Report a Comment

These buses are not "alternate fuel." They use the same exact fuel...they just do so more efficiently.

The difference between 3.5mpg and 4mpg is still 15%. That's nothing to sneeze at. Over the 12 year life of the bus, you save almost two years worth of fuel.

I wasn't aware that there were buses that used a true diesel-electric drivetrain; that technology hasn't even made it into consumer vehicles beyond the Chevy Volt (though the Volt focuses a lot more on its battery propulsion, which is currently impractical for a bus). I'd imagine that on a bus, the batteries would be used mostly to keep the lights/AC on while the bus is stopped.

Almost every diesel locomotive built in the last 70 years has used a similar configuration (sans batteries), and it's good to see that this good technology is finally making its way into buses. It makes a lot of sense from an engineering perspective.

That said, if the technology really is that far along, it does offer numerous other advantages, and I can imagine that it would reduce the vehicle's operating costs and lifespan by a very large margin. As with traditional hybrids, regenerative braking recharges the batteries, and significantly reduces wear on brake pads/rotors. However, unlike traditional hybrids, a true hybrid also requires no transmission, and needs no mechanical coupling between the engine and the wheels. This cuts a lot of weight and wearable/unreliable components, and makes it possible to put the diesel generator anywhere on the bus.

by andrew on Feb 28, 2012 11:20 am • link • report