OC Transpo

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

It's almost as if someone should have thought about the requirement for future grade separations when Barrhaven was designated as an suburban expansion area back in the 70s.

But Nepean was awesome because it had no debt, right??

While I agree that Nepean was pennywise and pound foolish, I don't think you can blame them for this, as the majority of the roads that cross VIA's Smiths Falls Subdivision were regional roads and thus the responsibility of the RMOC, not the City of Nepean.

Here is a list of crossings in Nepean (not just Barrhaven from east to west):

Road		Reg.Rd.#

Merrivale	17

Woodroffe	15

Fallowfield	12

Greenbank	13

Jockvale	*

Strandherd	**

* Jockvale was Reg.Rd.#13 south of where it crossed Greenbank, but not north, where it crossed the tracks. Having said that, it follows an ancient path that was originally a trail through the wilderness and thus predates the city of Nepean.
** The crossing at Strandheard replaced the crossing at Cedarview (Reg.Rd.#23), which was blocked off. It was built shortly before amalgamation, so it is unclear if it was also a regional road or not.


Strandherd crossing 1999, curtesy geoOttawa

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

Does nobody remember Tele-Transpo?

Yes, I remember that service. It was not a glowing success. Why? The small buses that ran the service were very short lived. They just weren't durable compared to standard buses. The city had a whole fleet of small buses back in the 70s. They ran on my route. They were horrible especially when you had to stand on them and even when you had to get up for your stop. The short wheel base made for a very unstable ride.

Just remember, that running a fleet of small buses only in certain hours creates inefficiencies. You still have to have standard buses running especially during peak hours. Whenever the idea gets trotted out about running small buses in certain hours (it has come up from time to time over the years), I shake my head. Now, we need two fleets for the same neighbourhoods.

But there is also another problem. The same issue as rail. Great for incoming service when your wait is a few minutes. Not so great on the outgoing trip, when you might wait a half hour for a bus transfer. Nice to order your trip from your home when you are more likely to have access to technology. Less so, on your way home, when you might have to transfer from rail or another bus route. How do you plan your return trip reliably and without a lot of hassle? It just sounds like a pain to be planning your trip as you go, especially for people who are prone to motion sickness (I avoid reading on a bus) or who are less technically adept. Also, what happens when you have to wait for people who have ordered a trip? Was that a problem back in the days of Tele-Transpo?

We can consider various ideas, but we are fools to make moves that result in the loss of buses and drivers until we see how things resolve themselves following the end of COVID. Remember when we laid off all the drivers and lost too many and sold off 'surplus' buses and then we had to back track when Line 1 opened. We need to avoid repeating that scenario. We are exploring unknown territory, so any predictions on ridership may be way off. We really need to be looking at how to grow ridership more than reacting to lost ridership in an unprecedented and temporary situation.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

Read it again, I literally stated that the expensive part was the grade seperation. The addition of the bike lane was a separate sentence to note other things included in the project, the link I provided has the full list.

And thus my point, which was calling the entire project "just a road widening" is misleading, especially do if one is a councillor who should know the details.

It was a joke. I was mocking the fact that the costs associated cycling infrastructure are so minimal in comparison to suburban road widening.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by roger1818

While I agree that Nepean was pennywise and pound foolish, I don't think you can blame them for this, as the majority of the roads that cross VIA's Smiths Falls Subdivision were regional roads and thus the responsibility of the RMOC, not the City of Nepean.

That comment was intended to be tongue-in-cheek. I know that these were not City of Nepean roads per se, but it goes so show how the "pay as you go" philosophy was somewhat of a farce.

In software, when we build something that works for now but we know will need to be redone later, we call it "technical debt". The at-grade crossings of VIA tracks are somewhat akin to this. It was known that they would need to be grade-separated later, but they weren't paying for it then, and they joined the amalgamated city "debt free!" Debt free financially maybe, but indebted in other ways, like deferred grade separations.

And that is of course ignoring all the debt taken on by the RMOC itself to build infrastructure to serve Nepean.

