Perth bus fleet to be all-electric

[TP]

The last diesel bus has been delivered to the Transport fleet. Ferries will also ultimately be all-electric.

https://www.busnews.com.au/end-of-the-line-for-diesel-buses-in-wa/

Tony P

[Brent Efford]

The way the world is going. All without wires, too. Shame on them :).

BTW – how is the much-vaunted sham (sorry, "trackless") "tram" in that fair city turning out? The silence in both the professional and enthusiast media is puzzling.

Brent Efford

[Bob Pearce]

Ummm,

 

I understand it is not.

 

Buggered up the roads, just as the warnings stated.

 

Bob in Perth

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/5ef276a3-b1ff-450d-9d81-130cf67c3dd0n%40googlegroups.com.

[TP]

On the long circle route 998/999, the range of the batteries will not be sufficient to support a single bus operating the service all day, so they'll have to restructure the roster to enable another bus to take over during the day while the first bus goes off for recharging. This is one reason why, with battery buses, you need to buy more of them to maintain the same level of service. A diesel or trolley bus wouldn't have this issue.

Tony P

[Brent Efford]

Perhaps operating practice in Australia is different, but in NZ there wouldn’t be many PT vehicles of any mode which operate continuously 18 hours a day, with no inter-peak downtime. Go to any bus depot or rail stabling yard here at midday and there will be plenty of vehicles waiting for school + pm peak duty – while drivers endure the hated split shifts. Rostering battery charging during this downtime doesn’t seem to be an issue – and the reduced time that BEBs spend in the workshops compared with diesels improves availability, too. 

Some of the longest bus routes including open road speeds – like the #83 Eastbourne in Wellington or the #1 from south Christchurch to Rangiora, are now worked by electrics. And the Orbiter in Christchurch, a continuous circular route, is now electric – but even if it means buying a few more BEBs, it would be hard to envisage it being wired for trolleybuses! https://www.metroinfo.co.nz/news/celebrating-our-acceleration-into-our-electric-future/

Brent Efford

You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tramsdownunder/X_9HHesz51A/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/2607ec7f-dba6-4645-9fbe-10648a385abbn%40googlegroups.com.

[Richard Youl]

Hi Brent,

Do you know how far these electrics can go on a single charge? 

I am in discussion with some Americans and to date the few places which promised battery buses in place of trolley buses have had poor results.

Didn’t Wellington also make similar promises? How has that worked out? 

Richard

On 25 May 2025, at 8:30 am, 'Brent Efford' via TramsDownUnder <tramsdo...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Perhaps operating practice in Australia is different, but in NZ there wouldn’t be many PT vehicles of any mode which operate continuously 18 hours a day, with no inter-peak downtime. Go to any bus depot or rail stabling yard here at midday and there will be plenty of vehicles waiting for school + pm peak duty – while drivers endure the hated split shifts. Rostering battery charging during this downtime doesn’t seem to be an issue – and the reduced time that BEBs spend in the workshops compared with diesels improves availability, too. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/FA92CAB2-2E03-40D5-898A-05F649695D7B%40me.com.

[TP]

It's not a black and white answer Richard because the more batteries you load on board, the more you have to reduce the passenger capacity in order to keep the axle load within limits. So it's a bit self-defeating if you increase the range with more batteries but then can't carry as many people. In NSW, battery buses typically have a range of about 350 km, but their capacity is reduced to about 60, compared to 70 to 80 for a diesel bus. In Europe they place a lot of value on passenger capacity, so their ranges are typically less than 250 km. This is why the battery trolleybus is so popular in Europe, because it's not range-restricted and can carry more people, so it does the heavy work while straight battery buses are confined to quieter routes. Of course, there they also have great numbers of tram and metro systems to do heavy lifting, so not so reliant on buses anyway.

Tony P

[Tony Galloway]

My boy Blair did his Dissertation for his Batchelor of City Planning on bus electrification.

It’s pretty comprehensive :

[Mal Rowe]

Sounds interesting - did you mean to add a link?

