Metro Vancouver Transit Discussion

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by s211

And there's another form of transit that's got quite a proven record too: buses!

Of low investment, unreliability, and discomfort?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Every form of transportation has reliability and comfort issues - even monorails are kind of bumpy. The biggest problem with the bus is the lack of frequency and of reworking to make them efficient.

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm guessing that you're basing this on SeaBus ridership.

Come on, give me some credit! Nah, I haven't gone full NIMBY - the TransLink reps said that when I asked, waves gave some decent estimates, and some quick napkin math confirms it. One 25,000 pphpd line should be enough for the foreseeable future.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I'm guessing that you're basing this on SeaBus ridership. But that's somewhat artificially limited by the number of vessels available and the frequency. I'll be very interested to see what happens when another vessel is added and the frequency is increased from 15 minute intervals to 10 minutes. I think that's going to make the SeaBus significantly more attractive as a commuting alternative.

I believe that frequency is very nearly as important as speed when people consider transit options - it's the main reason why Skytrain's automation, which allows for high frequencies with low labour cost, was such a game changer.

Reliability is another prime characteristic of rapid transit, and the SeaBus is the most reliable component of our transit system.

Not to mention lots of people skip the SeaBus to take a 1-zone bus across a bridge (and some routes get them a seat all the way home versus reboarding a crowded bus)

[TransitJack]

This week I took transit two/from the North Shore three times during rush hour. One day to the Capilano Mall area the other time closer to Capilano Road.

I took a bus and Seabus from the mall and found it pleasant but still kind of funny the route the bus takes around Lower Lonsdale (not very direct) but with a 2 min wait for Seabus I was on my way to Waterfront for an enjoyable trip.

The other times I used the bus as Google suggested it was a better connection. Even then I found I had to refer to the Transit App a few times to really make sure I was taking the correct bus. I lined up at Granville and Georgia and it was nice to have the bus lane as we whisked thru DT and over the bridge. Returning, the bus lane again was great to pass the huge queue for LGB SB and was downtown pretty quick. The advantage of the bus lanes was huge.

I think for many the bus connection is better as it gets folks closer to their homes versus the SeaBus and a transfer, plus a cost savings. If you are headed to the Lonsdale area I don't think you can beat the SeaBus unless of course it's running a low frequency time of day.

For my three trips, I preferred the bus as it was just faster and more direct to where I was going. Longer buses for the portion I took would be useful but I can see why they wouldn't be any good on the steed hills of North Van. An idea might be an high frequency route, Downtown Vancouver to the North side of LGB, perhaps turning back at Capilano Road and Marine Drive, with a connection point to the new NS BLINE? High capacity bus over the LGB and make connections once your on the North Shore?

Edit: It would be great if the "transit hub" of Granville and Georgia had covered structures for those who line up for the North Shore Buses. The queues get to be quite long and having a shelter would certainly make waiting for the bus much more pleasant.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by TransitJack

Edit: It would be great if the "transit hub" of Granville and Georgia had covered structures for those who line up for the North Shore Buses. The queues get to be quite long and having a shelter would certainly make waiting for the bus much more pleasant.

I'd like to see pedestrian scrambles at the Broadway and Cambie and the Granville and Georgia intersections. Those are both important transfer points.

[retro_orange]

A cruise ship's emissions are the same as 1 million cars: report

A luxury cruise vacation may sound like a perfect dream holiday, but a German environmental organization says that in terms of environmental impact, the industry is an absolute nightmare.

​Nabu has just released its annual report on cruise ship pollution. It looked at dozens of vessels travelling in Europe, and decided not to recommend any of them.

Dietmar Oeliger is one of the authors and head of transport policy at Nabu. He spoke with As it Happens host Carol Off from Berlin. Here is part of their conversation.

Were there really no cruise ships that you looked at that you could recommend?
Unfortunately not. We found out that pollution from the cruise ship industry is still massive, even despite that they claim newer vessels are clean and green. We made measurements at quite a few cruise lines, and it proves that nearly all of them, their attitude to the environment is still poor.

Why are they so bad for the environment?
All of them run on the dirtiest fuel you can imagine. It's heavy fuel oil, it's quite toxic. It's a residual of the petrol industry, and it contains a lot of dirty stuff.And on top of that, nearly all of the cruise ships don't have a catalyst or a particulate filter, [like] trucks and cars. That, altogether, sums up to really poor environmental situations.

The report says that a mid-sized cruise ship can use as much as 150 tonnes of fuel each day, which emits as much particulate as one million cars. Is that right?
That's correct. And the reason for this is that their engines run 24/7. Even if they're in the ports, they have to keep running their engines, because it's not only a transport mode, it's a hotel facility. They have a spa on board, restaurants ... and that needs a lot of energy — more or less the same energy a mid-sized city needs.

What does it mean for those who are actually cruising around on the boats themselves?
Unfortunately, we were not allowed as an organization to have measurements on board. Therefore, we helped two major TV stations from Germany and one from France to go undercover on board and take measurements with our help. It showed that the amount of emissions that passengers breathe on board is more than twenty times higher than on a main road with a lot of pollution.

You write in the report that the cruise ship companies "show contempt for their customers." What do you mean by that?
The cruise companies know what they are doing. And they know about the problems that result from their emissions.

But, still, they order new ships and don't install emission abatement systems on their ships. Most of the newest ships, that cost about a billion dollars, they don't even have an emission abatement system that would cost about a million. I would say this is really irresponsible.

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-...-same-as-1-million-cars-report-1.4277180

[VancouverOfTheFuture]

Originally Posted by retro_orange

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-...-same-as-1-million-cars-report-1.4277180

not that unexpectedly high since global shipping of goods accounts for wayyyy more pollution than cars.

that is why i find it funny that all these carbon taxes are added to make life harder for people to "help the environment." such a scam.

if you really want to help people and the environment you need to cut out shipping, so manufacture locally and give people well paying jobs in the manufacture of goods needed for modern life.

that's how you can really help the environment.

The Hidden industry that pollutes more than the US and India

How 16 ships create as much pollution as all the cars in the world

[jlousa]

Vancouver has had shore power for cruise ships while docked since 2009 and even gives them a $5k break on dockage fees if they hook up, not to mention the cost of hydro is cheaper for them then running their engines. I believe all Alaska cruise ships on the inside passage must burn low sulfer fuel. I'm sure they still emit alot though.

[xd_1771]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Not to mention lots of people skip the SeaBus to take a 1-zone bus across a bridge (and some routes get them a seat all the way home versus reboarding a crowded bus)

Rapid transit, built correctly, could outright replace the buses on the LGB.

Let's say there's a deepwater tunnel line of sorts proceeding from Waterfront to Lonsdale Quay. Going to Lonsdale Quay would be one thing, but if they could extend or branch that line west to at least Park Royal, you could justify those costs for the extension as the West Van buses could be made to terminate there instead of crossing downtown. And, the benefits would be clear: lower bus diesel emissions, service hours directed back onto the routes within West Van (signficantly increased frequencies), and more capacity to accomodate general-purpose traffic on the LGB with the buses taken off.

Skybridge in the 1990s replaced all of the buses that went over the Pattullo Bridge to connect to New West Station. I see no reason why a cross-inlet rapid transit line wouldn't do the same.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by jlousa

Vancouver has had shore power for cruise ships while docked since 2009 and even gives them a $5k break on dockage fees if they hook up, not to mention the cost of hydro is cheaper for them then running their engines. I believe all Alaska cruise ships on the inside passage must burn low sulfer fuel. I'm sure they still emit alot though.

In 2014 only 40% of the ships were using it and it costs them $1 million to retrofit a ship to use shore power.

They're also adding shore power for container ship traffic as well.

http://www.vancouversun.com/travel/Most+...ancouver+shore+power/10129179/story.html

[WestCoastEcho]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

In 2014 only 40% of the ships were using it and it costs them $1 million to retrofit a ship to use shore power.

