Bill

Councillor John Procter calls for the trolleybus scheme to be scrapped

Photo courtesy of Yorkshire Post Newspapers

.

Councillor John Procter is calling for the trolleybus scheme to be scrapped. In a letter published in Monday’s Yorkshire Evening Post, he says that in the wake of the news that the scheme is faced with a £20 million funding gap, the project should be abandoned.

He describes the trolleybus as a compromise, and argues that instead of pursuing it, we should be applying for money from the government’s new £50 billion infrastructure fund to build a tram system.

He says that what’s needed is vision and ambition, and that to continue with the trolleybus scheme would be a wasted opportunity for Leeds.

Call for tram system to be restored

Kieran

Kieran Preston, the head of Metro, recently wrote in to the paper placing the blame for the city’s transport ills at London’s door. Correspondent Hannah Johnson wrote a feisty response, pointing out that if Mr Preston was serious about solving the city’s transport problems, he could improve things cheaply and quickly by restoring the city’s original tram network. Dan Laythorpe wrote in reply to say that there would be practical difficulties. G Geapin wrote in to point out the advantages that trams have over trolleybuses. Hannah Johnson wrote a letter in reply to Dan Laythorpe to say that the difficulties he raises are just suppositions.

The above photograph taken in 1955 shows two trams crossing Woodhouse Moor on their way from the city centre. The tram in the foreground is a Chamberlain 105 and the tram in the background is a Horsfield 202.

NGT – Trees to be replaced by tarmac at West Park


The central

The central reservation of the A660 is lined with mature trees all the way from the West Park roundabout to the junction with Otley Old Road. The trees have been there for as long as anyone can remember and help to make the A660 one of the greenest and most beautiful avenues in Leeds

The people behind the NGT trolleybus scheme want to bulldoze the central reservation and its trees. In its place, they will lay tarmac. In addition, the trees to either side of the road will be cut back to make room for gantries from which wires will be suspended to supply electricity to the trolleybuses.

So, if the people behind NGT get their way, the current leafy view will be replaced by one of a broad expanse of hard tarmac with gantries and overhead electric wires.

NGT – Funding Gap


It was

It was reported in today’s Yorkshire Evening Post that the NGT trolleybus project has a £20 million funding gap. Metro’s chairman, Councillor James Lewis claims to be unfazed by the news. When the gap was announced in a report to his colleagues on the council’s Executive Board, he said that it could be made good by re-valuing upwards land that had been acquired by the council years ago. He also said they wouldn’t have to find the money all at once, and that the scheme might cost less that the estimated £250 million.

NGT, Greg Mulholland, and the trip to Budapest


At the start of this year

At the start of this year, MP Greg Mulholland flew to Budapest to learn about trolleybuses. During his visit, he was told by a representative of the body that administers Budapest’s transport, that trolleybuses do not lead to increased use of public transport. He was also told that Budapest would like to buy battery powered buses. Subsequently, at a meeting in this country he was told by another representative from Budapest, that the only reason Budapest hasn’t already scrapped its trolleybuses and bought diesel buses, is because they can’t afford to.

And yet despite this, on the 4th July, Mr Mulholland submitted an early day motion to parliament calling for the government to approve funding for the NGT trolleybus scheme in Leeds.

The following day on a secret visit to Leeds, the Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg announced that funding had been approved, subject to NGT passing the necessary hurdles.

The suspicion is that this was a political decision, not based on the merits or otherwise of the NGT proposal.

And the question arises, why should we pay for MPs like Greg Mulholland to fly abroad on fact finding missions, when they simply ignore the facts that they learn on these trips?

Read more

(photo courtesy of Bruno!)

NGT – The Myth that Trolleybuses are Green

In the late 1990s, the city of Edmonton was considering whether to continue running trolleybuses. A report was produced by consultants Booz Allen Hamilton which found that trolleybuses had higher capital and operating costs and are more polluting than both diesel and hybrid buses. The emission factors in the table below were extracted from the table on page 33 of the report.
heel


heel

As a result of this damning report, Edmonton scrapped its trolleybus system, and began a trial of hybrid buses.

95% of the electricity generated in Alberta comes from the burning of fossil fuels. This compares with 72.5% in the UK. These percentages have been factored into the emission factors for trolleybuses in the table above, to arrive at adjusted figures indicating the likely emissions from the proposed NGT trolleybuses.
heel


heel

Key

THC – total hydrocarbons
CO – carbon monoxide
NOX – nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide
PM10 – particulate matter of less than 10 micrometers
PM2.5 – particulate matter of less than 2.5 micrometers
CO2 – carbon dioxide

NGT – the energy efficiency myth – part 2

The trolleybus lobby keep telling us that trolleybuses

The trolleybus lobby keep telling us that trolleybuses

The trolleybus lobby keep telling us that trolleybuses are more energy efficient than diesel buses. The internet is flooded with their misinformation. For example:

The Tbus Group who claim, “the trolleybus is more than twice as energy efficient as the diesel”

The Trolley Coalition, who say exactly the same thing.

Trolleybuses for West London who also say exactly the same thing.

There are lots more examples of the same misinformation being repeated over and over again.

This quote from a New Scientist article published in 1976 states the true position regarding the energy efficiency of trolleybuses:

Calls for an underground

Photo courtesy of Adam E Moreira

The Yorkshire Evening Post has recently published several letters calling for Leeds to have an underground system.

To those who think an underground system would be too expensive, Janet Bailey points out that tunneling is cheaper now than it used to be. Hannah Johnson points out that other European cities are building underground systems whilst Leeds gets left behind. D Birch says that private companies should be invited to provide us with an underground system. Terry Allinson says there should be an underground link between Leeds and Bradford. And George Horsman informs us that back in the 1930s, Leeds City Council had detailed plans for building an underground system.

Leeds residents condemn NGT

The Yorkshire Evening Post has published several letters recently that criticise the NGT trolleybus scheme.

There were letters from Bill McKinnon and Dawn Carey Jones who are concerned about the plan to route the trolleybuses across a section of Woodhouse Moor. Andrew Batty points out that the trolleybuses will be bendybuses with wires, and that bendybuses have been scrapped elsewhere because they are cumbersome and unpopular. Peter Brash makes it clear that trolleybuses will just add to congestion. Kim Cowell relates how Transport for London ruled out the use of trolleybuses in London on the grounds of inefficiency and cost. Sarah Sullivan reveals that the Department of Transport estimate that the NGT trolleybus scheme will cost Leeds businesses in excess of £200 million.

NGT and Metro’s obsession with trolleybuses

An earlier incarnation of NGT was the failed Electrobus scheme of the 1980s. Metro’s original intention in 1980 had been to re-introduce trolleybuses to Bradford. But after two failed attempts to secure government funding, Leeds was included in the scheme, in the hope that this would persuade the government to change its mind.

But the government refused funding again on the ground that the trolleybus would only be economic if it had no competition.

Metro decided to go ahead anyway. But then in 1990, when an independent bus company announced plans to set up a rival bus service along the proposed first trolleybus route in Bradford, Metro withdrew its plan. It had taken them 10 wasted years to finally accept that trolleybuses couldn’t compete economically with diesel buses, the very same reason that trolleybuses were originally withdrawn from service.