Mal Rowe - still rather fond of steel wheels on steel rails whatever the motive power.

On 25/05/2025 16:41, 'Tony Galloway' via TramsDownUnder wrote:

My boy Blair did his Dissertation for his Batchelor of City Planning on bus electrification.

It’s pretty comprehensive :

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/609C5496-FB3E-497C-BFCA-028CF23927E1%40aapt.net.au.

Tony

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/25B4D22F-2782-47CA-AA65-C157E9336A53%40yahoo.com.au.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/609C5496-FB3E-497C-BFCA-028CF23927E1%40aapt.net.au.

[espee8800]

I got the link OK.

Virus-free.www.avg.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/f95f425d-1871-4427-b312-3971bb4781fa%40gmail.com.

--

cheers and best wishes,
David in Avenel.au,    
[Before you change anything, learn why it is the way it is.]

[TP]

Well done to Blair. The findings reflect those of similar studies in Europe. The problem for us is that, while there is a sympathetic political and professional environment - as well as extensive operational experience - in Europe towards trolley/IMCB buses, here in the antipodes (including NZ) they're considered by our more narrow-minded and set-in-their-ways bus professionals to be the work of the devil. Additionally, there is less care here for the wise investment of public moneys, so they'll run with a more costly and less effective solution without batting an eyelid. Then we'll have the anti OHW mob piling in on top of that (even though there would be much less of it with IMC buses). So in the end I don't hold out much hope.

A couple of other Sydney corridors that are very busy and all-artic are Victoria Road (500X) and Mosman (100). Not to mention the B Line to Warringah.

Naturally, an excellent new IMCB system to study is Prague where, not only did they do all the research, they spent several years live-testing all the alternatives, including battery battery buses, before deciding an an IMCB system .

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335848784_The_road_to_the_development_of_electromobility_in_the_Czech's_Prague_from_electric_buses_to_trolleybuses

I don't know why they call battery buses electric buses. Trolley buses are electric buses too! As are fuel cell ("hydrogen") buses incidentally.

Tony P

[Richard Youl]

Firstly, apologies to all who find this to be too far Off-Topic to be of interest. Just delete it. 

Thanks you for your email on this matter, Tony. 

This whole matter arose after Mark Sanders, a Philadelphia historian, sent me a link to a paper claiming a big swing back to trolley buses. I replied that as much as I wished this to be the case, with recent battery buses, I could not see that happening on a wide scale.

Subsequent responses outline the story of the demise of trolley buses in several US tram cities, and to date the failure of battery buses there. The SEPTA story is particularly sad. 

Anyway to anyone interested in this matter, the full exchange of emails is below. Best to start reading from the bottom.

Cheers,

Richard

Thanks, Richard, for the additional insights.  Your demurral notwithstanding, I continue to be impressed by the breadth and depth of your knowledge.

In regard to Boston, my recollection is that the year before last the MBTA, which had, ostensibly, been planning to replace all of its trolleybuses with battery buses, accelerated its shutdown of trolleybus operations for the sake of accommodating a major construction project in central Boston.  Until such time as the battery buses arrive, diesel/diesel hybrid buses are operating on these routes instead.  We'll see whether the battery buses ever materialize and, if so, how they function in service.

More than three decades ago, the abandonment of Toronto's trolleybus system in favor of CNG buses was especially unfortunate.  For multiple reasons, the CNG buses failed to meet the expectations of the TTC's management, and diesel/diesel hybrid buses have long since replaced them.

The major impediment thus far to the widespread deployment of battery buses in the northeast and upper midwest United States (and for that matter in Canada) is climate.  The cold winters here inevitably intensify the demands on their batteries, and the buses themselves must, at multiple times in the course of a day, go out of service for their batteries to receive a new charge.

