Free Public Transport and Exchangeable Batteries for Container Ships
This edition covers some positive developments around a month-long free public transport in Tasmania and exchangeable batteries for container ships to combat fossil fuel dependence
Free public transport trial in Tasmania
This week, the Tasmanian state-owned public transport operator announced a month-long trial making public transport trips free. Officially, this trial is in response to high fuel prices which have risen from AU$ 1.42/litre in March 2021 to AU$ 2.20/litre in March 2022. Apart from saving regular commuters some dollars, the trial may have some additional positive impacts. Interestingly, this trial is one of the few initiatives that directly addresses fossil fuel dependence without needing to completely overhaul the bus fleet. The key to this trial being a worthwhile lesson as opposed to dishing out money is measurement – ridership changes, socio-economic indicators, traffic counter data – all the information Government already collects should be analysed.
Free public transport generally has two main effects: generation and substitution. The generation effect entails additional trips by public transport, increasing in effect social mobility. The substitution effect entails replacing other means of transport with public transport. Research on free public transport trials suggests that the two effects can result in quite significant public transport ridership increases from 20-30% in Mercer, New Jersey (US), up to 10-fold increase in Hasselt (Belgium) and 13-fold increase in Templin (Germany). Most of these major benefits are recorded in relatively smaller towns.
Tallinn’s (Estonia), a city of roughly 425,000 inhabitants, made its public transport free in 2013. The trial led to a 3.5% increase in public transport ridership on average, with some areas, especially the most populous and with relatively higher unemployment, experiencing a 10% increase. Typically, free public transport measures lead to an increase in ridership, but they can provide more benefits that can offset the increased system costs.
Peak spreading, social cohesion, health benefits, and emission reductions are some of the other benefits that free public transport can generate. Peak spreading, the adjustment of departure time, can be particularly beneficial for cities struggling with congestion - such as Hobart, Tasmania’s capital. Social cohesion can also be improved as the bus stop becomes a place to meet people and friends – a challenging proposition after 2 years of ‘social distancing’, yet a potential solution to its effects. There are also potential health benefits. The London (U.K.) concessionary scheme for elderly had an impact on reducing obesity. Finally, every car taken off the road means less fuel consumption. Bus fuel consumption is not particularly affected by payload (passengers are much lighter than general cargoes). Hence, the end result is fewer per capita emissions.
Free public transport can be an expensive measure, especially as demand increases and more services are introduced. It’s worth noting, however, that most public transport services are already heavily subsidised. The Tasmanian Government estimates the month-long trial will cost AU$ 2 million but the Government already provides more than AU$ 100 million in subsidies to Metro Tasmania. In the Tallinn example, ticket sales accounted for 10% of operating revenue in the first place.
Ultimately, the reason why most public transport is publicly owned or heavily subsidised is because not all lines will make economic sense. From a purely economic perspective, only several lines should be funded and other dropped. However, public transport provides other benefits for cities, regions, and society as a whole, including social mobility, welfare and accessibility. It is Government’s role to analyse these impacts holistically and decide if the benefits are worth the costs for the state (e.g. what’s the tax-revenue of an unemployed person’s new job is he or she is now able to reach a new workplace using free public transport?).
This initiative is good news in my book because it is one of the few actions that preserve or enhance social welfare and mobility without increased end-user cost, a rare sight indeed!
Exchangeable Batteries for Container Ships
Exchangeable batteries for container ships are an idea that may help the shipping sector transition away from fossil fuels and towards carbon neutrality. The concept is relatively straightforward: several 2 MWh battery pack fitted into 20ft half-height containers loaded onto container ship in a similar fashion to a regular container. This modular container-based design means that a ship can load just the required batteries to make it to the next port, thus negating the weight challenges that massive battery packs have on ships. Depleted batteries can be left in destination ports for charging when electricity is abundant or cheap and replaced with charged batteries for the next leg of the ship’s journey.
Typically, battery power for ships in not the best idea, mostly because of battery charging times. It takes several hours to charge a battery on an electric vehicle with a 80kWh charging battery packs powering a 10,000 kW engine would take much more time. However, this swappable battery concept may be a move in the right direction. By exchanging depleted batteries with charged ones in ports, charging times become largely irrelevant if enough batteries are available.
This concept is particularly interesting because some ships already operate diesel-electric engines where diesel generators power an electric motor which in turn powers a ship’s driveshaft. For such ships, adding batteries in the system would entail few changes and would still afford the redundancy of maintaining a diesel engine on-board. Currently, the swappable battery idea is pitched for feeder ships (smaller container ships travelling from main ports – Rotterdam, Shanghai, Singapore etc. – to smaller ports) rather than the ultra large container ships, most likely because smaller ships require smaller battery packs and travel along shorelines, not in the middle of the ocean.
However, there are some drawbacks of this concept: the battery production capacity required and fire risks.
These batteries are massive. The battery production capacity required to manufacture one ship battery is equivalent to 25 electric vehicles. In a world where every device, car or truck is expected to be electric, all by 2030 and with battery production capacity already stretched, finding battery production capacity to electrify ships as well will be challenging.
One of the worst fears of seamen is fire. Apparently being surrounded by water during a fire is not as comforting as one may think. Batteries tend to burn quite intensely, and their fire is difficult if not impossible to extinguish. Because of this, batteries are classified as dangerous goods and have special stowage conditions on-board container ships which require some dangerous goods to be dispersed. Towing the batteries on a barge may work, until ships encounter rough seas when the barge can become either a giant whip or just detached. Imagine container ships after a storm scouring the ocean, trying to find their long-lost battery pack from last-night’s storm.
In other news
Supply Chain Impacts of Sanctions on Russia
In light of U.S. President Biden’s comments about impending food shortages, this article questions the effectiveness of the sanctions imposed by the Western world on Russia. Although many economic sanctions have no doubt hit the Russian economy, its supply chains for key materials, including food, energy products and manufacturing goods appear largely undisturbed, especially because large manufacturing centres like China and India seem to have no issues in trading with Russia.
EU Deal for US LNG
The E.U. has signed deals with the U.S. and other countries to import an additional 15 billion cubic metres (bcm) of natural gas in an effort to reduce its dependence on Russian gas imports. I covered Europe’s dependency on Russian natural gas imports in last week. The main concern remains the storage and regasification capacity. The additional 15 bcm will require around 12 million tonnes per annum (MTPA) in storage capacity, which is likely the maximum available across European LNG terminals. Great low hanging fruit, the next moves will be more challenging.
Climate Change and CO2, a not so Direct Relationship?
The climate change discussion is almost exclusively focused on the role of CO2 in causing global warming and extreme events. This research paper questions the link between CO2 and climate change arguing over the importance that the sun’s warmth cycles and the amount of water vapors in the atmosphere have. Whether CO2 is the main driver for climate change, or the correlation is spurious (intermediated) by water vapors, the main problem with climate change is the lack of debate. The “science” is settled. However, science without debate isn’t science, it’s propaganda.
A.I. Promise and Reality
How many times have you heard this phrase “…A.I., ML, IoT and Blockchain will revolutionise <insert industry sector here>”.