"e-Jeepney" - The electric powered jeepney

[OldSchoolHack]

Yung sa QC na ejeep libre sakay. Max nuon e 35 kph.

[ghosthunter]

Yung sa QC na ejeep libre sakay. Max nuon e 35 kph.

There is no such thing as "libre" or free. Someone else is paying for that "free" ride.

This is much like the current issue of the MRT fare.

[romski123]

http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquire...-of-e-vehicles

MMDA in favor of e-vehicles
By Miko Morelos
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:34:00 08/08/2010

Filed Under: Road Transport
MANILA, Philippines--Looking for a way to get around the number coding scheme of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA)?

Here’s one: Buy an electricity-powered vehicle.

MMDA Chair Francis Tolentino on Sunday said motorists using the environment-friendly vehicles would be exempted from the Unified Vehicular Volume Reduction Program (UVVRP) as he particularly called on bus owners and operators to shift from fuel-driven buses to those powered by electricity.

At the agency’s weekly radio program on dzBB, Tolentino said the move was in line with his vision of improving the quality of air in Metro Manila which is often covered in smog due to smoke-belching vehicles.

“It’s a way of enticing bus operators and owners to invest in environment-friendly vehicles,” the official said in Filipino, referring to the policy which is still being drafted.

“It’s a big investment, but nonetheless a good one,” he added.

He lamented that the air quality in the capital “was getting worse” every day and despite the agency’s campaign to arrest the worsening pollution through the apprehension of smoke-belching vehicles, more programs were needed to boost the MMDA’s efforts.

“One time, I saw students who coughed continuously with their condition getting worse every day,” Tolentino said. “If these are not monitored by their parents or teachers, their condition could develop into pulmonary and respiratory diseases that would be harder to treat.”

According to an electric vehicle manufacturer, a 40-seater electricity-powered bus costs around P1.5 million to P2 million depending on the speed and engine requirement.

Meanwhile, a classified advertisement posted on the Web showed that diesel or gasoline-powered buses retail from P2.5 million to P3 million.

Sean Gerard Villoria, president and chief executive officer of ElectricVehicle Solutions Inc., said that electric buses are still cheaper compared to those which run on fuel.

“It’s a feasible idea and the returns are huge because it needs less maintenance compared to fuel engines which has more parts,” he told the Inquirer in a phone interview, as he pointed out that fuel-powered buses have more parts like transmission and cooling systems which in turn require a lot of maintenance.

[OldSchoolHack]

There is no such thing as "libre" or free. Someone else is paying for that "free" ride.

This is much like the current issue of the MRT fare.

Siyempre walang libre sa mundo. But for an average commuter this comes as a FREE service. 7 pesos may not mean anything for someone who can buy the latest model car but for an average commuter it helps.

From 7am to around 8am FREE ejeep service is plying the route from the Quezon City Hall to Visayas. This is a pilot project by the local government there. In the afternoon the ejeep runs from Quezon City Hall to Trinoma.

This service is FREE. So far. Kaya libre. And if the local government there sticks to their word, additional ejeep services will be run these route. The operation is not free (siyempre. common sense and I wonder why I had to explain pa) but the ride fare is ZERO. You can take the ride without paying the 7 pesos.

It is better to see the LGUs spend for free rides to the public. Wag naman kayo masyadong conio.

[ghosthunter]

It is better to see the LGUs spend for free rides to the public. Wag naman kayo masyadong conio.

But for what end? Public money being used to benefit a few people. This is much like the problem with the fare for the MRT.

And is it financially sustainable in the long run? It has been calculated that running the e-jeep costs about the same as a regular jeepney over a period of 18 months.

[romski123]

http://www.topgear.com.ph/news/numbe...-electric-puvs

News

Number-coding exemption for electric PUVs?

11 Aug 2010

Printer-Friendly Version

The Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) is reportedly urging public utility vehicle operators to invest in electric-powered vehicles as an alternative to their fuel combustion-powered fleet.
The MMDA is even willing to exempt electric PUVs from the Unified Vehicular Volume Reduction Program (UVVRP) or number-coding scheme, the Philippine News Agency (PNA) reported.
“If we have this E-buses and E-cars as public transport, we are prepared to exempt them from the UVVRP,” MMDA chairman Francis Tolentino said in the PNA report.
Tolentino added that investing in electric vehicles is more cost-effective than importing second-hand petroleum-powered units from Japan and South Korea to serve as public utility vehicles. Besides costing more in maintenance, these vehicles only further pollute Metro Manila’s air.
"Green" vehicles currently running in the Philippines include electric jeepneys plying routes in the village of Salcedo and Legaspi in Makati City, and electric tricycles within the Fort Bonifacio Global City in Taguig. (Want to know how it’s like to drive an E-jeepney? Check out the Day In The Life article of Steven Yu in the August issue of Top Gear Philippines.)
Do you think more Filipinos would opt to buy electric or hybrid vehicles to help the environment if the government offers the number-coding exemption to private motorists? Share your thoughts through our comment box below.