The situation here in Philadelphia is particularly embarrassing.  Rather than locate a charging station at each end of Routes 29 and 79, SEPTA ultimately chose to construct a centralized charging station for all of its battery buses on the grounds of Southern Depot, which was actually located a significant distance to the south of both routes.  My understanding is that this decision in turn required the manufacturer, Proterrra, to install in each bus a heavier battery than the bus had originally been designed to accommodate.  As a result, unsightly (and possibly dangerous) cracks would repeatedly form in the body shells.  Proterra's subsequent bankruptcy and shutdown eventually forced SEPTA, which could not longer obtain replacement parts, to sideline the fleet in favor of operating diesel/diesel hybrid buses on Routes 29 and 79.

Recently, the Volvo Group has acquired Proterra's assets, and spare parts may once again become available to SEPTA, which has reportedly decided to construct additional charging stations at the ends of both routes.  Hopefully, its battery buses will eventually come out of mothballs, with a permanent fix to the body stress problem.  But don't hold your breath.

In the case of Philadelphia, you are entirely correct in your assertion, "As for unreliable battery buses, I can only presume they are buying from the wrong manufacturers."  I think that the fateful deployment of Proterra's battery buses on Routes 29 and 79 was motivated by SEPTA's desire at the time to find an excuse to eliminate trolleybuses from those routes once and for all more so than by a genuine interest in battery bus operation.  The results speak for themselves.

Cheers,

Mark

Sent from my TCL ION V

On May 21, 2025 1:51 AM, tressteleg1 <tress...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Mark,

I’m not sure your flattery is justified, but here and there I have a bit of knowledge. Certainly feel free to share my opinions with others. I am in occasional contact with Russ ever since I met him in Melbourne years ago checking on Philly railcars being built there. I was a tram driver at the time. 

Unfortunately any adopting anywhere of trolleybuses I expect will be very limited.

I may have read of the demise of trolleybuses in Boston, but if so I forgot. My first amazement was some years ago when Toronto dropped its few lines. Here anyway, Toronto was seen as the shining light to flow even if I thought they had some ‘Woolley thinking’ like kicking people off trams at ?Humber loop to make them pay an extra fare to go along Long Branch. Anyway as they already had an overhead team (presumably) at all hours to handle any tramway overhead problems, managing TB OH should have been no problem. As for Philly, ‘INEPTA’ has long been a pro-bus operator. 

As for unreliable battery buses, I can only presume they are buying from the wrong manufacturers. Here on the Gold Coast for several years battery buses have been operating the feeder service from the south end of the tram to the airport, 12 or so miles away. I have never heard of any breakdowns, and they certainly seem to be able to do at least a few return trips, or even all day, on just one charge. 

Brisbane is in the process of building a ‘Metro’ which is no more than double articulated battery buses made in Europe. It is too early to say what their reliability will be as the full system of about 3 routes is only opening bit by bit. 

As you say, economies of scale may be against trolleys, but the basic bus is still the same whatever drive system it has. Diesel engines must be more expensive with thousands of moving parts, while modern AC motors would require little maintenance year after year. Maybe makers charge extra to deter purchasers. 

I just remembered that a number of years ago Leeds UK was going to adopt a new TB system but that was blocked by the penny pinching government who have also blocked a number of tram proposals.

As you say, maybe there will be a resurgent of interest, but surely only in some obscure exceptional circumstances. 

Cheers,

Richard

On 20 May 2025, at 9:12 am, Phila. Street Railway <trolley...@hotmail.com> wrote:



Thank you, Richard, for your highly knowledgeable and perceptive comments.  I am taking the liberty of sharing them with a few of the other trusted recipients of my e-mail of yesterday evening (Chuck Bode, Russ Jackson, and Bill Vigrass).

Believe me, I share your skepticism regarding the reality of the resurgence of trolleybus operation, at least here in North America.  As you are doubtless aware, the MBTA has recently closed its entire trolleybus system, and SEPTA has, several  years ago now, trashed Routes 29 and 79 in favor of a fleet of overweight and unreliable battery buses that sit idle for lack of replacement parts.

As far as I am aware, no major North American city has successfully deployed battery buses on a significant scale.  Diesel and hybrid buses continue to rule the roost.  For all of the hype surrounding battery buses, the technology isn't quite there yet.

