Honestly, for growing places, or places with bad public transit, diesel busses are the way to go. They are the cheapest and require almost no new infrastructure so it can offset car emissions quicker than the other options. Established bus routes that are popular should be converted to tram lines or BRT.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Diesel busses should be considered the last alternative though, out of all the mass transit options they are still the worst for the environment. Not unless a city has exhuasted all other options should they look into them, or truly have no money for alternatives.

Downtown areas can easily be canternaried for electrified busses, and battery busses are great for trips within cities.
If a city is growing then it's the perfect time to lay down rail and plan it out properly before road infrastructure gets in the way, and rail always pays off in the long run.

For longer trips then fine, diesel, but only if 1) It's out of range for electrified busses and 2) there is not ridership enough for rail. (but even then, look at the UK's request stop numbers and I'd say that argument is pretty flimsy)

[–] Erismi14@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

I honestly disagree. If you can get 5 car users on a diesel bus, you are making a positive impact on the environment. And you can deploy way more diesel busses than electric ones. Once you build demand, you can skip busses altogether and replace with trams. The batteries in busses are a cool technology, but still exploit child labor and extended neocolonialism in the same way oil does. Also battery fires are much worse than normal fires.

I think we should electrify fleets as soon as possible but I think adding a few battery busses here and there won't do anything but pander to environmentalist