> First, you can’t go faster than cars or avoid traffic (in practice),
that is not true, in cities the car speed is usually limited to 50, a lot of trams go 70 on certain sections. Also "or avoid traffic" a lot of trams go completely separetely from the traffic.
> because modern suspension beats aging fixed rail (it tends to be shaky, again unlike trains).
Depends on the city, but a lot of cities that I visited have a very modern trams that are not shaky (helsinky, zurich, bratislava, riga, edinburgh, bordeaux...). Also the technology of the rail building has changed and the new lines are meant to be quiter and more stable
> Trams are electric? Given how buses are basically commodity in our oil-centric world, I can only imagine how trams look at the balance sheet in comparison
> No idea what you mean by this but I would assume that the cost of running things is lower
I meant that light rail must be much more expensive, but now I’m not so sure. I hadn’t considered you can have more passengers per driver and if labor is dominating cost then yeah trams can be cheaper!
> a lot of cities that I visited […]
Have you accounted for the reliability of these networks? In my experience trams (or rather tracks and electrical- and signal systems) often break down when there’s snow in the winter, leaves in the fall or sun-bending in the summer, which may not be noticeable on visits. That can also increase costs, since the backup is usually buses and you need a task force who can go fix problems.
Maybe I’ve been unlucky, but my experiences relying on them everyday (in San Francisco and Gothenburg) have been disappointing.. it feels like those networks have been kept alive for nostalgic reasons.
> I meant that light rail must be much more expensive, but now I’m not so sure. I hadn’t considered you can have more passengers per driver and if labor is dominating cost then yeah trams can be cheaper!
Well labor and gas/electricity. I think in most places in EU the electricity will win over gas easily.
> often break down when there’s snow in the winter, leaves in the fall or sun-bending in the summer, which may not be noticeable on visits.
Not an issue in Prague where I have experienced them the most. You can clean the tracks in similar way that you would clean the road, so the buses would not have much of an advantage..
> it feels like those networks have been kept alive for nostalgic reasons.
i have not been there, so maybe its true tho Gothenburg seems to be investing into the network and buying new trams. So are a lot of other cities.
that is not true, in cities the car speed is usually limited to 50, a lot of trams go 70 on certain sections. Also "or avoid traffic" a lot of trams go completely separetely from the traffic.
> because modern suspension beats aging fixed rail (it tends to be shaky, again unlike trains).
Depends on the city, but a lot of cities that I visited have a very modern trams that are not shaky (helsinky, zurich, bratislava, riga, edinburgh, bordeaux...). Also the technology of the rail building has changed and the new lines are meant to be quiter and more stable
> Trams are electric? Given how buses are basically commodity in our oil-centric world, I can only imagine how trams look at the balance sheet in comparison
No idea what you mean by this but I would assume that the cost of running things is lower, the c02 profile is for sure https://ourworldindata.org/travel-carbon-footprint