I myself haven't compared the costs of diesel buses and trolleybuses; however, the higher cost that you cite of the latter may, I believe, be attributable to the lack of économes of scale.  Procurements of trolleybuses are relatively small and infrequent.

Notwithstanding all of the economic and societal forces militating against them, I share your hope that trolleybuses will enjoy another day in the sun.  At the same time, I think that you are wise to refrain from holding your breath.

Cheers,

Mark

Sent from my TCL ION V

On May 19, 2025 5:06 PM, tressteleg1 <tress...@gmail.com> wrote:

As much as I would like to see trolley bus wires all over the place, I believe that, with very few exceptions, (and the attached chart did give very few new locations over quite a few years) this is not going to happen largely because of the apparent efficiency of battery powered buses and public objecting to “ugly overhead wires“ being installed in their city streets. 

The inclusion of Nancy in France in the list is very misleading. About 25 years ago, the city opted for guided electric buses which in fact used twin overhead wires the same as a trolley bus. Apparently they had too many problems including “derailments“ so they they simply abandoned the guidance system and now use normal steered trolley buses using the same overhead wires as the guided buses used to use. Their guidance system in fact was just a single rail along the middle of their roadway. More details:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolleybuses_in_Nancy

In the past, some operators with fairly small trolley bus systems decided that it was not worth the bother for various reasons including the need to have an overhead wire repair and maintenance team on duty, or near at hand, during all hours of trolley bus operation.

 Although trolley buses seem somewhat simpler vehicles than diesel buses, I get the impression that they are much more expensive to purchase but I can’t imagine why.

I would like to be proven wrong on all of this, but I am not holding my breath till it happens.

Cheers,

Richard

On 19 May 2025, at 11:38 am, Phila. Street Railway <trolley...@hotmail.com> wrote:



Esteemed Recipient:

A highly interesting article has recently appeared on CleanTechnica, a website devoted to analyzing the cleantech industry:  https://cleantechnica.com/2025/05/14/why-modern-cities-are-embracing-trolleybuses-again/.  This article is clearly worthy of your attention.  As its title suggests, it discusses the global resurgence of the trolleybus currently underway.  Unfortunately, we cannot help but notice that this resurgence is taking place largely outside of the United States.

Among the few exceptions to the woeful lack of progress in this country is SEPTA's recently issued Request for Proposal No. 25-00098-AMJP – 40-Foot Low Floor Trackless Trolley Buses.  These trolleybuses (or trackless trolleys as they are generally known here) will--if they ultimately materialize--comprise the next generation of such vehicles to operate on Routes 59, 66, and 75.  In these times, however, of enormous financial uncertainty, let's keep our fingers crossed!

Cordially,

Mark D. Sanders

Mark D. Sanders, President 

PHILADELPHIA STREET RAILWAY 

            HISTORICAL SOCIETY 

Post Office Box 58985

Philadelphia, Pa.  19102-8985

(215) 782-8826

trolley...@hotmail.com

On 25 May 2025, at 4:42 pm, 'Tony Galloway' via TramsDownUnder <tramsdo...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

My boy Blair did his Dissertation for his Batchelor of City Planning on bus electrification.

It’s pretty comprehensive :

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/609C5496-FB3E-497C-BFCA-028CF23927E1%40aapt.net.au.

<PLAN4005 Thesis Dissertation - BLAIR GALLOWAY Z5193286.pdf>

[Geoffrey Hansen]

Could the buses recharge at stops like the Brisbane Metro buses and the Newcastle Light Rail? 

Regards Geoffrey 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/208CEE8F-B6D4-402F-8628-A672B234CB9A%40yahoo.com.au.

[espee8800]

And that would make for a system that would not be popular with passengers who want to get somewhere. I found the short Newcastle system not much faster than walking.

Virus-free.www.avg.com

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAADExCexsNzk6gZ2V7-aOVgTLx92nFopG8p5WbkWXjJjzbqPMw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Richard Youl]

I consider capacitors to be the most hopeless wire-free option. Having to stop for around 35 seconds at every stop in Newcastle when passenger requirements are very often around 10 seconds is unacceptable.

