• Rooty@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    21 hours ago

    To address the trolley bus comments - yes, they are better than battery buses, but my city already has a tram network and the bus network covers too much territory to justify putting trolley cables.

    • filcuk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I hate to say it, but trolley cables are ugly, at least where I’ve seen them. It makes the streets look like old times, when each building or home had a dedicated cable going to it from a pole.
      I know it’s better than batteries, but is there no other way?

      • RubberElectrons@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Oh man, but look how much more efficient they are: You have a large, high energy network to draw from when climbing very hard hills and full of passengers.

        So the bus electric motor only has to pull itself, the chassis, and the passengers up the hills, instead of all the above plus a several thousand pound battery, whose weight does not vary with state of charge.

        My point is, I know you’re aware they’re better, but they’re so much better to where it blasts appearance out of the question for me and others who understand the system.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        13 hours ago

        There is - the electric rail. It can only be used with rail transportation, but allows to transfer power without any overhead cables.

        As per buses, the only thing one can imagine is wireless power transfer from under the road, but that comes with an extreme power loss.