much was the roadway repairs, however the funding source is listed as being from fuel taxes, so I'm fairly certain that legally the majority of the project expense had to be road repairs.
Actually, buses are always among the vehicles with the highest axle load (especially when they go into sardine can mode…). As there are (at least in the civilised world) relatively strict limitations on total vehicle weight (in Switzerland 30 t for a single-articulated and 40 t for a double-articulated), it is a tradeoff between passenger capacity and battery capacity… this translates to 200 kWh corresponding to 12 passengers capacity - which in a single-articulated vehicle is about 8% of the capacity. Therefore you will need more BatteryElectric Buses to handle the same line capacity (we talk between 15 and 30%!). And this can easily compensate the additional cost for overhead lines…
Why not both? In Lublin, Poland there are new trolley buses with batteries. They are able to go for a few kilometers only on battery where there is no electric line. When it goes back on track it connects to the line again.
Looks like you haven't watched the whole video - in the conclusion I've told exactly the same.
The two technologies can be combined it's called in motion charging a battery electric bus can charge using the overhead wires 750v DC or 600v DC in addition to its battery charge on the Depot side. Vossloh Kipe has this.
Actually that is what I've told in the conclusion :)
Thank you for telling me about that if you are looking for a system in the United States that has the diesel for emergency detours it's Philadelphia @@cityforall
Tip for a next video. Talk about Trolleybuses in Brazil. Especially in the city of São Paulo.
I guess trolleybuses are superior and more eco-friendly.
Agree!
A weat dream: Trolley trucks!
Trolley buses are so much better than Electric buses because if that battery on the Electric bus catches fire it'll be impossible to put out and claim that bus.
Your phone can catch fire as well. Are you going to use a phone with a powercord now?
There aren't 50 people in my phone. Not to mention that the battery of a phone is max. 5000 mAh, while an electric bus has 200 Ah.
obviously trolleybuses are by far superior
You forgot to mention that trolley busses have the big advantage of high acceleration.
the 750 VDC network (also used in tramsystems) can deliver a lot of power.
Yes, you are right
Yeah, they are especially good in hilly cities.
Any thoughts on hydrogen buses? My city is starting to implement a system of this kind and I don't know how they compare to both battery electric buses or trolley buses.
I think I should make a separate video about it. What city are you talking about?
@@cityforall Porto, Portugal. The initiative, by the name Unir, is in its starting phase, launching the first line in September.
Oh, Porto is amazing city, I've enjoyed it once.
Hydrogen (urban) buses exist only when either there is a LOT of subsidies, or the operators are mathematically challenged. Operation cost are considerably higher (findings in Montpellier came to a factor of SIX compared to Battery Buses), and they still need a traction battery. You may consider the hydrogen fuel cell subsystem as a range extender for the battery bus.
In another place, Wuppertal, the energy to create hydrogen comes from the city-owned garbage incinerator fed power station, and they obviously don't take the real price for the electricity into account (or the actively forget that they could do much more with that energy, making accordingly more money). For the investments, they still need subsidies from the Land and Staat.
In even another places, it is just ideology insisting on hydrogen which gives hydrogen fuel cell buses a chance. Total Lifecycle Cost simply don't matter. Note that hydrogen for transportation is one desparate attempt by the petrochemical industry to somehow remain in business.
Disappointing video; no real attempt was made to compare the true costs of either system, just a few vague generalisations about trolleybuses that anyone could have guessed at and, worse still, the unquestioning regurgitation of the standard oil-lobby anti-EV arguments. In short a complete lack of research, apart from finding a few pretty pictures and videos which would be fine by themselves and didn't need to be dressed-up as a serious comparison piece.
Both systems have their place, but this video simply perpetuates anti-EV myths while saying nothing about the true state of battery science at present or indeed the environmental cost of catenary wire installation and production and the mining of the various metals, including cadmium, that are alloyed with copper to produce useable supply wires.
There is plenty of literature on this subject if you search. The general consensus is that an in-motion charging trolleybus system is cheaper to build, maintain and operate and has a higher passenger capacity than a battery bus system. City for All has summarised the current state of research very well. Of course, technology continues to develop and the equation may change in the future.
