Institute for Transportation and Development Policy

Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide

You Must Walk Before You Can Run: How to Get an Electric Bus Fleet Running

Blue MTA electric bus on curbside

The second in a blog series in partnership with the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT) and ITDP. Read the first part, “The Electric Revolution Begins with Buses” here.

Why Electrify?

One of the biggest issues that cities worldwide face today is air pollution. As 90% of the world’s population breathes highly polluted air, cities are issuing more and more pollution alerts in an attempt to mitigate the harmful risk of breathing in bad air. While electric private vehicles are increasingly viewed as a popular solution to pollution and climate change, the electrification of vehicles shouldn’t stop there. As mentioned in our previous blog post, bus fleets are an ideal starting place to begin an electric revolution. Electrification mitigates pollution and the process of fleet electrification can lead to valuable enhancements in efficiencies within the fleet itself. The steps to electrifying a fleet are generally straightforward but within them there are many important aspects and questions to consider to guarantee a successful deployment. This blog post will review suggested actions to take in electrifying a fleet, as well as important considerations to keep in mind throughout this process.

Step 1 – Set a Target & Begin Improvements

To transition a bus fleet to zero-emission, most cities should think about a multi-step, multi-year process. First, cities should establish simple, clear, and time-bound targets, such as a zero emissions by a certain date. Some examples of this approach include cities that started with bold policies or legislation that set emissions goals for the fleets by a specific year. For example, in July 2017, Los Angeles (LA) Metro adopted a transition plan to operate a 100 percent zero-emission bus fleet by 2030, following a strong push from Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. São Paulo adopted a climate law in 2018 that will require 100 percent elimination of fossil fuels within 20 years. Political will is a necessary ingredient in setting ambitious goals. Since fleets typically replace ten percent of their rolling stock per year, a full transition is feasible within ten years.

Step 2 – Fleet Improvements & Program Pilot

Once goals are set, the city can start piloting the electrification program. There are different approaches to pilots given the scale the city chooses to implement. Sometimes cities can study the conclusions from pilots performed elsewhere to understand and determine their implementation methods and approaches. In performing a pilot, the goal is to minimize the number of variables being tested, while also minimizing the risk to the system. Some variables to be tested include inclement weather, space, location, and timing for refueling or recharging. When it comes to recharging, testing in the pilot should focus on the range that one charge covers and how that can affect a given route. Some possible approaches to a pilot include starting with:

  • BRT corridor. BRT routes are often self-contained with fixed infrastructure, dedicated buses, depots, and maintenance staff, enabling a small section of a bus fleet to make the electric transition.
  • Planned fleet renovation. Most fleets have a ten percent annual replacement rate therefore new vehicles can be transitioned to electric technology as fleets are replaced.
  • Depot by depot. A transition can be undertaken by a given depot, gradually increasing over time.

As knowledge is gleaned from the pilots, operators can move more confidently into transitioning a single depot to electric buses and eventually the entire fleet. The pilot stage should be limited to a smaller number of vehicles to be tested as a demonstration. This will allow agencies to test new technology and identify constraints on a very limited scale without putting at risk the delivery of public transit.

Step 3 – Implementation, With Care

After enough information has been collected during a pilot, agencies can develop an implementation strategy coinciding with planned vehicle replacements. Sometimes a transition takes place after or during the pilot, as the transition moves from depot to depot. This plan should reflect the upcoming investments in vehicles, fuels, fixed infrastructure, and staff, as well as the annual milestones and procurement schedule. Public outreach is important to prepare the public to adapt to a multi-year technology transition. Any implementation strategy must also detail how the agency will scale up the roll out of electric buses. 

While it may not be possible to transition to electric vehicles immediately, cities can start with incremental changes throughout the electrification process like switching to cleaner fuels and better ‘soot-free’ engines, like the Euro VI. Cities can also procure buses that create fewer emissions like hybrid-drive, low rolling resistance tires, or use renewable or natural gas. The simple combination of fuel efficient buses and cleaner fuels can greatly reduce emissions. It is important to focus on both short term and long term goals throughout the electrification process and stay focused on ongoing improvements.

Added Value

One important aspect of the electrification process is the opportunity it provides to rethink and improve the bus network. It’s a natural break with the past, which is a huge opportunity to make improvements in access and to the environment. Throughout the transition to clean buses, cities have an organic moment to perform a fuller audit of their bus operations. It is worth asking where else can improvements be made and what frequent transit corridors and networks are possible in upgrading the service plan. Technology matters for climate change and air pollution, but service is the ultimate determination for ridership. Through harnessing electrification, cities can transform their technology and make other important transit improvements.

