Biking in Boston

[nobody]

Wow, I didn't realize how they were powered mattered so much to people.

First, I'm not making any guesses. I know how they work, I've worked with them.

If you open one of them up and remove the battery it will not work, no matter how sunny it is. When the equipment draws power it draws it from the battery, not from the solar feed. I guess we can argue semantics all day though.

I'm not sure where Jass got his 4 hours of sun a day information. It could be sunny for 16 hours a day everyday and the batteries would still eventually run down. And nobody who works with them considers the battery "the backup"

And Bixi stations can very easily be integrated into the grid, this was done with Bixi equipment in London for their system. Because they are on the grid they have nice big full color touch screen displays, they are really pretty sweet. It does have the downside of making them much more permanent structures and not as easily moved as the stations in Boston.

 

[Justin7]

^ So one of you is wrong. Fair enough.

Since you say you've worked with them: Are they connected to the grid or that the batteries are replaced every so often? If so, how often on average? How much do the batteries hold? How much does the average station draw? Thanks.

In general, most solar systems power a battery of some kind, no? It doesn't make sense to have something powered directly by the sun unless the thing only runs when it's sunny. My only point was that saying something isn't "solar-power" because the sun is powering a battery is nonsense.

 

[nobody]

The batteries are replaced every few weeks. They are then recharged fully by the operator and put back into use. I'm not sure about how much the batteries hold or the power draw from the stations, it's not really necessary to know those kinds of specs to know how to make them work properly. I do know the batteries produce around 13 volts after a full charge.

I see your point on the solar issue. And I still think it's just semantics.

How about we look at it this way. I'm sure that in London or Boston or Montreal where there are Bixi systems there is a test station sitting INSIDE a warehouse with no solar panels connected to it.

If you were standing next to it and someone asked you "how is that thing powered" would you answer "solar"? It's the same as every other station in the system, it gets its power from a battery. It just doesn't have it's battery life extending solar system plugged in to it.

Maybe they should call them "Battery Powered Solar Life Extending Stations"?

 

[Justin7]

If the thing is in a warehouse and not connected to a solar panel it not "the same as every other station in the system." The difference being that it is not solar powered, because... it is not solar powered. Hence, you know, different. This is sinking into absurdity.

If the batteries need to be replaced and charged by another energy source, I think "partially solar powered" is an apt and obvious description, though one lacking detail.

What I seem to be unable to get across is that it is not the presence of a battery that is important but where the energy stored in that battery originates.

 

[nobody]

"What I seem to be unable to get across is that it is not the presence of a battery that is important but where the energy stored in that battery originates. "

It originates from a battery charger that is plugged into a wall outlet.

And when the battery runs down (because the solar can't keep it charged) it gets plugged right back into that same battery charger that is plugged into the same wall outlet.

So should we are argue that they are on the grid because the batteries receive their initial charge (and their full recharges) from the grid?

"If the thing is in a warehouse and not connected to a solar panel it not "the same as every other station in the system." "

Mechanically it is no different whatsoever, there is no modifications made to the station in order to make it function without the solar panel plugged into it. So if it was sitting in the warehouse and it still had the solar panel plugged into it you would answer that it was solar powered? It would still be just as NOT solar powered as when it didn't have the panels plugged into it.

Absurdity! Yes! Who cares how they are powered, they have power, they work, they let you rent bikes.

There's got to be something more interesting about Hubway to talk about.

 

[Lurker]

My point earlier about solar is that it isn't practical in this region for anything other than small appliance or lighting applications, such as these stations, and that currently society has a green fetishism and an industry driven agenda which overlooks better, yet less sexy, sustainable energy solutions.

The the case of these stations, since the tiny PV panels only are capable of a life extending charge, I do not understand why a larger panel was not designed into the system as a partial shelter. Keeping the bikes and maybe the kiosk partially covered and out of the weather would seem desirable. As would an additional surface for signage or advertising.

A dual battery system where one is always in use while the other recharges could work quite well with the larger PV array.

Since these stations are typically only slightly larger than a bus shelter, what would be the big deal?

I also have to gripe about the design of the bikes lacking stand-lights (the lights have a built in capacitor to stay lit for four minutes at a stop per German/Dutch/Danish/Austrian/etc road regulations)and poor rear lighting. Other bike-share systems feature a decent rear carrier system with a larger tail light and integral stand-lighting. It boggles my mind whey these obvious safety and cargo features weren't accounted for. The battleship gray paint scheme is also quite lame compared to other cities. We couldn't have gotten an eye catching Prussian blue with redcoat red accents scheme or something?