They're also adding shore power for container ship traffic as well.

http://www.vancouversun.com/travel/Most+...ancouver+shore+power/10129179/story.html

Don't forget the IMO 2020 regulations coming into force next year; all ships will be required to use low sulphur fuel starting next year, or convert or modify their ships to run on LNG or use exhaust gas cleaning system in the interim.

[madog222]

Originally Posted by WestCoastEcho

Don't forget the IMO 2020 regulations coming into force next year; all ships will be required to use low sulphur fuel starting next year, or convert or modify their ships to run on LNG or use exhaust gas cleaning system in the interim.

Even stricter sulphur emission regulations have been in place since 2015 limiting certain areas including within 200nm of the Canadian coastline.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

In 2014 only 40% of the ships were using it and it costs them $1 million to retrofit a ship to use shore power.

They're also adding shore power for container ship traffic as well.

http://www.vancouversun.com/travel/Most+...ancouver+shore+power/10129179/story.html

It would be great to get an update on that number. $1M is a big capital expense, and at the time of that article very few ports supported it. That's obviously a tough sell for cruise ship lines. I'm sure much has changed in the last 5 years, and I would assume all new ships would have the necessary hookups built in.

Does anybody know what kind of current is required?

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

It would be great to get an update on that number. $1M is a big capital expense, and at the time of that article very few ports supported it. That's obviously a tough sell for cruise ship lines. I'm sure much has changed in the last 5 years, and I would assume all new ships would have the necessary hookups built in.

Does anybody know what kind of current is required?

Not sure about current, but power requirements can go up to fifteen megawatts. AFAIK you'd have to know the port's voltage to figure out the current.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Not sure about current, but power requirements can go up to fifteen megawatts. AFAIK you'd have to know the port's voltage to figure out the current.

I googled around Port of Vancouver and it looks like 6.6kV, not clear on the amperage.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I googled around Port of Vancouver and it looks like 6.6kV, not clear on the amperage.

If I'm remembering my high school physics right, power = voltage x current, so 15,000,000/6,600 is ... 2273 amps???

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

If I'm remembering my high school physics right, power = voltage x current, so 15,000,000/6,600 is ... 2273 amps???

That would be it. I'm sure that's peak capacity.

[officedweller]

New $32-million SeaBus from Europe arrives in Vancouver

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxq5jMxh8wf/?utm_source=ig_embed
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-new-seabus-burrard-chinook-arrives-may-2019

*******************

Third platform at SkyTrain's Stadium-Chinatown Station to open for shuttle train
...

TransLink says it is opening up the platform for passenger service on most nights from May 21 to approximately the end of June for trains running in the inbound direction towards Waterfront Station.

Dan Mountain, a spokesperson for TransLink, told Daily Hive this platform is being used for late night service during this period to accommodate rail pad and running rail maintenance work between Stadium-Chinatown Station and Main Street-Science World Station.

Due to the work, trains will be unable to operate on the inbound track between Commercial-Broadway Station and Burrard Station, and it necessitates the use of multiple shuttle trains on the outbound track between Commercial-Broadway Station and Waterfront Station.

Late night shuttle train service and the usage of Stadium-Chinatown Stadium’s third platform will take place from 11 pm to the end of service from Monday to Thursday and from 10 pm to end of service on Sundays.

...

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-stadium-chinatown-station-shuttle-service-may-2019

[BCPhil]

Originally Posted by officedweller

New $32-million SeaBus from Europe arrives in Vancouver

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bxq5jMxh8wf/?utm_source=ig_embed
https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-new-seabus-burrard-chinook-arrives-may-2019

*******************


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/skytrain-stadium-chinatown-station-shuttle-service-may-2019

It's a Seabusbus. Or would that be Seabusboat?

So, a $35 million investment increases Seabus capacity by 50%. Why not add even more Seabuses and increase capacity and frequency by even more at a fraction of the cost of a Skytrain line? Does Lonsdale really need transit to downtown more than every 5 minutes?

[Mac Write]

The Transfer at Waterfront to Skytrain is a long hike from here the SeaBus docks and the SkyTrain and Canada Line Platforms are.