China rapidly electrifying its fleets and other examples will be featured in future posts within this series.

2020 STA Nominee Cities Feature Electrification, Pedestrian Design, and Low-Cost Interventions from Africa, Asia, and Americas

Woman on back of bicycle that man is riding in bicycle lane in Colombia
Montería, Colombia built 60 km of cycling infrastructure

For 16 years, the Sustainable Transport Award (STA) has showcased cities that demonstrate political courage by implementing innovative sustainable transport projects. This year is no different. The 15 nominated cities for the STA hail from Africa, Asia, South America, and North America and feature transportation interventions from electrified vehicles and widened walkways to new transportation lines. This year, as in others, demonstrates that size, both in city and project, is not the largest determining factor regarding impact. In fact, it is often the small, on-the-ground, and low-cost interventions such as sidewalk improvements, bus frequency, and or parking reform that make the biggest difference in people’s lives. With the political will for improvements, any city can make adjustments large and small that transform lives. This was evident in the nominees where cities of all sizes presented an impressive collection of innovations all with the same goal of improved sustainable transportation.

Large Indian bus on BRT route in Amritsar, India
Amritsar, India increased its BRT ridership to 76,000 people per day

Strategies honored by the STA improve mobility for all residents, reduce transportation, greenhouse and air pollution emissions, and improve safety and access for cyclists and pedestrians. Cities apply under five categories of interventions including Cycling & Walking, Public Transport, Sustainable Urban Development, Travel Demand Management, and newly added for 2020, Urban Freight. This year the most popular interventions were Cycling & Walking and Public Transport with 12 and 11 cities, respectively, engaging in interventions in those arenas. Six cities engaged in Sustainable Urban Development and only 3 cities engaged in Travel Demand Management. The 2019 winner, Fortaleza, Brazil, implemented a complete streets plan that massively improved road safety by prioritizing public transport, cycling, and walking. The winning city will be announced at the MOBILIZE summit in Fortaleza in June, and will host the MOBILIZE summit the following year.

While many of the Public Transportation interventions included creating new or expanding current BRT lines like in Peshawar, Pakistan or Richmond, USA. Some cities increased public transportation with other types of interventions like a new funicular in Bogotá, Colombia. Many cities saw ridership and participation in public transportation increase. Jakarta, Indonesia has doubled its BRT and bus ridership through better integration of systems and improved access to stations. Public transportation growth also came from electrifying vehicles already in use like buses and rickshaws in Amritsar, India; tricycles in Pasig City, Philippines, or motorcycles in Marrakech, Morocco.

  • Richmond, USA opened a new BRT line in June 2018
  • Kingston, Canada’s communications campaign focusing on young people increased ridership among that demographic

When it came to Cycling and Walking, Cali, Colombia; Cuenca, Ecuador; Montería, Colombia; and Pasig City, Philippines started or expanded public bike share programs while San José, Costa Rica expanded its cycling infrastructure. Many cities provided their pedestrians with enlarged sidewalks or footpaths like in Pune, India; Montería, and Providencia, Chile. Improved pedestrian environments are crucial to healthy and safe residents. Cities also focused on inclusivity. In Kingston, Canada, youth were targeted to engage in public transportation or in Montería, Pasig City, and Bogotá initiatives specifically targeted supporting low-income communities.

Bicycle riders with reflective vests in San Jose, Costa Rica
San José, Costa Rica built 15 km of cycling pathways

Many of the Sustainable Urban Development projects included transformations of waterways and historic districts into pedestrian friendly and mixed real estate neighborhoods like in Amritsar, India; Pune, Providencia, and Cali. Additionally, Kigali, Rwanda and Pasig City host regular car-free days. Parking policies in Pune and congestion pricing in Cali serve to alter their urban landscapes, promoting a high shift to public transport and active modes.

“We are thrilled with the list this year because it demonstrates how innovation can come from anywhere – it is not just the ‘usual suspects’ of progressive, predominately Northern European cities that are implementing policies to improve sustainable transport,” says STA committee member Aimée Gauthier, “The STA demonstrates that with enough political will, any city is fully capable of putting forth powerful solutions to enhance their urban environment.”

