Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US cities pay too much for buses

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 590 posts

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#361

Post by namibj »

treis wrote: post #228
milesvp wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've thought about this a lot, and wonder if the last mile problem could be lessened with an uber style pickup you suggest. I have a civil engineer relative who follows this stuff better than I do, and he says all the pilot programs he's seen (in the US) tend to be wildly unprofitable. That said, I think that some program like this is essential to bootstrapping a really good transit system. The last mile problem real…

Most bus systems in the US are wildly unprofitable and quite costly. My local system is just under $10 per unlinked trip (i.e. get one on bus). That makes getting from point A to point B not much cheaper to provide than Uber because it will usually involve a transfer. Everyone would be better off in an Uber type system but there's no appetite or budget to subsidize rides at the level people would use it

Don't calculate the amortized (over a reasonable 30 years if you also ignore inflation and major maintenance/refurbishment costs) capex of the proposed Dallas red line northern extension, seen in a per-passenger-mile figure..... (I got 54ct per passenger mile just in capex (well, a capex-based view on the cost of having the track there and operable; costs from direct wear and tear of running trains and electricity and the trains themselves are additional)...)

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#362

Post by maxerickson »

freeopinion wrote: post #340
maxerickson wrote: post #312

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 2 bus contracts were with the same manufacturer, which is headquartered in California.

Thank you. That's informative. What about the third contract?

The difference between the North American buses is larger than the difference between the cheaper NA bus and the Singapore buses.

Is your theory that they treat half the plant poorly?

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#363

Post by namibj »

jlhawn wrote: post #86

One of the issues that AC Transit (SF East Bay bus agency) has is that it purchased a lot of Hydrogen Fuel Cell busses which have issues which dramatically impact their reliability. It's also very expensive technology. There's a decent argument that public agencies _should_ invest in early emerging technologies like that but the costs should not be borne by the transit agency alone, at the cost of poor service for it…

Make the argument why the bus company that provides bus-based transportation near one's home/work should spend marginal income on fancy emerging technologies instead of on higher-quality service (or lowering ticket prices if somehow service quality has reached an upper limit)? Sure if the state or feds want to pay the extra costs to get such technology out there into production, make them an offer as the local bus company how much they'd have to chip in for you to deploy that.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#364

Post by AngryData »

stocksinsmocks wrote: post #189
dayvid wrote: post #88

Worth watching Modern MBA on the inefficiencies of transit in USA. Detailed analysis and comparison against Asian, European and Latin American systems along with private and government run operations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ3LSNXwZ2Y

I would also love to know the real reason why US manufacturing seems to be so much more costly than it is anywhere else, even after adjusting for wage differences.

Because US manufacturers/investors demand high profit margins and expect it to increase every year, if not every quarter. If a company makes the same profits year after year, US investors consider it a dead end if not a complete failure, despite the fact that everybody involved in the business is making money

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#365

Post by namibj »

myrmidon wrote: post #7

I think this shows one of the downsides of trade barriers very well: You get stuck with undesirable industries (diesel bus manufacturing), binding capital and labor better used elsewhere (and you easily end up with underperforming, overpriced solutions, too). But I'm curious how much this actually affects transport costs. If such a bus is used 12h/day, then even overpaying 100% for the vehicle should get outscaled by…

Imagine if they could just order from vendors like "Solaris Bus & Coach sp z o.o."... They're even running some https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_Urbino_12_hydrogen over here that I at least hope have their hydrogen premium costs paid for by the EU grant the decals claim. Riding them I can't note a difference between what I would expect from a battery only version. But I can't imagine it's cheaper to take the hit of hydrogen roundtripping and the cost of hydrogen infrastructure just to avoid some 400 kW DC fast chargers at some strategic extended-stay bus stops where they take their lunch break (kick the last passenger out, walk outside, plug it in, lock the door and take a walk or go back inside and read the newspaper, and at the end unplug and hang it back on the electricity-vending-machine).

