Based on the electric car transition, of course (which I guess would need renaming). Busses generally at the moment have no link to the oil/traffic congestion/road maintenance stuff you’ve set up, despite using exactly the same infrastructure (with the exception of bus lanes). Private bus companies and commuters would make decisions based on many same factors as motorists, but that isn’t reflected at all by the model atm.
2 Likes
This is done mostly for simplicity. We imply buses are generally not electrified, and that the best thing about promoting buses is that they reduce the quantity of cars. I’d be worried about overcomplexity if we started modelling the fuel type for buses as well as cars. I guess we should also model trucks and freight really… yikes.
1 Like
Iunno, buses in some ways seem easier to electrify than cars: You can give them way larger batteries.
At 100% car electrification, pretty much any transport method that traditionally runs on fossil fuels should be electric, other than airplanes, because they have a huge weight problem.
You don’t really have to model it separately. Just make it scale by the same modifier as regular cars. That’s close enough, imo. Although arguably they could probably reach that point faster, especially if government funded/mandated.
1 Like
Well, the model wouldn’t really increase in complexity to be honest. It’s a straightforward set of relationships that (I think) don’t really step out of line with the complexity of the rest of the model. The real problem is just that the ui doean’t accomodate these kinds of relationships.
1 Like
I do intend to add some UI to show you when an effect is scaled by another value. Once thats in, it might seem more sensible to fix this stuff.
3 Likes
Do all vehicles get electrified now?
3.3 Jiggawatts!