About the Sustainable Transport Award

The Sustainable Transport Award is an annual award chosen by the STA Committee given to any city that has implemented innovative sustainable transportation projects in the preceding year. The STA has been given every year since 2005 to cities worldwide that have implemented innovative, important, and forward thinking initiatives in transportation. Past winners have included cities of all sizes – from large metropolises to medium-sized cities from North America, Europe, South America, Africa, and Asia. The winning STA city hosts ITDP’s  MOBILIZE summit the following year and like every year, the 2020 winner will be announced at MOBILIZE in Fortaleza, Brazil, the 2019 STA winner. The 2020 winner will be honored at a ceremony in Washington, DC this upcoming January.

See the full list of the nominated cities here.

Reclaiming the Streets of Fortaleza, Brazil (Issue 30)

In this vibrant issue of the Sustainable Transport magazine, we look forward to new leadership at ITDP, dive even deeper into the topic of women’s access to transit, explore progress and change in Fortaleza, learn about how transportation and early childhood development intersect, and much more!

E-Scooters Could be a Last-Mile Solution for Everyone

Like docked and dockless bikeshare before them, dockless electric “kick” scooters are taking off in popularity, responding to a strong and growing need for urban car alternatives like transit and “last mile” connections. As part of a menu of urban transportation options, scooters have the potential to reduce short-distance, single occupancy vehicle and TNC (Transportation Network Company, e.g. Uber, Lyft, Via) trips, reducing urban congestion and emissions. Scooters provide a low cost, flexible mobility option for short trips, particularly those connected to transit. Bikes have long provided an excellent option for last-mile trips, and they continue to do so. However, the popularity, and user-friendliness of e-scooters may offer an even easier option for the first and last mile.

Scooters, particularly e-scooters, offer an option that pretty much anyone, regardless of fitness or ability, can ride for short trips. As with shared bikes, cities have an opportunity to leverage scooters, and other privately-operated, shared modes in a way that more directly encourages their use in coordination with transit. For example, cities could work with operators to subsidize scooter and bikeshare rides that start or end at transit using common payment options. This level of targeted integration benefits cities by expanding access to transit at a relatively low cost per mile (compared to building new stations, adding buses, etc.), benefits users by making sustainable, multi-modal trips more streamlined and affordable, and benefits companies by establishing a loyal, diverse customer base.

Scooters, bikes, and other technology-enabled shared modes have a role to play in shifting the paradigm away from personal car ownership. Cities can take advantage of this opportunity by understanding the demand for car-alternatives for short trips, and setting smart, goal-oriented regulations that help address that demand. Data from Portland’s scooter pilot shows that 34% of resident scooter riders would have otherwise driven a personal car or taken a taxi or TNC if a scooter hadn’t been available for their most recent trip. While this is promising support for scooters helping to reduce car trips, the data also indicates that 37% of respondents would have otherwise walked if a scooter wasn’t available. When asked how often they rode a scooter to or from a transit stop, 61% responded ‘never’. These last two data points underscore the need for cities to ensure that scooters support public transit, walking and cycling, instead of competing with these modes.

Photo Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pbotinfo/44665532241

Scooter riders during Portland Bureau of Transport e-scooter event

More, and longer-term data on scooter trips could help cities decide whether scooters are, in fact, providing a first-last mile connection to transit, substituting car trips, or pushing pedestrians and cyclists away from biking and walking.

 

Funding the Last-Mile Solution

Cities are now more prepared for the “ask forgiveness, not permission” attitude of privately-operated mobility services, and are responding to the unpermitted launch of e-scooters much more quickly and systematically than with transportation network companies like Uber, or even dockless bikeshare companies. While a few cities have outright banned scooters, most have launched pilots to test regulations and evaluate potential for long-term integration of scooters into the transportation network. In some cases, such as in Austin, Denver, and Los Angeles, cities are moving to combine permitting of dockless bikes, e-bikes, and e-scooters under a common regulatory scheme.

Other cities are taking more concrete steps to improve scooter and bike riders’ comfort on the street by requiring private operators to help fund infrastructure and other road safety improvements. Indianapolis is the first city to require scooter operators to pay $1 per scooter per day into a fund for road safety improvements for cyclists and scooter riders. Scooter operator, Bird, has volunteered to pay a similar amount for infrastructure improvements in other cities (many of which have been hesitant to accept Bird’s offer) however, some reportedly do not have a process in place to accept this type of funding from the private sector. Regardless, this new model of collaboration between cities and private companies to fund projects that make choosing a scooter or bike as a last-mile solution safer could prove successful, as long as cities are clear about what their goals are and why they are asking companies to share costs.