Anyway... I think we've gone quite a bit off topic here.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Norman Bates

Does nobody remember Tele-Transpo?

I remember that it existed, but I never used it- it was a bit before my time and not available where I lived.

I think the Belleville system has a few key differences though, such as:

-they use regular buses
-they only stop at bus stops
-you can still board the bus even if you didn't order it through the website or app
-you can only order the on-demand route for stops within a given area and at given times
-you can't order the on-demand service between two stops that are on a fixed route- the system tells you to use the fixed route instead.

EDIT: It looks like "On-Demand Transit" is part of the OC 2021 Business Plan.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

I remember that it existed, but I never used it- it was a bit before my time and not available where I lived.

I think the Belleville system has a few key differences though, such as:

-they use regular buses
-they only stop at bus stops
-you can still board the bus even if you didn't order it through the website or app
-you can only order the on-demand route for stops within a given area and at given times
-you can't order the on-demand service between two stops that are on a fixed route- the system tells you to use the fixed route instead.

EDIT: It looks like "On-Demand Transit" is part of the OC 2021 Business Plan.

North Bay started on-demand transit back in January, and Sault Ste. Marie has it as well. Both are powered by VIA.

I've only been in North Bay since their system started operating and I haven't ridden it, but I know they use a mixed of fixed routes in part of the city and on-demand in another part. The on-demand buses aren't stuck on fixed routes, as I have seen them driving around off-route. With that said, I don't know if they stop outside of regular bus stops. Their service operates on-demand in the evenings and all-day Sunday.

I do think this is an interesting idea in Ottawa's suburbs. The existing service isn't great in many areas after the commute. We have a strong backbone (Transitway/LRT) to feed people into the areas, a system of on-demand buses to get people home would work well, and would be a significant improvement for trips within the suburbs, which often don't connect well.

[TransitZilla]

^Interesting. Belleville is using a system developed by Toronto-based Pantonium.

[Dundas]

Remember when we laid off all the drivers and lost too many and sold off 'surplus' buses and then we had to back track when Line 1 opened. We need to avoid repeating that scenario.

Actually no drivers were laid off, they sent out notices of lay off, a bunch of drivers quit to look for work and the remaining drivers never got laid off. They did however start decommissioning buses and then realized they were f*cked becaused the train wasn't running right.

This created a backlog for training new bus drivers.

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by Dundas

Actually no drivers were laid off, they sent out notices of lay off, a bunch of drivers quit to look for work and the remaining drivers never got laid off. They did however start decommissioning buses and then realized they were f*cked becaused the train wasn't running right.

This created a backlog for training new bus drivers.

In addition to problems with the train, they also retained those buses to undo some of the bus service cuts that had happened.

Also, as of now there are more active buses in the fleet then there were even after they brought those 40 buses back from retirement.

[eltodesukane]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Strandherd crossing 1999, curtesy geoOttawa[/INDENT]

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

You know what would be a better idea? If they could figure out how to start electrifying the bus fleet to get operating costs down in the long run.

That would save fossil fuel costs, sure.

I'm still in wait-and-see mode as to overall operating cost savings. Most other costs won't change much or at all, and I am not convinced we aren't about to saddle Canadian transit operations with lemons. Electric lemons. But lemons.

[lrt's friend]

I read recently that our electrical grid cannot handle a mass switch-over from gasoline vehicles to electric vehicles. That tells me that hydro costs are going to climb steeply in the future.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

That would save fossil fuel costs, sure.

I'm still in wait-and-see mode as to overall operating cost savings. Most other costs won't change much or at all,

There will be a reduction in maintenance costs as well since there is no oil to change and the breaks will last significantly longer.

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

and I am not convinced we aren't about to saddle Canadian transit operations with lemons. Electric lemons. But lemons.

Certainly always a concern with new models of vernicles, but as long as we buy models that have been well used in other cities, that risk should be low. The question is if OC Transpo can figure out how to use them effectively and not get stuck in ancient mindsets.