 

[jass]

^ So one of you is wrong. Fair enough.

No, we're both right but hes arguing semantics.

I say its solar power.
He says no, its battery powered. The sun charges the battery.


But thats how most solar systems work.

If the stations were connected to a grid, theyd still have a battery because they need to operate 24/7. if the grid were to lose power, the locks would open and people would steal the bikes.

I also have to gripe about the design of the bikes lacking stand-lights (the lights have a built in capacitor to stay lit for four minutes at a stop per German/Dutch/Danish/Austrian/etc road regulations)and poor rear lighting. Other bike-share systems feature a decent rear carrier system with a larger tail light and integral stand-lighting. It boggles my mind whey these obvious safety and cargo features weren't accounted for. The battleship gray paint scheme is also quite lame compared to other cities. We couldn't have gotten an eye catching Prussian blue with redcoat red accents scheme or something?

I agree, the bixi lighting system is not ideal. Having the dynamo system supplemented with a battery that holds 1 minutes worth of charge, to keep the lights lit when stopped at signals is just plain obvious, and most other manufacturers do that.

The basket also sucks, should be a real basket, and not a "holder"

 

[nobody]

Lurker,
One of the biggest issues when trying to launch these systems is that a very large number of people consider the stations an eye sore. They are designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. Keeping the user and the bikes out of the rain is a minor convenience, they are about to get on a bike and ride through the rain anyway. Keeping the kiosk out of the weather is irrelevant as well, they are built to be outside. You don't see little covers over the electronic parking meters they have everywhere do you?

I'm not arguing that it would "be a big deal" to add covers. I'm just explaining to you the issues that come up and why the stations are as small as possible.

As far as the standing lights, they are available on the Bixi bikes. Some cities simply choose not to use them because of the extra expense The gray paint scheme is cheaper than a full color scheme like London or DC so that was probably a cost savings move as well.

Basket vs Holder is another one of those debates nobody will win. I think the basket on the Bcycle bikes is too heavy and it hinders the ride. It would be nice if they could keep the strength but manufacture it a bit lighter.

Others have ridden the bikes side by side and agree.


http://bikeportland.org/2011/09/06/bike-share-demo-puts-future-system-within-reach-58571
Quote from the article.

I rode both bikes and preferred the Bixi. The B-cycle was capable and worked fine, I just found the ride of the Bixi a bit more predictable and smooth. The B-cycle has a large front rack that not only makes the front end a bit twitchy/floppy (a few other test riders shared the same feeling), but it also inhibits the rider's view of the front wheel, which can be a bit strange at first.

--------------------

Jass, I have an idea for you. If you are ever out on the street in Boston and you see one of the maintenance people working on a station bet him that if he turns the station off you could remove a bike by force. I'm sure they be happy to take your cash.

The locks do not open when you cut the power. Where do you get your info?

 

[jass]

I actually prefer the JCdecaux (Paris, Velib) bike model best (not sure who the actual manufacturer is). From what I remember, it's not as heavy as the north american bikes, but offers a useable basket.

The clear channel model is hands down the worst one of the systems I have tried. I have not tried the chinese systems, so cant comment on the quality of their locally produced bikes.

The locks dont open like the charlie gates do (safety measure in the MBTAs case, for evacuations), but the locking mechanism stops working. A grid connected station would still need a battery.

Of course, things like the big bellys and the parking meters have batteries as well even though theyre "solar powered"

 

[nobody]

The locking mechanism stops working in that it can't open or close without power. You said "if the grid were to lose power, the locks would open and people would steal the bikes. "

That is absolutely false.

The locks would not open if power was lost on a gridded station just like they would not open when the power switch was flipped on a non-gridded station.

 

[JohnAKeith]

If you need me I'll be over at the Herald's message boards.

 

[Justin7]

No, we're both right but hes arguing semantics.

I say its solar power.
He says no, its battery powered. The sun charges the battery.

You said it takes 4 hours of sunlight a day to keep the charge of the battery. He says is the battery will often run down and need to recharged by plugging it in regardless of how much sunlight it sees each day.

It's one or the other.

He was arguing semantics with me, but not concerning this point.

 

[jass]

You said it takes 4 hours of sunlight a day to keep the charge of the battery. He says is the battery will often run down and need to recharged by plugging it in regardless of how much sunlight it sees each day.

It's one or the other.

He was arguing semantics with me, but not concerning this point.

Actually, it can be both.

4 hours of sunlight a day might let the station stay charged for, say, 2 weeks. 8 hours of sunshine might let it stay charged for 3 weeks.