Encouraging the use of dockless scooters as a first-last mile option could also help connect people living further from the city center to public transit. Residents who live in outer neighborhoods tend to have fewer transit options, and likely require both a first and last mile solution for their trip. These residents stand to benefit the most from improved access to reliable, affordable first-last mile options.

Cities and e-scooter operators have an opportunity to learn from bikeshare by recognizing the demand – especially in neighborhoods further from downtown – for low-cost, reliable transportation options that aren’t private vehicles. It’s also critical for cities to realize their role in supporting sustainable transport like bikeshare and e-scootershare with protected infrastructure that can serve cyclists and scooters well, along with cost-effective and convenient connections with transit. Technology and private capital offer cities great tools to improve the lives of their residents, and taking full advantage of these tools means making space on our streets for many mobility options: scooters, bikes, transit, and shared vehicles all have a role to play in a healthy, vibrant transport system.

For more on e-scooters, check out our post: Scooters Are Not A Public Safety Crisis, but Cars Still Are

Scooters Are Not A Public Safety Crisis, but Cars Still Are

Lime scooters at Portland Bureau of Transport event Photo cred: PBOT Flickr

Small, personally-operated mobility options, like bikes and scooters, have highlighted a growing demand in urban areas for convenient, inexpensive alternatives to cars. However, following two high profile fatal crashes involving e-scooters and vehicles in Dallas and Washington, DC, media coverage (and the public) has been heavily focused on the safety of these two-wheelers. Some have even characterized injuries associated with the popularity of scooters as a “public safety crisis”, and a lawsuit was filed on behalf of pedestrians injured by scooters in California, suing scooter companies for negligence. Some cities have moved to restrict maximum scooter speeds, like Washington, DC, which just recently limited speeds to 10 miles per hour.

Bird scooter rider in Washington DC

This is an overreaction that neglects putting scooter safety into perspective. Riding an e-scooter does carry some level of risk, but those risks pale in comparison to those associated with driving a car, or sharing the streets with cars. Despite the increases we’ve seen in cycling, walking, and scooters in many North American cities, the majority of urban roads are designed for vehicles often traveling at high speeds. Road crashes are the leading cause of death among 15-29 year olds worldwide, resulting in over 3,000 deaths on average per day. Until we have streets designed for all modes that actually use them: bikes, scooters, buses, pedestrians, and cars, high numbers of crashes and fatalities will continue to be the norm. Like cyclists, scooter users are often forced to ride in traffic alongside cars or on the sidewalk alongside pedestrians. In fact, capping speeds such as DC has done may actually make scooter riding less safe, since scooters won’t be able to keep pace with cyclists, and will likely be forced out of bike lanes and onto sidewalks where they intrude on pedestrian space.

The Rapid Rise of E-Scooters

Since their launch in late 2017, dockless electric “kick” scooters have sparked a range of public responses from nostalgic glee, to concerns for safety, to outright hatred. After raising significant venture capital funding, Bird was the first electric scooter company to launch and, over the next few months, several existing dockless bikeshare companies began to pivot their business models to focus primarily on e-scooters. At least a half dozen other e-scooter companies emerged during this time.

Uptake of e-scooters in the US happened fast, generating a 3.6% adoption rate (the percentage of people who have tried the service) in less than 12 months, compared to docked bikeshare schemes, which show a 13% adoption rate after eight years. Compared to dockless bikes (excluding pedal assist offerings), dockless scooters have generated, on average, significantly more total trips, as shown in the chart below, and more trips per vehicle per day.

Despite e-scooter companies modeling their business after bikeshare, these trip numbers make the economics of e-scooter operation more viable than dockless bikes, with each scooter paying for itself in a matter of weeks (4-8 by some estimates) instead of months. At this level of return, investors are keenly interested in the success of scooters, and continue to pump billions of dollars of funding into the industry. In fact, after less than one year of operations, Bird became the fastest company ever to reach a valuation of $1 billion (known in the venture capital world as a “unicorn”) – faster than Uber, Facebook, Twitter and other tech giants. Concerns abound, however, about the long-term sustainability (from a profit perspective) of the private scootershare and bikeshare business models, particularly when maintenance, charging, rebalancing and other operating costs associated with high-quality service are taken into account.

