Transitioning to transit

More Canadians are taking transit. How many more? According to the Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA), about 14 per cent more. Over the five years from 2004 to 2008, the number of regular service rides increased to 1.83 billion per year from 1.6 billion. That’s about five million Canadians per day riding transit. The increase from 2007 to 2008 alone was 63.8 million rides. That’s about 175,000 Canadians per day.

Now, the cynics will say this increase has been fuelled by the cost of downtown parking in Canada’s major cities, or even a lack of downtown parking in Canada’s major cities.

But we like to think it’s about concern for the environment. One bus full of people is the equivalent of taking 45 cars off the road. Consider this – if your round-trip commute is 32 kilometres, and you decide to take the bus every day and leave your car at home, you’d reduce of CO₂ emissions by 2.8 tonnes per year. This means the 45 cars replaced by a bus would represent a reduction of about 126 tonnes. And that’s only 45 cars.

But wait, there’s more

Today’s transit technology is a lot cleaner than the smoke-belching buses of yesteryear. According to the CUTA, clean diesel technology, a combination of more efficient fuel injection, particulate filters and catalytic converters used in conjunction with ultra low-sulphur diesel fuel, has reduced exhaust particulate matter 90 per cent since 1993. Ultra low sulphur diesel fuel has less than 15 parts per million sulphur.

Another innovation is biodiesel, fuel produced from oilseeds, vegetables or animal fat. It’s not really a new concept. Rudolf Diesel had vegetable oil in mind as a fuel when he invented the diesel engine in the 1890s. But for most of the engine’s history, it’s been run on petroleum-based fuels. Biodiesel can be blended with conventional diesel without major modifications. Common blends are B5 (five per cent biodiesel and 95 per cent conventional diesel) an B20 (20 per cent biodiesel and 80 per cent conventional diesel). Saskatoon Transit reported a 7.2 per cent reduction in GHGs using B5 with a canola-based biodiesel additive.

Perhaps the biggest boost to clean transit is the hybrid bus. Like hybrid cars, hybrid buses have two power sources: an internal combustion engine (usually diesel) and an electric motor that runs off batteries recharged by the diesel engine and regenerative braking. The electric motor gets the bus moving, and once underway, the diesel engine kicks in. At top speed, only the diesel provides power. The advantages of hybrid buses include about 30 per cent less fuel consumption and correspondingly fewer emissions.

Bus fleets in most major Canadian cities are a mix of clean diesel, biodiesel and hybrid buses and any remaining conventional gasoline or diesel buses are being replaced with their cleaner cousins.

So for a two-pronged assault on emissions, leave the car at home and take the bus.

Funding for green diesel research

You’ve seen the commercials, and heard the popular wisdom – hybrid cars are hip now, and a cornerstone of the future.  Soon, all cars will be hybrids – right?

If that’s the case, why is Ming Zheng focusing on diesel engines? With some help – namely, a $1.4 million grant – from the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the University of Windsor researcher wants to find a way to increase the fuel efficiency of diesel – while decreasing its emissions.

Zheng believes biofuels and biodiesels derived from plant and animal sources are the way of the future. He wants to free us from relying on fossil fuels altogether.  Hybrids still require some gasoline; biodiesel engines would not.  Zheng figures diesel-based hybrids may even trump them all.

Currently, however, the university is using this $1.4 million grant primarily to focus on ways to make conventional diesel burn cleaner. It’s already a more energy-efficient option; diesel’s big advantage is fuel efficiency.

However, as demand increases, so does price.  This was demonstrated in April 2008, when in some places diesel prices topped that of gasoline.  This impacted shipping costs worldwide, and drove up the prices consumers paid for imported goods.

That may have been more than just an anomaly.  But reports show that demand for diesel has been experiencing much more growth than comparable demand than gasoline.  It’s a global phenomenon, but particularly in Europe, where diesel-running cars are incredibly popular.

Perhaps Zheng, telling us to jump on the diesel bandwagon, has the right idea.

Solving the infrastructure problem

The future is electric. Or at least many believe it is minus the one glaring problem facing electric vehicles: infrastructure.

More and more companies are building electric cars. Nissan has released a preview of their as-yet unnamed model, one based on their Versa in appearance. But on the inside, it’s all about the battery, baby.

Nissan also has electric models of their Cube. While neither model is available to consumers just yet, product planner Mark Perry says “This is not a test or demonstration…we’re ready for mass production.” They plan on having the car available in 2012. Hopefully, in that three-year gap, the infrastructure needed will be built. It would be a shame to have electric cars driving around with nowhere to plug them in, or for no one to buy them because there is no infrastructure.

Luckily, some universities are looking for solutions.

In Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology brought in a UK company to install 150 Elektrobay charging stations in September. All Elektromotive’s charging bays are allocated to the 150 EV car fleet for staff and students to use around the campus. A feasibility test, so to speak, on a small scale.

Closer to home, electrical engineers at the University of Calgary are looking at plug-in hybrids to determine the feasibility of storing electricity directly from the power grid. They hope to develop a smart-charging system that would specifically make use of energy generated from wind power.

Nissan wants to help too; and why wouldn’t they? The Renault-Nissan Alliance is signing deals left and right to set up charging networks all over the world. Because they’re smart enough to know convenience is key to keeping customers happy.

Fuelling irony and the cost of knowledge

Consider the irony of rising fuel costs making research to distant locations like Antarctica more expensive.

Climate change recently offered a resounding reminder of its presence when a gigantic, four-square-kilometre arctic shelf broke away in the Canadian North. It seems cruelly poetic, then, that missions to study the effects of climate changes largely brought about by our use of greenhouse gas-emitting fossil fuels require the same fuels to make their trips. It’s a catch-22 that draws out one of the central dilemmas of any climate change argument, namely that no matter what we do, whether it’s researching melting polar shelves or walking to the corner store for milk, our activities have measurable effects on our environment.

The rising cost of fuel coupled with the increased price of doing business also demonstrates that if there’s any recurring theme in energy and climate change it’s of unintended consequences (or, sometimes, benefits). From biofuels increasing the price of food to kidney stones as a result of warmer climates, the unpredictability of climate and business makes for a frustrating combination.

It’s a complex, interconnected system of energy, costs and benefits, but if we’re going to be analyzing it any further we’d better hope the answers aren’t too far away. We can’t afford the trip.

Do they make hybrid tanks yet?’

As reported by the LA Times, while American troops in Iraq fight over terrain that covers enormous deposits of oil, fuel prices are ratcheting up the costs of waging war.

It’s no secret that modern war machines require enormous volumes of fuel, with patrols of both ground and air vehicles meaning that no military remains stationary for long. And if the idea of cutting back your own fuel use seems intimidating, just imagine the difficulties involved in regulating the fuel use of thousands of vehicles, each with fuel economies that would make the most profligate Humvee driver blush.

The M1 Abrams Battle Tank, one of the tank models currently deployed in Iraq, consumes about 300 gallons of fuel an hour. And an F/A-18 Hornet, can carry about 3,000 kg of fuel, which, made from garbage or not, means this is one thirsty bird.

With the monthly costs of the US’s current wars at about $12.1 billion a month, and fuel costs more than three times 2003 levels, this is one fuel crisis with enough bite to make a conservationist of even the most strident hawks. After all, it’s awfully hard to carpool in a cockpit.