[GeoNerd]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I read recently that our electrical grid cannot handle a mass switch-over from gasoline vehicles to electric vehicles. That tells me that hydro costs are going to climb steeply in the future.

Report brought to you by the oil and gas industry.

Ontario has a surplus in electricity and needs to sell the surplus at a reduced price. Quebec also has a large surplus. While fear of electricity scarcity might be justifiable in certain jurisdictions, it certainly isn’t valid in ON and QC.

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I read recently that our electrical grid cannot handle a mass switch-over from gasoline vehicles to electric vehicles. That tells me that hydro costs are going to climb steeply in the future.

This is FUD for several reasons, but mostly because it will take decades for the majority of vehicles on the road to become electric. Even if we banned the sale of gasoline vehicles tomorrow (which isn't going to happen) it would take years for the majority of the vehicles on the road to become electric. Even in places where they plan on banning gasoline vehicles sales by 2030, it won't be until the mid 30's that the majority of vehicles on the road will be electric, giving the grid plenty of time to adjust. Engineering Explained did a video explaining this.

Norway is leading the world in EV adoption (in 2020, 54% of vehicles sold were electric with a further 20% being PHEVs) and their grid isn't melting. Part of the reason for that is most charging is done at night when demand for electricity is low. In this sense, EVs can help balance the load on the grid, resulting in better utilization of the existing infrastructure, which will help keep electricity costs down.

• Video Link

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

I am not convinced we aren't about to saddle Canadian transit operations with lemons. Electric lemons. But lemons.

These buses have been in use by other agencies for some time so I think they are somewhat at proven at this point. The TTC has had some of the NewFlyer models we are purchasing in service since at least fall 2019:

• Video Link

[OCCheetos]

Originally Posted by roger1818

Certainly always a concern with new models of vernicles, but as long as we buy models that have been well used in other cities, that risk should be low. The question is if OC Transpo can figure out how to use them effectively and not get stuck in ancient mindsets.

If this is about how they used the hybrids, I really don't think the same applies to electric buses.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by GeoNerd

Report brought to you by the oil and gas industry.

Ontario has a surplus in electricity and needs to sell the surplus at a reduced price. Quebec also has a large surplus. While fear of electricity scarcity might be justifiable in certain jurisdictions, it certainly isn’t valid in ON and QC.

Ontario's surplus is temporary. After 2024 when nuclear plants come offline we will no longer be giving away excess energy. Previously it was thought we would then have a shortage though now this is not the case.

Regardless our rates now are unsustainably low and will grow unless the government continues, and increases, subsidies.

The elephant in the room is almost half the cost of diesel is tax. Meanwhile electricity has a negative tax rate. A mass shift to electric (by consumers and trucking) would require a readjustment so future savings projections may be way off if the predicted mass shift to electric is realized.

[Tesladom]

Originally Posted by roger1818

EVs can help balance the load on the grid, resulting in better utilization of the existing infrastructure, which will help keep electricity costs down.

Bang on! I hear a lot of silly arguments all the time about Electric cars, I'm so tired of it with people who have no idea telling me what is wrong with electric cars (all BS - I know I've been driving one for 3 years)
We need to spend billions to create new generating stations to handle the peaks, and the main reason why these new plants are expensive is because they sit idle 90% of the time, yet collect $$
EVs charging at night will reduce the overall costs by balancing the grid and demand, which means that said new generating station doesn't have to be idle, therefore more cost effective to the grid

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Tesladom

Bang on! I hear a lot of silly arguments all the time about Electric cars, I'm so tired of it with people who have no idea telling me what is wrong with electric cars (all BS - I know I've been driving one for 3 years)
We need to spend billions to create new generating stations to handle the peaks, and the main reason why these new plants are expensive is because they sit idle 90% of the time, yet collect $$
EVs charging at night will reduce the overall costs by balancing the grid and demand, which means that said new generating station doesn't have to be idle, therefore more cost effective to the grid

The following gives a pretty balanced analysis of the impact of a switching to electric vehicles. However, it does not speak much about electrical rates other than we can expect much higher differential between peak and off-peak hydro rates. So, there will be a price to be paid by everybody to convince EV owners to charge their vehicles during off-peak hours.

Electric Cars Will Challenge State Power Grids

STATELINE ARTICLE
January 9, 2020
By: Alex Brown Topics: Energy and Environment & Economy

SEATTLE — When Seattle City Light unveiled five new electric vehicle charging stations last month in an industrial neighborhood south of downtown, the electric utility wasn’t just offering a new spot for drivers to fuel up. It also was creating a way for the utility to figure out how much more power it might need as electric vehicles catch on.

Seattle aims to have nearly a third of its residents driving electric vehicles by 2030. Washington state is No. 3 in the nation in per-capita adoption of plug-in cars, behind California and Hawaii. But as Washington and other states urge their residents to buy electric vehicles — a crucial component of efforts to reduce carbon emissions — they also need to make sure the electric grid can handle it.

The average electric vehicle requires 30 kilowatt-hours to travel 100 miles — the same amount of electricity an average American home uses each day to run appliances, computers, lights and heating and air conditioning.

A U.S. Department of Energy study found that increased electrification across all sectors of the economy could boost national consumption by as much as 38% by 2050, in large part because of electric vehicles. The environmental benefit of electric cars depends on the electricity being generated by renewables.

So far, states predict they will be able to sufficiently boost power production. But whether electric vehicles will become an asset or a liability to the grid largely depends on when drivers charge their cars.

Electricity demand fluctuates throughout the day; demand is higher during daytime hours, peaking in the early evening. If many people buy electric vehicles and mostly try to charge right when they get home from work — as many currently do — the system could get overloaded or force utilities to deliver more electricity than they’re currently capable of producing.

In California, for example, the worry is not so much with the state’s overall power capacity, but rather with the ability to quickly ramp up production when demand is high, said Sandy Louey, media relations manager for the California Energy Commission, in an email. About 150,000 electric vehicles were sold in California in 2018 — 8% of all state car sales.

The state projects that electric vehicles will consume 5.4% of the state’s electricity, or 17,000 gigawatt-hours, by 2030.

Responding to the growth in electric vehicles will present unique challenges for each state. A team of researchers from the University of Texas at Austin estimated the amount of electricity that would be required if every car on the road transitioned to electric. Wyoming, for instance, would need to nudge up its electricity production only 17%, while Maine would have to produce 55% more.

Billions From VW Settlement Boost Push to Clean Vehicles
Efficiency Maine, a state trust that oversees energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction programs, offers rebates for the purchase of electric vehicles, part of state efforts to incentivize growth.

“We’re certainly mindful that if those projections are right, then there will need to be more supply,” said Michael Stoddard, the program’s executive director. “But it’s going to unfold over a period of the next 20 years. If we put our minds to it and plan for it, then we should be able to do it.”

A November report sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy found that there has been almost no increase in electricity demand nationwide over the past 10 years, while capacity has grown an average of 12 gigawatts per year (1 GW can power more than half a million homes). That means energy production could climb at a similar rate and still meet even the most aggressive increase in electric vehicles, with proper planning.

Charging Times Matter

Charging during off-peak hours would not only allow many electric vehicles to be added to the roads, but also allow utilities to get more use out of power plants that currently run only during the limited peak times.

Seattle City Light and others are looking at various ways to promote charging during ideal times. One method is time-of-day rates. For the Seattle chargers unveiled last month, users will pay 31 cents per kWh during peak daytime hours and 17 cents during off-peak hours. The utility will monitor use at its charging stations to see how effective the rates are at shifting charging to more favorable times.

The utility also is working on a pilot program to study charging behavior at home. And it’s partnering with customers such as King County Metro that are electrifying large vehicle fleets to make sure they have both the infrastructure and charging patterns to integrate smoothly.

“Traditionally, our utility approach is to meet the load demand,” said Emeka Anyanwu, energy innovation and resources officer for Seattle City Light.

Instead, he said, the utility is working with customers to see whether they can use existing assets without the need for additional investment.