By the later half of 2018, scooter companies began eyeing markets outside of the US. Lime operates in six European cities, two cities in New Zealand, and launched in Mexico City in October. A Mexican scooter company, Grin, also provides service in Mexico City. Bird operates in six European cities including London, Madrid and Paris, as well as in Israel.

Lime scooter rider in Portland, Oregon. Photo cred: Ian Sane, Flickr
Grin scooter rider in Mexico Photo cred: lavca.org
Bird Scooter rider in Baltimore, Maryland Photo cred: Elvert Barnes, Flickr
Lime scooter riders in New Zealand. Photo cred: NZ Herald

Make the Streets Safer for All Modes

Investing in infrastructure that protects scooter and cyclists is key to supporting and growing these car alternatives, as is clearly communicating to users safe riding behavior and where scooters are and are not permitted to be ridden. Recognizing that most streets, in their current car-centric form, are inherently unsafe for non-car users, cities must commit to street design that is inclusive and safe for all modes, and they must commit to enforcing these rules. Bike lanes are only useful if you can actually bike in them without the obstacles of parked cars, delivery trucks, and even pedestrians.

As cities have notoriously tight budgets, many are testing solutions for generating revenue that supports sustainable modes (and, in some cases, charging polluting modes for their negative impacts). Mexico City’s tax on TNC trips, which supports cycling and walking improvements; Portland’s use of state gas taxes to build protected bike lanes; and Chicago’s use of tax increment financing (TIF) to fund streetscape improvements including protected bike lanes are just a few examples. E-scooter operator, Bird, has offered to pay cities in which they operate to improve and build new bike lanes. Indianapolis is the first city to require all scooter operators to pay into a fund for road safety improvements that benefit cyclists and scooter riders.

Whether you think e-scooters are the best or the worst thing to ever happen to cities, their popularity demonstrates how great the need is for diverse transport options that serve all types of trips. People want to get around cities in ways other than a private car, and city governments should do everything they can to make those options convenient, safe, and connected to each other.

For more on e-scooters, check out our post: E-Scooters Could be a Last-Mile Solution for Everyone

China Tackles Climate Change with Electric Buses

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

In 2009, Shenzhen, China, a city of 12 million that links Hong Kong with mainland China, was selected as the first of 13 pilot cities for demonstration and promotion of new energy vehicles in China. This includes not only electric cars, but also electric buses. By the end of 2017, a total of 16,359 electric buses had been implemented, making the city’s entire bus fleet completely electric. This made Shenzhen the first city in not only China, but the entire globe, to realize the full electrification of its public transport.

In the following years, bus electrification brought some clear benefits to Shenzhen. Compared with the former diesel buses, Shenzhen’s e-buses have greatly reduced dependence on fossil fuels and lessened environmental pollution. Fuel consumption in the public transport industry has been reduced by more than 95%. Based on the operating mileage in Shenzhen in 2016, electric buses consume 72.9% less energy than diesel buses, with a daily average operating mileage of 174.4 km, and energy consumption 106.3 kWh/100 km. According to the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Commission, the resulting energy savings amount to 366,000 tons of coal saved annually, substituted by 345,000 tons of alternative fuel.

There are also major reductions in CO2 emissions. On average per year, electric buses emit 67.02 kg of CO2 per 100 km, compared to diesel vehicles which emit 129.91 kg, corresponding to a reduction rate of about 48%. According to the statistics from the Shenzhen Municipal Transportation Commission, the 2017 data shows a total reduction of CO2 emissions of 1.353 million tons. Furthermore, the annual emission of pollutants such as nitrogen oxides, non-methane hydrocarbons and particulate matter was reduced by 431.6 tons.

The performance of these buses relative to diesel has been improving. In 2016, the average daily operating mileage of electric buses and hybrid buses in Shenzhen were 174.4 km and 163.0 km, respectively, representing 76.2% and 71.2% of the operating distance of a traditional diesel bus, which averages at 228.8 km. However, the average daily mileage of electric buses has increased year by year, with an increase of 40.6% in 2016 compared to 2012.

The World’s Largest Vehicle Market

The 2018 Annual Report of China’s Motor Vehicle Environmental Management, published by the Ministry of Ecology and Environment, shows China as the world’s largest motor vehicle market, in both production and sales, for nine consecutive years. Motor vehicle emissions are now a major source of pollution in China, contributing heavily to CO2 emissions. The increasing development of new energy vehicles offers a possible way forward.