Without solar, the battery would have to be replaced, for example, every 2 days.



nobody, if you work with Alta, will the 61 station installation actually get done this year before the system is closed for the winter? The map shows 57 stations installed.

Also, whats going on with the rebalancing?

As of 5:22pm, 15% of the stations have either no bikes or no docks open. Having more stations would help this problem, especially in the BU area where stations are too far apart.

 

[nobody]

Actually, it can be both.

4 hours of sunlight a day might let the station stay charged for, say, 2 weeks. 8 hours of sunshine might let it stay charged for 3 weeks.

Without solar, the battery would have to be replaced, for example, every 2 days.



nobody, if you work with Alta, will the 61 station installation actually get done this year before the system is closed for the winter? The map shows 57 stations installed.

Also, whats going on with the rebalancing?

As of 5:22pm, 15% of the stations have either no bikes or no docks open. Having more stations would help this problem, especially in the BU area where stations are too far apart.

Those numbers are not right in terms of the # of days the stations function, especially 2 days for a station without solar. But the idea is correct. In the end though, no amount of sun keeps them from not needing a new battery.

What makes you think Alta has any control over when the stations get installed? You should be asking the city that question. It would be extremely naive of you to think that the operator gets to place the stations at their discretion.

Having more stations would help rebalancing in any bike sharing system, everyone knows that. Once again you should be talking to the city, they buy the stations. You have to know that the city decides where they go based on all sorts of factors, most of them political.

Why on earth would Alta choose to put the stations where they are now? It's not a network built to be efficiently operated, it's build to allow the city to please as many people and sponsors as possible.

What would you consider good from a rebalancing standpoint in the middle of rush hour? Do you actually have any experience attempting to rebalance a system or is it just all theoretical?

 

[jass]

Those numbers are not right in terms of the # of days the stations function, especially 2 days for a station without solar. But the idea is correct. In the end though, no amount of sun keeps them from not needing a new battery.

What makes you think Alta has any control over when the stations get installed? You should be asking the city that question. It would be extremely naive of you to think that the operator gets to place the stations at their discretion.

Having more stations would help rebalancing in any bike sharing system, everyone knows that. Once again you should be talking to the city, they buy the stations. You have to know that the city decides where they go based on all sorts of factors, most of them political.

Why on earth would Alta choose to put the stations where they are now? It's not a network built to be efficiently operated, it's build to allow the city to please as many people and sponsors as possible.

What would you consider good from a rebalancing standpoint in the middle of rush hour? Do you actually have any experience attempting to rebalance a system or is it just all theoretical?

Yes, those numbers were completely made up examples, sorry if that wasnt clear.

Because Alta presented their station map plan to the city. It was Alta's job, not the city's, to find station locations. Obviously, the location selection is a rough area. IE: Kenmore square. The exact spot in Kenmore would be based off the stakeholders (who wants or doesnt want the station in front of their business). Isn't it Altas job to present the landowners/stakeholders with the benefits to having a station at their door? Alta should be doing the outreach. And if x location is having issues....why not "install" the station a block away while the details get worked out?

At least Alta has fixed one mistake they made in DC. In DC, their map had the stations as "coming soon".....for up to a year in some cases! Not having them on the map is a better call, because people wont sign up expecting "soon" to be "this week".

Yes, some of the locations (allston/brighton) arent efficient at all with the current deployment. Those were obviously chosen because of the Harvard and NB sponsorships. As I mentioned before, the 4 Harvard stations are useless without the corresponding cambridge stations.

Of course it is impossible to have a perfectly balanced network. But doesnt the contract come with a clause that a station cant be full/empty for more than x amount of time in every 8(12, 24?) hour period? I dont know what the final contract says about that. But 15% of stations being full or empty at a given moment means the system isnt perfect.

 

[Justin7]

Actually, it can be both.

4 hours of sunlight a day might let the station stay charged for, say, 2 weeks. 8 hours of sunshine might let it stay charged for 3 weeks.

Without solar, the battery would have to be replaced, for example, every 2 days.

Then why make the statement in the first place? Saying it takes 4 hours of sunlight to run the locks and interface is not the same as saying it takes 4 hours of sunlight to extend the battery life 33%. I give up.

I'm definitely with Lurker on this one. Why not simply use larger panels to avoid battery replacements? Even without the consideration of additional ad space, wouldn't this be more cost-efficient than paying to have someone come out and collect/recharge/replace the batteries every x days?