Numerous analysts say that approach is crucial.

“Even if there’s an overall increase in consumption, it really matters when that occurs,” said Sally Talberg, head of the Michigan Public Service Commission, which oversees the state’s utilities. “The encouragement of off-peak charging and other technology solutions that could come to bear could offset any negative impact.”

One of those solutions is smart charging, a system in which vehicles are plugged in but don’t charge until they receive a signal from the grid that demand has tapered off a sufficient amount. This is often paired with a lower rate for drivers who use it. Several smart charging pilot programs are being conducted by utilities, though it has not yet been phased in widely.

Utility officials say the technology will be ready by the time widespread purchases of electric vehicles make it necessary.

In Colorado, both time-of-day rates and smart charging will be part of the state’s approach, said Will Toor, executive director of the Colorado Energy Office.

“There’s a broad consensus that EVs will need to be on time-of-use rates,” Toor said. “It will be easy for people to program their vehicle so they come home, plug it in and it doesn’t actually come on until the electricity gets cheap at 9 p.m.”

Some utilities say localized infrastructure upgrades may be necessary if, for example, one neighborhood or city has a particularly high number of electric vehicles.

“We’re looking at will there be enough capacity, but also from distribution planning at the neighborhood level to make sure we're not getting overloaded circuits,” Talberg said.

Welcoming Growth


In many places, the increased electricity demand from electric vehicles is seen as a benefit to utilities and ratepayers. In the Northwest, electricity consumption has remained relatively stagnant since 2000, despite robust population growth and development. That’s because increasing urbanization and building efficiency have driven down electricity needs.

Electric vehicles could help push electricity consumption closer to utilities’ capacity for production. That would bring in revenue for the providers, which would help defray the costs for maintaining that capacity, lowering rates for all customers.

“Having EV loads is welcome, because it’s environmentally cleaner and helps sustain revenues for utilities,” said Massoud Jourabchi, manager of economic analysis for the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, which develops power plans for the region.

Colorado also is working to promote electric cars, with the aim of putting 940,000 on the road by 2030. The state has adopted California’s zero-emission vehicles mandate, which requires automakers to reach certain market goals for their sales of cars that don’t burn fossil fuels, while extending tax credits for the purchase of such cars, investing in charging stations and electrifying state fleets.

Auto dealers have opposed the mandate, saying it infringes on consumer freedom.

“We think it should be a customer choice, a consumer choice and not a government mandate,” said Tim Jackson, president and CEO of the Colorado Automobile Dealers Association.

Jackson also said that there’s not yet a strong consumer appetite for electric vehicles, meaning that manufacturers that fail to sell the mandated number of emission-free vehicles would be required to purchase credits, which he thinks would drive up the price of their other models.

Republicans in the state have registered similar concerns, saying electric vehicle adoption should take place based on market forces, not state intervention.

While Colorado’s goal is primarily focused on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it will have additional benefits for utilities and their customers, Toor said.

“The benefit will come from the fact that you’re adding a meaningful amount of demand,” he said. “Each EV in Colorado will create $600 over its lifetime in economic benefits for other utility ratepayers.”

And in California, electric cars may provide a market for surplus renewable energy production when demand is low. Pacific Gas & Electric, the nation’s largest utility, is working to install 7,500 chargers in its service area.

Cars Give Back

Many in the utility community are excited about the potential for electric cars to serve as battery storage for the grid. Vehicle-to-grid technology, known as V2G, would allow cars charging during the day to take on surplus power from renewable energy sources.

Then, during peak demand times, electric vehicles would return some of that stored energy to the grid. As demand tapers off in the evening, the cars would be able to recharge.

V2G could be especially beneficial if used by heavy-duty fleets, such as school buses or utility vehicles. Those fleets would have substantial battery storage and long periods where they’re idle, such as evenings and weekends — and even longer periods like summer and the holiday season when school is out. The batteries on a bus, Jourabchi noted, could store as much as 10 times the electricity needed to power a home for a day.

https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-an...ic-cars-will-challenge-state-power-grids