Unless it's different for bus drivers than for truck drivers, there is plenty mandatory break time under German rules to allow fast charging of such style to give enough range. And it's easy to set up by just fitting route-after-route with the charging spots and keeping a few diesel busses in reserve to handle broken chargers until there are enough chargers to maintain bus schedules even if some of them go offline.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#366

Post by gosub100 »

rfrey wrote: post #291
gosub100 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The left serves corporations at least as much as it claims to represent the people. That is why they are blamed.

This is confusing. If I accept your statement, then it seems: 1) The democrats hypocritically supports offshoring while claiming to support workers 2) The republicans explicitly (prior to Trump, but MAGA is not very similar to traditional Republicans) support corporations and offshoring as a mechanism for increased profits And so we blame "the left"?

No they aren't exclusively to blame. But they were a big part of elimination of manufacturing jobs in the 90s, and were huge critics of attempts to bring them back. I don't want people thinking that the left are some kind of "underdog" that is championing the people. Also their fiscal policy doesn't depend on manufacturing jobs. They can just print more cash and hand it out in various "programs". They, as a party, profit off suffering of Americans because they are always there to sell their voters a solution. The worst thing that could happen for them is people doing well. Because they won't be needed anymore.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#367

Post by AngryData »

p_l wrote: post #219
logifail wrote: post #161

Ever since I first looked at the Oshkosh NGDV for the USPS I couldn't help but wonder WHY there was a need for a custom vehicle?* European parcel delivery firms and postal systems (Deutsche Post DHL, La Poste, Royal Mail, PostNL and all the non-legacy competitors) generally do not commission purpose-built vehicles, they buy off the shelf small vans and light commercial vehicles. * of course I do know why, "because jo…

USPS has drastically different approach to mail deliver and pickup than most countries. Including as mentioned street-level mailboxes for both pickup and delivery, and general idea that really rural mail gets delivered direct still. In comparison, polish postal system although it's pretty much standard european approach: - postal trucks deliver mail between post offices - in cities and more built-up rural areas, on-f…

I don't know how it is done in the rest of the US, but in my state rural mail services are 95% of the time delivered using the mail carrier's personal vehicle, not the custom mail trucks. I usually only see them inside towns or moving between post offices.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#368

Post by dnissley »

hibikir wrote: post #290
estearum wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the largest insurers increasingly own the doctors you’re seeing too. Also the pharmacy you get your drugs from. Also the entity that negotiates prices between pharma companies and your insurer. More healthcare consumption = better, across the board

Even when it's not the insurer, it's at least a hospital. Many a doctor around me that used to have a private practice sold to one of the hospital chains, as they promised more money than by owning, solely due to superior collective action advantages. A large insurer can bully a private practice into cutting costs, but a hospital network that handles 40% of ERs in the metro area? The insurance company can lose. So ev…

On top of that the ACA prevents new physician owned hospitals from being established and placed restrictions on expansions of existing ones

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#369

Post by happosai »

numpad0 wrote: post #209
myrmidon wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here you go: https://afdc.energy.gov/files/u/publication/financial_analys... My takeaway: No reasonable assumption exists that would make operating battery electric busses more expensive than diesel ones.

> On the other hand, he told us that without subsidies, the life cycle costs would be "diesel buses, followed by hybrids, and then with a huge difference, EV buses and then fuel cell buses." He asserts that, as things stand, "neither EV buses nor fuel cell buses would be profitable in terms of life cycle costs without subsidies." > Tai said, "Relying on subsidies to introduce EV buses and fuel cell buses cannot be co…

Your link doesn't work. However, I know electric busses have won tenders over diesel in many places that don't have any eco-subsidies.

Japan may have special conditions, like diesel/electricity price may be unfavorable or "build local" rules and no local competition in EV building.

Re: US cities pay too much for buses

#370

Post by inferiorhuman »

decimalenough wrote: post #250
lazyasciiart wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they certainly don’t all come with AC and heat.

I haven't seen a non-AC bus in ages, even in developing countries.

It's been a while since I've been on Muni but most of their bus fleet did not have AC as of 2019.
Post reply on HN