Converting Washington, D.C. to Electric Buses

A Collaborative Presentation by:

Kiwanis Hardine, Micah Orsinger, Jared Adams, and Philip Rodda

In the nation’s capital, Washington, D.C., take the current fleet of 1,500 diesel buses, decommission them, and purchase 1,500 electric powered buses.

The initial cost of buses and recharging infrastructure is high

The cost/savings analysis proves that the buses and infrastructure will pay for themselves, given time

This is the smart decision for the city: to increase profits while also benefiting the environment

Our proposal

Spending now, Saving later

Electric buses cost more up front

Diesel engine buses cost more to maintain

The cost of diesel maintenance increases each year

The cost of electric motor maintenance stays low each year

If compared as an investment, it would be a no-brainer to invest in something now that will pay dividends in the future; fully-electric buses for public transportation in Washington, D.C.

Increasing Ridership

In May of 2014 alone, D.C. Metro’s buses gave rides to 11,766,849 people.

Diesel buses are out of service more than electric buses

By having each bus on the route even 1% more than the diesel buses, ridership would increase buy almost 1.5 million fares per year.

This increase would be gained while still using the same number of buses, therefore making each bus route more profitable than when it was serviced by a diesel bus.

Infrastructure for the Electric Bus Transition

The desire of this project is to remove Washington DC Metro bus system to an entirely alternative energy driven power source. While this idea is simple in concept in reality the application is quite complicated. This presentation won't delve into the intimate details, but will rather present an overview of the project from a macro perspective.

http://w3.siemens.com/topics/global/de/elektromobilitaet/PublishingImages/ladetechnik-

busse/pdf/ebus-hamburg-en.pdf

Energy Production “state” of Affairs

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/

Current energy production in the United States of

America is supplied largely by coal and natural gas.

The Washington Post found that coal supplied around

34% of the energy, while natural gas supplied 30%.

Alternative energy sources account for no more than

approximately 13% of our country's energy

consumption. The states surrounding Washington DC

show a similar deficit in alternative energy production.

Energy Consumption in the District of Columbia

The U.S. Energy Information Administration sites the state annual energy consumption at more than 175 trillion BTU's in 2014.

The state produced a minuscule .4 trillion BTUs.

There is a massive deficit in energy production versus consumption. The state consumes more than 425 times the amount of energy it produces.

Infrastructure and Alternative Energy Production

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/power-plants/

The District of Columbia has little in the way of resources.

There is little land that can be devoted to natural energy

projects such as wind harvesting. The city occupy's only

about 68 square miles.

The US Energy Information Administration identifies the

largest alternative energy production facility is as a solar

facility located on a building's roof. It produces a minuscule

2300 kilowatt hours of energy a year.

The state sees approximately half of the sunshine days that

strong solar cities in the US do.

Low wind harvesting potential.

Potomac River provides the cities only hydrodynamic

energy source.

Bus Acquisition

http://ebus.com/about-us/

This is a comparatively simple process with Ebus, a

leader in electric bus technology,as they provide

compelling bus options including:

-Retrofitting of existing buses

-Purchase of new buses

-Variety of bus models

Technologies provided:

-Lightweight composite construction

-Substantial fuel economy through weight reduction

-Lithium ion batteries option, creating the possibility

of all-day service without the need to recharge

-Standard lithium iron phosphate batteries providing

up to a claimed 125-mile range

The final infrastructure requirement would be the

acquisition and installation of charging stations:

-These can be placed throughout the route

-Ideally placed at route turn around

Charging buses at these takes just minutes

Provide the ability for buses to leave the terminal and

not return until evening

Stations require little, being limited too:

-Small concrete pad

-Adequate power source

-Appropriate real estate

As of April, 2016, The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) estimates that diesel transportation resulted in approximately 440 million metric tons of CO2 emissions.

One gallon of diesel fuel produces 22.38 pounds of CO2

http://www.tercenter.org

Washington DC currently has a fleet of 1500 buses used for public transportation. If every bus has a fuel capacity of 100 gallons of diesel, and uses one tank of gas a day, then each bus is producing 2238 pounds of carbon dioxide a day.

If 1500 buses are producing 2238 pounds of 𝐶𝑂2 a day, then Washington DC’s fleet is producing 3,357,000 pounds a day, and 1,221,948,000 pounds of carbon dioxide a year!

http://www.dentons.com

The average cost of a diesel bus is $450,000 while the average cost of an electric bus is $700,000. While the initial cost of an electric bus is much higher, the overall cost in the long run favors electric buses.

Washington DC’s fleet of buses, based off of current prices is approximately $675,000,000. To replace the entire fleet, it will cost approximately $1,050,000,000.

Estimating that a diesel bus burns one tank of gas a day, based off of the current $2.40 a gallon average price of diesel in the Eastern United States, DC’s fleet would cost $131,040,000 in fuel. Electric buses on the other hand, based off of the national average of eleven cents a day per kilowatt/hour (kWh) would only cost $36,360,000. That’s a savings per year of $94,680,00! Since the operating costs for the fleet would be lower, savings could carry over directly to the public with lower fare prices, enticing more people to ride the bus rather than drive their own vehicles, further reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

Using a baseline of $2.40 a gallon for diesel fuel and $0.11 a kWh for electricity, this chart represents the amount of money that would be spent in fuel costs. Diesel 100 reflects the 100-gallon capacity fuel tank in most buses, while 600 kWh represents the average battery capacity of the newer models of electric buses. Electric buses travel an average equivalent of 20 miles per gallon and the average charge will carry an entire day’s worth of passengers. A diesel bus’s average fuel consumption is four miles per gallon.

Diesel 100

Electrric 600 kWh

$0.00

$200,000,000.00

$400,000,000.00

$600,000,000.00

$800,000,000.00

$1,000,000,000.00

$1,200,000,000.00

$1,400,000,000.00

Cost/Day Cost/Year Cost/10 Years

Diesel/Electric Fuel Costs( B a s e d o f f o f W a s h in g t o n D C ' s Cu r r e n t F le e t o f 1 5 0 0 B u s e s )

Diesel 100 Electrric 600 kWh

$0.00

$200,000,000.00

$400,000,000.00

$600,000,000.00

$800,000,000.00

$1,000,000,000.00

$1,200,000,000.00

$1,400,000,000.00

Cost for 1500 Cost of Fuel Total Costsafter 10 Years

Difference

Diesel/Electric Total Cost Comparison( B a s e d o f f o f W a s h in g t o n D C ' s Cu r r e n t F le e t o f 1 5 0 0 B u s e s

Diesel 100 Electric

This chart is a comparison of total costs, including purchasing and fuel costs. At the end of a ten year span, and not taking maintenance costs in to consideration, replacing Washington DC’s fleet of diesel buses would save the city $225,039,000, while eliminating 12,219,480,000 pounds of carbon dioxide pollution from entering the Earth’s atmosphere.

Washington DC is the Nation’s capital and as such should lead by example, making renewable energy a priority in their public transportation system. Alternative energy in public transportation could be proven to be more than just a fad; rather it can be proven to be the next step in the evolution of mass transit. Not only will implementation of this proposal reduce costs to the city in the long run, savings that in turn can carry over and entice more people to utilize public transportation, but reduce pollution and eliminate a major source of carbon dioxide emissions.

There is be no denying that electric buses is a smarter choice than continuing with diesel buses.

Only based as a financial decision, it makes sense.

Saves D.C. money, while also making more per bus for the next 20-30 years.

Stops polluting the air, and sets the standard for the rest of the United States

In conclusion