I will try to find out how often the battery buses running from the Broadbeach tram terminus to the airport need recharging. The distance one way is about 18 km. 

As for the Brisbane ‘Metro’ bus, in the early stages of public operation they were charging for a few minutes at the university then went to the depot at the south end for another boost. The entire network of about 3 routes is still to be operational and I suspect that with experience charging could well become less frequent. 

Richard

On 25 May 2025, at 6:29 pm, espee8800 <espe...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/CAGmZ6yMRPxLz2jXCUrm_waEikM9JF5fv-A09H8znt2tjFNjmFg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Geoff Olsen]

Batteries/capacitors in electric vehicles at best are around 70/75% efficient due to the losses incurred during charge and discharge. Burst charging like Newcastle makes it even worse. It could also be argued that the impressive piece of infrastructure required at the charging point makes the “Ugly overhead wires” argument look a little foolish.

 

The most energy efficient way of powering transport with electricity is to use rail vehicles with overhead wiring. Mind you I understand that “Trendy” will always beat sound engineering principles.

 

One of the colourful identities at Loftus has pointed out that we must take into account the deaths caused by visual pollution.

 

Geoff O.

[Brent Efford]

The proof of the pudding is in the eating! 

I have no inside knowledge of the operations of the two bus companies operating electric buses in Wellington. But I do recall questioning the driver of a double-deck #1 route bus  in the hills above Johnsonville, at the end of a journey from the waterfront at Island Bay, where there is a charger (which is not needed for every journey), how much of the initial charge had been used. Her reply was 12.5%. And that is one of the most demanding uphill runs – clearly a single charge would be enough for a normal morning or afternoon shift, as I explain below. My observation is that diesels are as likely as electrics to be off the road during inter-peak times.

I spend about an hour a day reading a flood of internet material from overseas about the rail, transit and electric vehicle industries. Trolleybuses are mentioned perhaps twice a year!

Dispassionately (i.e. not as far as many enthusiasts are concerned) the idea that manually-steered rubber-tyred vehicles designed for go-anywhere availability should be tied to a fixed-route infrastructure is an absurdity, only tolerable if it is the only means of achieving electrification. Even at the height of trolleybus adoption after WW2, trolleybuses only served  few routes in the cities where they were used at all. Dunedin was the only NZ city where trolleys briefly outnumbered diesels (because they built too many trolleys which were then under-used). I don’t think there were any Aus cities where trolleys dominated. Maybe in Tasmania, briefly. 

In contrast, all NZ cities operating buses expect to be 100% electric by 2035. Palmerston North is already there. That would be unthinkable if wire networks were required.

When on-board energy storage is developed enough to be a practical alternative (and actually offers better performance) then the case for erecting a wire network, or even retaining an existing network, becomes thin indeed. When up to 2017 we (and I was a spokesperson) urged the retention of the trolleys we did so in ignorance of how far battery electric traction had developed – and it has developed more since, too. Plus we had some justification insofar as it took about three years for the BEBs to start arriving, and the trolleys were initially replaced by second-hand Auckland diesels.

For rail vehicles the situation may be somewhat different, but it is notable that the low voltage DC networks used for trams and many suburban railways do have big technical problems with unstable voltage, the need for many substations, etc. Which is why onboard battery storage is being fitted to the new Melbourne G class trams, and why the recent Sydney Metro, Auckland City Rail Link, Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth suburban systems are all 25 kV AC. (And why Wellington’s trolleybuses were poor performers, needed a big substation renewal, and couldn’t even have air conditioning!)

Brent Efford 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/25B4D22F-2782-47CA-AA65-C157E9336A53%40yahoo.com.au.