New energy vehicles include pure electric vehicles, extended-range electric vehicles, hybrid vehicles, and fuel cell electric vehicles, among others. Companies are offering different types of electric buses to meet market demand, and the industry has developed rapidly, with the production and sales volume of new energy vehicles increasing 101 times in the last five years.

Different e-buses offered by bus manufacturers.

 

China Electric Bus Sales — 2011–2017

 

In recent years, China’s electric vehicle industry has developed rapidly, with the production and sales volume of new energy vehicles increasing 101 times increase in the last five years. Source: Clean Technica

Government support for new energy buses has been strong. In 2015, the Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Industry and Information Technology jointly issued a stipulation that the proportion of new energy buses to be added and replaced in Chinese cities must be divided proportionally:  80% in Beijing, Shanghai, Tianjin, Hebei, Shanxi, Jiangsu Zhejiang, Shandong, Guangdong and Hainan; 65% in Anhui, Jiangxi, Henan, Hubei, Hunan and Fujian; 30% in other provinces (regions and cities). At the same time, national and local governments have introduced a series of subsidy incentives and tax reductions to encourage and promote the development of new energy vehicles.

National and local governments have introduced a series of subsidy incentives and tax reductions to encourage and promote the development of new energy vehicles. Notes: 1. The subsidy for large- and medium-sized fuel cell bus is 500,000 yuan. 2. The subsidy standards are jointly formulated by the Ministry of industry, the National Development and Reform Commission, the Ministry of finance, the Ministry of science and technology and the Energy Bureau.

The “Zero Emissions” Question

It’s clear that China sees rapid development of new energy vehicles as a way to continue its pace of rapid development while reducing emissions. However, this has been accompanied by questions about whether this approach is really as effective as promised. Terms such as “zero emissions” to describe new energy vehicles have been criticized as misleading. Many have pointed out that new energy vehicles transfer pollution from roads to power plants, rather than being fully “zero emissions”. Advocates counter that it would be the case with renewable energy, but there has not been comparable progress in decarbonizing the grid. In 2016 in China, coal-generated power accounted for 72% of all power sources.

In order to calculate the environmental impact of new energy vehicles, the conventional method is to calculate the standard carbon dioxide production by multiplying the power consumption per 100 kilometers by the carbon emission factor. However, there are many different types of new energy vehicles, each with a different method of measuring vehicle emissions, as well as different power consumption based on the location. Therefore, the results of the calculations would be quite varied.

According to the Study on Demonstration Promotion and Business Model of New Energy Buses issued by the China Electric Vehicle 100 People’s Congress, a 12-meter-long, Category 4 emissions bus with a fuel consumption of 38L/100km emits 1103 grams of CO2 per kilometer. Based on the average standard and composition of the national power grid, an electric bus that consumes 120 kWh of electricity per 100 km emits 943 grams of CO2 per km, and a plug-in hybrid bus emits 870 grams. After electrification, CO2 emissions decreased 15-20% compared to diesel vehicles- a marked difference in reducing carbon emissions.

CO2 Emissions per Kilometer (g)

After electrification, CO2 emissions decreased 15-20% compared to diesel vehicles- a marked difference in reducing carbon emissions. Source: Study on Demonstration Promotion and Business Model of New Energy Buses

Regarding the emission of gaseous pollutants that cause smog, such as CO, VOC, NOx, and PM, the Study on Demonstration Promotion and Business Model of New Energy Buses stated that during their life cycle, the annual emissions of diesel vehicles average 1146 kg. In comparison, electric vehicles emit only 279 kg annually, amounting to a 75% reduction in emissions, while plug-in hybrid vehicles emit 895 kg annually, amounting to a 22% reduction.

The annual emissions of diesel vehicles average 1146 kg. In comparison, electric vehicles emit only 279 kg annually, amounting to a 75% reduction in emissions, while plug-in hybrid vehicles emit 895 kg annually, amounting to a 22% reduction. Source: Study on Demonstration Promotion and Business Model of New Energy Buses

Long Term, it’s About Power

Although China is still mainly based on coal-generated electricity, the continuous development of wind energy, nuclear energy, and other energy sources, as well as the control of emissions from coal-fired power plants, would help mitigate the problem of “pollution transfer”. Coal-generated power accounted for 80% of all power sources in 2010, dropping to 78% in 2013 and 72% in 2016. According to data from the China Power Federation, 1.0-1.2 grams of pollutant emissions (particulate matter, sulfide, nitrogen oxides, etc.) and 810 grams of carbon were produced per kilowatt hour of electricity in 2015-2016. Wang Hewu, deputy director of the US-China Clean Vehicles Consortium, believes that they are 70% to 80% lower than the 2010 pollutant emissions. In addition, according to BP’s Energy Outlook 2035 report, by 2035, thermal power generation will continue to decline both in China and globally, and the proportion of clean energy will gradually increase.