 

[jass]

Then why make the statement in the first place? Saying it takes 4 hours of sunlight to run the locks and interface is not the same as saying it takes 4 hours of sunlight to extend the battery life 33%. I give up.

I'm definitely with Lurker on this one. Why not simply use larger panels to avoid battery replacements? Even without the consideration of additional ad space, wouldn't this be more cost-efficient than paying to have someone come out and collect/recharge/replace the batteries every x days?

I said that because I didnt realize Bixi stations weren't as efficient as their competitors. I know Bixi lacks many of the user-end features other systems provide, but I didn't realize their power management was also less efficient.

And yes, Im with you. Especially for the longer stations, they should have the panel kiosk at both ends (like south station). Extra power, extra map, extra sponsorship place.

 

[whighlander]

I said that because I didnt realize Bixi stations weren't as efficient as their competitors. I know Bixi lacks many of the user-end features other systems provide, but I didn't realize their power management was also less efficient.

And yes, Im with you. Especially for the longer stations, they should have the panel kiosk at both ends (like south station). Extra power, extra map, extra sponsorship place.

Panels are expensive compared to batteries and apparently even the maintenance labor cost

But the key points are still - if you can make it work for 24 hours of presumably summer sun -- it would just barely work without the battery this time of the year and not at all in January

It's not magic its just simple trigonometry -- aka angles -- in these parts at noon (real noon (so called apparent noon) -- not what you see on the clock) mid summer the sun is 78 degrees above the southern horizon. At noon in early January the sun will be less than 25 degrees above the southern horizon. The output from the panel depends on the angle between the sun and the surface of the panel -- with perpendicular being the optimum. As the sun rises and sets this angle increases and decreases with its largest value at apparent noon. Beyond about 3 hours on either side of noon from September till April the angles get small enough that you can effectively fagitaboutit!

If you want a fully implemented calculation program -- try the following:
http://www.batterystuff.com/tutorial-solar-calculator.html

 

[jass]

The system will not be in place from late November to early spring. The dates depend on what kind of snow season we get.

So January sun isnt an issue for this particular installation.

 

[nobody]

Yes, those numbers were completely made up examples, sorry if that wasnt clear.

Because Alta presented their station map plan to the city. It was Alta's job, not the city's, to find station locations. Obviously, the location selection is a rough area. IE: Kenmore square. The exact spot in Kenmore would be based off the stakeholders (who wants or doesnt want the station in front of their business). Isn't it Altas job to present the landowners/stakeholders with the benefits to having a station at their door? Alta should be doing the outreach. And if x location is having issues....why not "install" the station a block away while the details get worked out?

At least Alta has fixed one mistake they made in DC. In DC, their map had the stations as "coming soon".....for up to a year in some cases! Not having them on the map is a better call, because people wont sign up expecting "soon" to be "this week".

Yes, some of the locations (allston/brighton) arent efficient at all with the current deployment. Those were obviously chosen because of the Harvard and NB sponsorships. As I mentioned before, the 4 Harvard stations are useless without the corresponding cambridge stations.

Of course it is impossible to have a perfectly balanced network. But doesnt the contract come with a clause that a station cant be full/empty for more than x amount of time in every 8(12, 24?) hour period? I dont know what the final contract says about that. But 15% of stations being full or empty at a given moment means the system isnt perfect.

Your idea of reality in a public/private partnership is just not right. You sound like someone who's read RFP's and never actually done the work to fulfill a contract.

" It was Alta's job, not the city's, to find station locations." Every bike sharing operator would LOVE to place the stations where they want them. In reality the city will tell the operator exactly where they want them and the operator will put them there. The operator can make recommendations til the cows come home, the city will decide final placements.

"Isn't it Altas job to present the landowners/stakeholders with the benefits to having a station at their door?"

Nope, not their job

"And if x location is having issues....why not "install" the station a block away while the details get worked out"

Money. City pays operator to launch the system which consists of 61 stations. If they choose to place 4 of the 61 in temporary locations the system is still fully "launched" because 61 stations have been installed. If at that point the city decides to move 4 stations to a new location they have to pay the operator to do so. The city cannot make the operator move stations without paying them unless there is some sort of public safety issue.

Do you know how the revenue for the system is divided? If you did you'd understand that the operator is being hurt by those stations not being on the ground.

Surely the contract comes with performance levels around rebalancing, maintenance and everything else you can think of. And anytime the operator fails to meet those they get penalized. So you can just assume that the operator is doing everything it has to in order to meet it's contractual requirements. We could debate whether that meets your personal standards all day, but in the end the operator is going to do what it has to do meet it's contract.