@@tonyhworks I know, and I have read some of it that seems to suggest to me at least that the best solution would be a compromise, wires over the simple parts of the system and relatively small batteries on board to take the bus across complex junctions and open squares where the wires would be particularly complex and, at least in the opinion of the majority of the population who have no particular interest in such things, unsightly.
I just thought the video would have benefitted from a little more detail to assist in establishing the cases for each system to justify its title.
Actually the best one is a hybrid of the two that uses super capacitors instead of lithium ion batteries! So it can operate like a trolley bus on dedicated busway parts of their routes while being able to run off wire for a significant amount of their routes where they may have to share the road with other traffic! ::
super capacitors ROCK!
The future is coal fired steam.
It's unfair to compare a fuel tank with a battery. In an EV the motor is light and the battery heavy. In an ICE the engine is much heavier and the fuel tank lighter due to fuel density, also all the mechanical complexities of the powertrain needs to be added with transmission and driveshaft. All in all the difference is quite significant still but much less so. Also packaging in battery is becoming much better and chemistry also. CATL unveiled recently an NMC cell of 500 Wh/kg put into production this year for certain applications while their current topline density is 250 Wh/kg with their Qilin cell. 500 is probably one of the highest density possible with liquid electrolyte lithium-ion battery but it shows there is a lot of room to grow and hence up to half in battery's weight reduction.
Trolleybuses or battery buses: why not both? In my city (Saint-Petersburg) the battery buses are operated by the enterprise that runs buses and they replace regular buses on their routes. Trolleybuses, on the other hand, are run by a different operator and have their own routes (they often have the same number as a bus that they intersect with, but a completely different route, so an unsuspecting tourist can confuse them)
Same situation here in Yerevan. It's so annyoing, like, just add a "T" in front of the number...
Thanks bery good video!! Only one bad take is all this "Tesla-lithium-mining" block. Its all not so bad as it shown in a media. And modern battery recycling is already proven tech what will allow in next 10 years recycle 95% of metals and not mine them over and over again.
Мені здається, чи автор зі Львова? Відео круте в будь-якому випадку, а кадри зі Львова, Франківська та Києва рідко можна побачити в англомовних відео, була така здивована!
It makes nothing but sense. In some places they have the trolley bus run partly on the tram network. I went to the trolleybus museum in the midlands and I was told that the UK government has closed their mind to it. I would combine some of the routes with kerb sided steering, which, as with trams, allows much smaller gaps between vehicles. Kerbside guided tracks have the advantage of a tram, that they can run through a large park, making impossible for ordinary vehicles to use the track and the gap in the middle can be greened with vegetation and low growth flowers. The making of the tracks can be cheap as large scale 3d printing can be employed on a seemless operation with a choice of materials like concrete or suitable plastics
Cool video, although some of your information about batteries is a little out of date. Modern battery technologies are both more energy dense and less reliant on things like cobalt. Also worth noting that when batteries reach the end of their life, they are usually converted to large batteries for the home (like the Tesla PowerWall) where they can go on serving useful lives for many, many years.
The problem with Cobalt is confined to a single type of batteries, Lithium-Nickel-Manganese-Cobalt batteries. Those are mostly used in mobile devices, because they allow for the most compact built. In car batteries. Cobalt use is far lower than 10 years ago, and now, you can get the same energy density with only a tenth of the Cobalt usage.
Other battery types like Lithium-Ironphosphate don't use any Cobalt all, and no Nickel either. All they use is Ironphosphate, which is quite abundant everywhere and so harmless, that you can literally pour a teaspoon full of Ironphosphate in your morning coffee and drink it without fear of poisoning. Ironphosphate batteries don't burn. They will of course melt down if heated up, but so will the whole bus anyway. And they are mechanically stable. Drive a nail through a Lithium-Ironphosphate battery, and it will lose some of its capacity, but still be working. Biggest disadvantage: Lithium-Ironphosphate batteries have a foamy structure, making their size larger than Lithium-NMC. Thus they won't be used in mobile devices. And in low-floor busses, you have to find a place to store the large (but not necessarily heavier) batteries inside the bus.
The water usage in Lithium mining is also more complex. The grade of water purity you need is far less than the quality necessary for agriculture or drinking water. You can use industrial waste water for instance. In Chile, there are legal limits on the usage of waste water, which forced the mining operater to use fresh water instead.
I wonder if a different kind of trolley bus could avoid overhead wires - instead using light poles with nearly "invisible" electric contact bars.