[TP]

Except for having to cart around the weight of their batteries, battery buses are now fine for most typical operational scenarios, only needing overnight charging and not often carrying capacity loads. But they have their limitations for high-demand, peakish services. I have no doubt that they're totally suitable for the pretty small public transport patronage of NZ cities. That's not the case in Europe, which is the polar opposite. It's particularly tough for cities where there is high patronage, but they have no trams and/or metros to do the heavy lifting, thus placing undue demand on their bus systems. We have situations like that in Australia where, for example, the bus services replacing former tram routes are now feeling the strain of demand that is pushing beyond the capacity of buses.

The 333 bus to Bondi, which replaced a tram route, for example, is serviced entirely by artics running as frequently as every 2 to 3 minutes. (They move about 2,000 people per hour per direction, compared to about 7,000 on the old tram service.) That's not going to be replaced by battery buses any time soon and they're still scratching their heads for a solution, given the need to ultimately electrify the system and the almost zero prospect of returning trams, let alone rail, to that corridor. They may find a solution in quicker pantograph charging at depots, which Custom Denning has introduced on their 12 metre buses and can also be used on artics. But, yes, it would mean that buses have to be cycled out of service during the day to charge, which means you need more buses in the fleet, as you see in Blair's paper. 

With the exception of Brisbane "Metro", which has a dedicated enclosed busway, remote "flash" charging isn't generally likely to be adopted in Australia because of electricity supply and security issues. So battery buses will always be dependent on back-to-depot, more frequently for high-capacity buses (artics and deckers). On a fixed route, does this really represent "progress" over old trolleybuses that are basically available 24/7/365 except for routine minor servicing and have no restriction on their capacity?

Tony P

[Matthew Geier]

On 26/5/25 10:05, 'TP' via TramsDownUnder wrote:
>
> With the exception of Brisbane "Metro", which has a dedicated enclosed
> busway, remote "flash" charging isn't generally likely to be adopted
> in Australia because of electricity supply and security issues. So
> battery buses will always be dependent on back-to-depot, more
> frequently for high-capacity buses (artics and deckers). On a fixed
> route, does this really represent "progress" over old trolleybuses
> that are basically available 24/7/365 except for routine minor
> servicing and have no restriction on their capacity?
>

'flash' charging is very hard on the batteries - and a route bus has a
very hard life to start with. If you can organise to avoid over use of
super high current charging, the batteries will last a lot longer. (And
the electricity supplier will be happier too - they really don't like
'lumpy' loads.

At any rate, I gather diesel buses get an engine swap every 5 years or
so anyway, with the old engine being stripped down and rebuilt pretty
much from scratch, the intense duty cycle is hard on engines too. A
battery swap is probably quicker to do than an engine swap.  Of course
overhauling diesel engines is a well understood and optimised process
for any bus operator.

And while the process not there yet, vehicle batteries CAN be recycled -
most of the exotic metals and chemicals used, can be recovered and
reformed to make new batteries - the material is not consumed over the
life of the battery, it changes form to be less effective, the material
can be recovered and reformed in components. (But the local bus depot
won't be doing that in the back workshop unlike engine rebuilds -
battery recycling is an industrial process).

Short sections of overhead over core routes would enable buses to have
lighter batteries and less down time, but there is a general public fear
and loathing of overhead of any sort and no amount of talk about how
much more efficient over head will make the system will overcome that
public reaction to 'ugly overhead wires'.

A bus making toxic (but invisible) exhaust emissions will be more
publicly acceptable that a trolley bus that requires visually intrusive
overhead. Logic and technical superiority have nothing to do with it.

[Brent Efford]

Not wishing to unduly extend this conversation – in which transitory technical issues and acceptable trade-offs are being portrayed as catastrophic and permanent show-stoppers – I would just note that battery recycling is a fast-developing component of the electric vehicle industry. Different, easier, and cheaper, battery chemistries are being developed, too. Subscribe to the Electrive newsletter (https://www.electrive.com/) if you are interested in EV developments on a day to day basis.

Brent Efford

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "TramsDownUnder" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/tramsdownunder/X_9HHesz51A/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to tramsdownunde...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/6c31bb89-6c3f-4314-85a0-441913197c73%40sleeper.apana.org.au.

[David Batho]

😂