Profiling Pioneers in
Alternative Fuels
We take a look at some districts that are going out of their way to go green By Ryan Gray and Stephane Babcock
project that Campbell said will cost about $180,000. “Now there are grants for fueling stations; if purchasing two buses
you get your money back,” he commented. “We’re hoping at least 75 percent of that will be covered with grants. Te school district is looking long-term, 10 years down the road, to realize cost savings.” With the grants, Campbell added that he is looking at a com-
plete 12-year payback on the buses, which will allow the district to keep them for a minimum of 15 years. Te normal life cycle for diesel has traditionally been about 12 to 18 years per bus. When it comes to maintenance, Campbell said there is little
NO ‘PAIN’ IN PROPANE FOR TEXAS SCHOOL DISTRICT Kirby Campbell is sold on propane. More than two years ago,
the transportation director at Leander Independent School District northwest of Austin, Texas, began overseeing the in- troduction of 11 school buses powered by the fuel derivative of natural gas. It was May of 2008, and the district began working with the Texas Railroad Commission, one of the nation’s leading propane advocates. While the state agency helped alleviate the incremental cost of the
new buses and connected Leander with key contacts in the propane infrastructure industry, the school district was so early on the scene of the propane evolution that grant funds had yet to be made available to help offset the capital costs of paying for the necessary fuel station. Many school districts point to the need for grant funds, or to
the lack of available money, as reasons for not going the alterna- tive fuels route. But that didn’t stop Leander ISD. “It was all fairly new, so we paid for that out of our own pock-
ets,” said Campbell. Te district began operating its 12th propane-powered Blue
Bird Vision Type C conventional at the start of the school year, and, this month, Leander was expected to add another 25. Te goal is to turn over the entire fleet of 214 school buses to pro- pane. Tis means Leander must upgrade its current 2,000-gallon propane tank to a 12,000-gallon variety to meet the demand, a
56 School Transportation News Magazine March 2011
data to go on beyond preventative maintenance because the bus- es are so new. Instead, the district is relying on the manufacturer to work out the kinks. While the district’s technicians have yet to encounter any major issues, even seeing less front brake wear, the big savings seem to be tied to oil. Leander’s maintenance program for the propane buses has added 2,000 miles on top of the normal 6,000-mile interval of diesel. Campbell also said the propane buses appear to be running cleaner on the synthetic oil, and oil analysis has also uncovered little if any metal debris. “Over the life of the bus that’s going to save us thousands of
dollars just in oil changes,” Campbell added. Ten there are improvements in fuel consumption, if not in
the fuel mileage numbers that were originally forecast. Te dis- trict has seen the propane buses turn in about 4.5 to 5 miles per gallon, down from the 7 to 7.5 miles per gallon of diesel, likely due to the hills in the area. “But the fuel cost is half of what we’re paying for diesel,” said
Campbell. “So we are seeing a cost savings there of anywhere from $793 to $1,200 per bus per year on fuel alone. Tat’s fine with us. We’re still saving money and have cleaner air. Propane has more power, and the drivers really like it.” If anything, Campbell added, propane “almost runs too good.”
He said the drivers need frequent reminders to keep their feet off the throttles because propane buses have been exhibiting more power than their diesel counterparts. “I think that affects the fuel mileage as well,” he said. “When you press on the gas it really moves.”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76