Primary Energy Used for Power Generation

Source: BP’s Energy Outlook 2035

At present, there are a large number of peak-to-valley differences in China’s daily electricity demand. Analysis shows that electricity demand may fluctuate by up to 1 billion degrees each day. As electric buses run during the day and charge at night, they can help provide a solution towards stabilizing these fluctuations, and 40 million electric vehicles can be charged using these differences in electricity demand. Therefore, the development of new energy vehicles will also help to improve the overall utilization efficiency of electricity, avoid the construction of pumped storage power stations, and save social costs.

According to statistics from the Ministry of Communications, the total number of public buses in China has increased from 509,600 in 2013 to 651,200 in 2017. The biggest change has been the proportion of traditional fuel buses, which has decreased from 62.7% of all buses in 2013, to just 29.7% in 2017. In accordance, the number of new energy buses has increased from less than 0.33% of the total in 2013, to 39.5% in 2017.

The proportion of new energy buses was extremely low in 2013, which provides a good opportunity to compare the impact of growth of China’s new energy bus fleet in the following years on the environment. Using CO2 vehicle emissions in 2013 as a baseline, by 2017, about 8.56 million tons of CO2 were reduced due to the increase in new energy buses.

Given the current trend of decreasing numbers of diesel and gasoline vehicles, if supposed that by 2021, all diesel and gasoline vehicles are replaced by new energy vehicles, CO2 emissions will be reduced by 33.08 million tons.

Notes: The data for 2013, 2014, and 2015 standards are calculated based on the sales volume of new energy in the year. CO2 emissions (kg/km) for different types of vehicles is as follows: diesel, 1.103; pure electric, 0.943; hybrid, 0.871; gasoline, 1.07; gas, 0.943. CO2 emissions for 2013, 2014, and 2015 were calculated using the average value for electric and hybrid power. Total emissions of different vehicles are based on vehicle consumption. Considering the improvement of thermal power generation technology, the reduction of pollution emissions and the increased proportion of clean electricity, the weight of power consumption of E bus to the environmental pollution decreases by 0.1 every year from 2016. According to the technical path of China’s new energy vehicle development, it is assumed that the proportion of hybrid vehicles will remain unchanged after 2017.

Progress is Impressive, yet Challenges Remain

Despite the encouraging progress of new energy vehicles, there are still serious issues to be addressed. China’s current subsidy policy has increasingly supported batteries with high energy densities, raising the minimum density threshold for non-fast-charging electric buses from 85 kWh/kg to 115 kWh/kg. However, the energy density of lithium iron phosphate batteries is limited, with a theoretical upper limit of 170 mAh/g, but an actual density of only 110 mAh/g currently. Ternary lithium batteries have a much higher density capacity; however, they carry certain safety hazards, so they are seldom used in public transportation. It is clear that electric buses must adopt new technical means to increase battery energy density.

In addition, some enterprises have taken advantage of loopholes in the subsidy policy to defraud subsidized funds by means of false production and products that do not conform to requirements, leading to the “false” development of electric vehicles and the massive loss of state subsidized funds. Therefore, in order to promote the healthy and stable development of China’s new energy automobile industry, the relevant state departments will improve subsidy standards and mechanisms, subsidy allocation, and establish a supervision system with local governments taking the main responsibility. Determining how to develop effective policies and reduce loopholes will require further careful consideration.

It’s clear that new energy vehicles are not a perfect product. Their development, and the technology for electric buses, is ongoing. However, it is clear that there are real benefits to be had in CO2 reduction, especially when compared to private cars, but even as compared to gas or diesel powered buses.  China’s commitment to improvement and electrification of its bus fleet is commendable, and should serve as a model for other nations with high transport emissions. As Miao Wei of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology said during the National People’s Congress in 2018, “As technology continues to progress and charging facilities continue to improve, new energy vehicles will show rapid growth in the future.”