Each electrode arm holds up the end of a wire; the other ends of the wires are held up by a drone. The point is, the wires slide against the contact bars, allowing the bus to receive power for some time as it drives past a light pole.
This way, the battery only needs to provide enough power to get from one light pole to the next, and there's no visual impact on the scenery. The drone makes some noise, but I don't think it will be much noise in the big scheme of things.
It might also lower infrastructure costs, because existing light poles have power supply suitable for older less efficient lights.
I’m pretty sure there’s like one or no manufacturers actually making trolley buses in the US.
This makes it increasingly difficult for trolleybuses to be integrated into US urban transport, especially when you consider that federal grant programs for clean buses seem to award only battery or hydrogen buses.
Wikipedia says that there is one -
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gillig
But Switzerland also has one but they don't have problems with that. I suppose more difficult is to deal with norms and import duties
New Flyer Industries or NFI makes trolleybuses, a Canadian company which has factories both in the US and Canada
They still have trolleybuses in Vilnius. They are very good and fast! Only 20 min from my stop in Zirmunai to Vingio Parkas!
Trolleybus with a small battery (for adequate range for exceptions) are far superior. Imagine these devices with todays modern sensors technologies for lane tracking vs...
Some can't be want you think can be like BRT - Bus Lane or Busway either Trolleybus or Electric Bus with Pantagraph Just Like the Tramway and Streetcar LRT - Light rail Transit likewise with Train or Mass or Metro Rail Transit (MRT) Train and Electric Train and Fast Speed Train.
I live in a city (Geneva) in which ALL public transports are electrified, except for the peri-urban lines. We have underground rail, trams and trolleybuses. To electrify the peri-urban lines, which are mostly deserved by diesel buses, an experiment has been conducted with a solution intermediary between trolley- and battery buses. This bus technology is called TOSA (see th-cam.com/video/tWT3CwfHiBk/w-d-xo.html). It is buses with small and light batteries, just enough to drive a few km/miles. At every stop, the bus has a robotic arm that plugs onto an overhead connection, and recharges the battery for the duration of the stop (15- 30 seconds), enough to drive to the next stop. At each terminal of the line, the stop is longer (ca. 5 mn) and the battery can be replenished completely. These buses have been tested on one line for 3-4 years in a successful experiment, and the Geneva transport company recently purchased 110 units of those buses.
So:
- No overhead power lines to install, which is especially useful in the countryside. Only a connection is installed at each stop, over the passenger waiting shelter.
- No expensive and heavy battery to haul along.
if you need to move 1500 people per hour (point a to point b) use bus(capacity 120) .
if you need to move 3600 people per hour use trams or articulated buses (capacity 300 with 3 cars).
but if you need to move 28,800 people per hour use the metro (capacity 2400 with 8 cars)
You skipped 7.200, 10.800, 14.400, 21.600... ;)
For 30k a full metro is overkill, AGT or monorails are more economical to build and operate, and a higher frequency is better for passengers than higher capacity lower frequency trains.
@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter or we call that LRT
@@komisiantikorupsikoruptord6257 sure, if you don't mind a higher cost and higher noise of the rails.
@@My-Opinion-Doesnt-Matter where you life men. Cars are a source of air pollution and noise pollution
The batteries should be much safer when Lithium Iron Phosphate batteries have improved in energy density (They don't catch fire, can be run until empty and fully recharged without any loss of capacity and are much less dependent on temperature. And cost around 30% less. Oh and don't forget Sodium ion batteries which are sill too low in capacity for this use case and are roughly another 30% cheaper than LiFePo cells.
In my opinion that most cities could run trolleybuses with few overhead cables if you have trolleybus with battery for ~100km range.
Cheaper and easier than trying to go electric on battery only.
Especially if you already have a tram system so 750v infrastructure already exist.
Charge on bigger roads where multiple lines go down the same road and on big interchanges. If needed some charging infrastructure on the outskirt final stops when there's some turn around time.
Also you save money on brake discs and pads.
Also no need to dedicate time, work force and infrastructure for refueling.
Also no oil changes etc.
Porque no los dos? Why not both? A city in my metro area (Gdynia, Polan), has had a working trolleybus network. They bought several trolleybusses with batteries - to allow for lines which only have partial coverage.