765
submitted 10 months ago by skhayfa@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] AClassyGentleman@lemmy.world 112 points 10 months ago

Curious how it'll perform in real world conditions. Sodium batteries are supposed to have much better charging times and don't degrade the way lithium batteries do, both of which would be huge. Fingers crossed they live up to expectations.

(Also obligatory "expand and improve public transit damnit!")

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago

As some used to "gotchas" and things aren't free, I'm wondering what kind of shortcomings[1] these batteries have that others do not.

[1] for example acid batteries can push a lot of power, but they are heavy and contain lead and well... acid. The nickel cadmium doesn't contain lead and acid, but has memory so you should follow discharge them before charging again. They are lighter, but still not light. Lithium ion are light, don't have memory, but can explode, also lose life if they are kept fully discharged or charged for long periods of time. They also slowly discharge when not in use, mainly due to protective circuit needing electricity to run.

[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago

Their only downside is having a little less energy density than lithium ion ones. You need a larger battery for the same capacity basically. Everything else is a positive - they are even non-flammable and the materials to make them are abundant and easy to obtain.

[-] takeda@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Thanks. That's awesome to hear.

[-] pedroapero@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago

Interested to know about durability also :-)

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 9 points 10 months ago

Where I live they recently bought a bunch of electric and hybrid public buses.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Hope they simply bought trolley buses and didn't waste money on battery buses

It's such a waste to put batteries in inner city buses

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 6 points 10 months ago

Yeah, and the cables would install themselves automatically.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago
[-] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 10 months ago

Sorry but youtube experts and their google research are not a reliable source of information for me. It's entertaining but it's the last thing I would base city planning on.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world -4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Lol

" i refuse to engage with content that says i am wrong"

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 10 months ago

So some dude on the Internet says I'm wrong. Guess what? I'm also a dude on the Internet and I say he's wrong. Checkers!

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Yeah but this dude has this thing called common sense, try acquiring that first.

Maybe then you can think about the implications of BE buses more than " cables need to be installed therefore Be is better than trolley"

You might think about stuff like extra weight extra purchase cost, decreased capacity, more expensive road maintenance cost, less uptime due to charging, less efficiency due to weight, decreased range in cold or hot when AC is needed that makes everything worse

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 10 months ago

Show me a town that recently switched to trolleys and done a cost/benefit analysis after couple of years that confirms they saved money and I will absolutely agree with you.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Why don't you show me a town that switched from trolleys to BeBs and saved money ?

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 10 months ago

I don't have data, you don't have data. All we know is that lots of cities choose electric/hybrid buses while no cities choose trolleys. If you think it's because everyone working in the public transport departments is stupid and only some youtuber is super smart that's fine. I'm sceptical.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Literally the first city I checked is switching gas powered buses to trolleys and new bus purchases are going down to 0 and Brno unlike many cities has an excellent public transport system

https://www.idnes.cz/brno/zpravy/dopravni-podnik-brno-financni-plan-uspory-zvysene-naklady-rozpocet.A221213_696580_brno-zpravy_azu

[-] ExLisper@linux.community 1 points 10 months ago

You checked one city at random and they were switching to trolleys? Amazing. Anyway, good for them. Let's hope it will work and in a couples of years we'll have some hard data to base policy on.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Not at random, I lived there for 9 years, so it's a city close to my heart.

[-] zik@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Trolley buses are a weird niche. They require permanent overhead cable infrastructure like trams do but don't have the other benefits of trams - higher capacity, greater speed, better ride and no tyre pollution. I figure if you're going to install a trolley bus route you probably might as well install rails at the same time and get the benefits of trams. (Aka streetcars for the North Americans out there)

The City of London did assessments on trolley buses and found that the added capacity of trams made them the better choice pretty much anywhere trolley buses were proposed, despite the slightly higher install cost.

[-] filister@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Actually electric buses make a lot more sense, as the utilisation and environmental impact would be much greater compared to normal EV cars.

Plus you are conveniently omitted mentioning the energy losses of the cables, the maintenance cost, the installation cost, etc.

[-] anotherandrew@lemmy.mixdown.ca 1 points 10 months ago

Not to mention how unbelievably ugly stringing that shit all over the service area is. Electric buses make a ton of sense.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

id be genuinely surprised if the energy losses of the cables are more than the energy losses of charging the batteries even if they are they are more than likely offset by the weight difference of batteries vs the weight of the cable connecting mechanism.

Then there is the issue of range and the uptime of the vehicles while you can use a trolley 24/7 you have to charge the bev buses

Then there is the issue of extreme weather cold or hot where due to AC and or heating and the temperature itself affects the range a lot

Then there are the maintenance costs of the battery the power capacity since you need space for the batteries

So all in all you exchange a bunch of negatives for the benefit of not needing overhead cables

A trolley with a small built in battery for those last few miles you might need to connect but don't want to pull cables is the best of both worlds.

Hope that was a comprehensive enough dismantling.

[-] filister@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

Source for your claims?

Plus do you know how expensive it is to support the whole cable infrastructure, including personnel salaries, etc. I am not convinced your math is right, but feel free to prove me wrong.

[-] flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

My city recently decided to pull down the existing overhead cable network in favour of 'local' batteries in buses (was aging and needed a lot of maintenance which they were allergic to)

Unfortunately, that doesn't really argue either way, as same city is now seeing the issues of not maintaining it's water infrastructure for the last recent decades... They do some dumb shit

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

What do you think cables are made of? Gold? Lol

What do you think is more expensive maintaining the cable infrastructure or the road surfaces under the extra heavy buses?

Here is a good youtube video on the issue

https://youtu.be/B78-FgNqdc8?si=fIy93Q8QPqTwRorV

[-] filister@lemmy.world -1 points 10 months ago

I am sorry but since when do we consider YouTube as a credible source? I am looking at scientific peer reviewed proof, not someone's video on the matter.

expand and improve public transit dammit!

Currently living in Shenzhen and you'd be surprised that you can actually have it both ways. You can get around via transit quite easily, but also driving isn't too difficult. The problem with US cities is mostly just single family homes, which waste a bunch of space. If everything is less dense, you have to drive further to get to where you want to go, and building public transit makes less sense since it needs to service more areas to reach the same amount of people

this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
765 points (98.5% liked)

Technology

59381 readers
1037 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS