Citizens for Better Transit, longtime strong supporters of investment in quality public transit, charges that the study's conclusions are not comprehensive enough. A fair evaluation just cannot be made without something more complete and balanced, says spokesperson Kevin Brown.

He is exactly right. Despite the study's fixation on costs, the 57-page document fails to assess the value of the trolley infrastructure, with 140 kilometres of wire, 4,600 poles and eight power substations, as a capital asset. When Vancouver conducted a study into its trolley system, it placed a value of $184 million on its infrastructure and that value was a factor in the city's recent decision to purchase 228 new trolley buses.

The Edmonton study looks at expenditures for trolleys and diesels, expressed as a cost per kilometre, but this is only half the story. The cost per passenger and revenues earned by trolleys were not evaluated and they are necessary to compare the financial performance of the trolley system against the diesel system or the transit system as a whole.

Citizens for Better Transit also notes that the study's maintenance cost analysis compares operating 23 year old trolleys with a diesel fleet that is half brand new - hardly a fair measurement. And the report fails to examine life cycle costs of trolleys versus diesel buses.

The group argues there are too many future unknowns like oil prices to certain that abandoning trolleys is the correct course to follow. They say the existing system should be retained and theyre right.

Although their operations are less flexible than that of motor buses, trolley buses are much quieter and less polluting. They also operate better on hills, can require lower maintenance and are tend to be longer lasting than motor buses. Modern trolley buses have an auxiliary power unit (APU), which allows the buses to travel off-wire for several blocks and avoid anything blocking their normal route, such as an excavation in the street or a street fair. Modern trolleys are also low floor, enabling persons with mobility challenges to board and exit more easily.

The study contains no noise impact assessment and, for anyone living or working right next to a bus route, the higher noise generated by diesels is a significant factor. Diesel exhaust is known to be a strong carcinogen and a contributor to respiratory problems, heart disease and birth defects.

Diesel buses release their emissions in the streets, where they are not only inhaled by pedestrians and transit users, but also are drawn into nearby buildings through ventilation systems.

The Canadian Government states there is no safe level of exposure to particle emissions, and recommends avoiding particle exposure. The consultants' report says very little about in-street emissions, focussing instead on what it calls "area-wide" emissions. But the study does acknowledge that people waiting at diesel bus stops are exposed to particle emissions up to 40 times higher than the levels in ambient air.

The city is currently purchasing between 35 and 50 new diesel buses a year to replace 25-year-old GM models. Before the stringent diesel exhaust standards come into force in the 2008 model year, the city will have finished replacing most of the old fleet and that means Edmontonians won't see the 'ultra-clean' diesels in any large numbers until about 2028. Eighteen years is a long time to suffer dirty diesels on Edmonton streets on the promise it will get better.

The study claims diesel prices will "remain stable for the foreseeable future" but anybody who fills up their car at a fuel pump will know diesel prices fluctuate with world oil prices. For the past three years, city council has had to inject additional funds into the city budget to cover the rising costs of diesel fuel. Electricity prices can be negotiated on long-term contracts, where there is better stability.

Edmonton's Transportation Master Plan, adopted by Council in 1999, pledges that the impacts of transportation on the community will be reduced or mitigated. But replacing trolleys with diesels would actually increase environmental impact, adding noise and vehicle emissions to our streets.

The report states that trolley use is in a downward trend and cites Hamiltons and Torontos decisions to shut down their systems in 1992 and 1993. But the document neglects to mention that Toronto Transit Commission Chair Howard Moscoe later called the move a regrettable mistake.

North American cities, including Vancouver, Seattle, San Fransisco, Boston and Dayton, Ohio are expanding their trolley systems. Vancouver has just ordered 228 new wheelchair accessible electric trolleys from New Flyer Industries of Winnipeg. Neoplan USA is supplying 28 buses to Boston, while Maryland-based Electric Transit Inc. has recently provided trolleys for San Francisco and Dayton, Ohio.

When all the beans are counted and the city bases its decision on a complete and comprehensive cost and impact analysis, there's no good reason Edmonton cannot do the same. Trolleys are a rich and valuable part of Edmonton's past and they should be a rich and valuable part of its future. The ears, the lungs, the health and the wallets of citizens depend on it.

The issue goes before city council's Transportation and Public Works Committee on Tuesday, March 16th and public hearings may be held in April. If you feel strongly about trolley buses, I'd encourage you to speak out. Edmonton Transit seems to be on a misguided course to eliminate the cleanest and quietest buses from city streets.

Call or write your City Councillor or the Mayors Office; Contact the Citizens Action Centre at 496-8200, by fax at 496-8210 or by electronic mail at cacentre@edmonton.ca. For further information on how to speak to Council or for details on the scheduled meetings, call the City Clerks Office at 496-8178 or contact them by e-mail at: civic.agencies@edmonton.ca

If you'd like to offer your thoughts, please drop me an email at lawrenceherzog@hotmail.com

For information on reprints of previously published articles, check out my website at www.lawrenceherzog.com