Tags: number coding scheme, electric jeepney, electric vehicle, MMDA

[ghosthunter]

http://www.topgear.com.ph/news/numbe...-electric-puvs

Do you think more Filipinos would opt to buy electric or hybrid vehicles to help the environment if the government offers the number-coding exemption to private motorists? Share your thoughts through our comment box below.

The benefit of exemption from the coding scheme if you buy an electric or hybrid car is too small a benefit if someone was to purchase such a vehicle. And helping the environment is one of the least considerations for a new car buyer.

A new car buyer would be more interested in getting good fuel economy than helping the environment.

Current electric cars are both expensive and too limited in many ways, like driving range, speed and riding comfort. Without those, the only people switching to electric cars would be the eco-diehards and tinkerers.

As for hybrid cars, without government subsidy or support, hybrid cars will just be too expensive to purchase from the dealers.

[romski123]

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx...bCategoryId=89

Pushing for climate-change policies
A SPIRITED SOUL By Jeannie E. Javelosa (The Philippine Star) Updated August 15, 2010 12:00 AM Comments (0)

Red Constantino, executive director for ICSC in an ejeep.


Sharing a conversation with Red Constantino will take you from the main issues of the times to the vision of a utopian future of sustainability and all the possible steps in between. And this is why I always enjoy talking to him. Not only is he a visionary but a radical for the stand of change. But it’s a smart radical that knows that once one makes a choice, one needs to work out the nuts and bolts of grounding that vision of change — from creating policies, to collaborative partnerships, to community development… in other words, to do all it takes to make that vision practical workable and to see clear key result areas.

Red Constantino is the executive director of the Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities (ICSC), a non-profit organization working on sustainable energy solutions and fair climate policy.

He and his colleagues in the ICSC, all former Greenpeace members, are working on helping create green and sustainable cities that address issues of climate change (waste treatment plants, depot for electric vehicles, biodigester plants to name a few essentials) with seed money from the Stichting Doen. The Doen Foundation’s advocacy is funding environmentally relevant and entrepreneurial and commercially viable sustainability projects that can be replicated. To date, ICSC’s focus has been on the ejeep and waste treatment facilities. ICSC introduced the electric jeep to the country. Launched in 2007, the first units were made in China but within a year, the local industry association reacted positively. The Motor Vehicle Spare Parts Manufacturers of the Philippines made all the difference not only in assembling the ejeeps here but also spelt out the possibility for the long term success of the project as spare parts were now locally available and after sales service was answered. Makati City and Puerto Princesa in Palawan were the first cities who have adopted the ejeep; and are also both now looking at solutions for waste issues with ICSC.

ICSC’s next step was to help change policies: from creating routes, adding charging stations and looking towards expansion in Quezon City, San Juan, UP Diliman, Davao City and some cities in the Visayas. It’s a work in progress, Red tells me, as they are working slow but sure in trying to meet all the hurdles and challenges of making these solutions work to create more climate friendly cities.

The ICSC’s strategy is to act as catalysts to bring together various sectors in society to work on a “good idea.” What is clear to them is that focus is needed on policy work to promote adaptation activities against effects of climate change. The country will be hard hit as climate changes continue and there is a need to help in areas such as agriculture intervention for better farming methodologies so crops are spared, strategic urban planning to name a few.

Red talks about how there needs to be a clear country plan to bring in climate financing specific to adaptation. ICSC is intent on helping craft policy work with government in all levels to have clear steps to help the most vulnerable and impoverished Filipinos themselves (farmers, fisherfolks and urban poor women) who are already seeing great impact on climate changes in their lives. ICSC’s mission is to help government create a national climate action plan and help administer public finance at the soonest possible time to communities most vulnerable to increasingly severe climate change impacts.

Many donor countries offer funding for mitigation but not for adaptation. Adaptation strategies are often funded through loans and this is not the way for the country to go. He stresses that climate change will impact all aspects of our lives. We cannot just work on solutions reactively as what mitigation suggests, but rather, pro-actively create strategic plans for adaptation.

Red tells me of the failure of Copenhagen to deliver a fair, ambitious and binding deal on urgent mitigation and financing issues, and the possibilities of collapse of further international climate talks, which has left developing countries like the Philippines with little choice but to take local action. Meanwhile, government’s trench fighting and problem solving need to look at the existing skewed domestic actions towards wrong priorities with the sourcing (through loans), use (adaptation issues, a reactive process rather than pro-active planning which mitigation may allow us to do) and disbursement of foreign funding. It is crucial to take note of climate finance administration or all the money will just end up useless, or lost to corruption.

The ICSC, knowing that it is only government who can generate resources in a massive way, is actively working with Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile for the establishment of the National Survival Fund. This will help secure the long-term viability of Philippine development ambitions. It will democratize access to and create predictable, long-term finance streams for adaptation activities and climate-induced disaster preparedness programs. It will also prioritize areas in the country that require urgent adaptation support.

It is interesting to note that the Philippines is the only country in Southeast Asia with a dedicated agency on climate change. The Climate Change Commission, created last year, is chaired by the President and assisted by three commissioners. Perhaps because it is new, plus the change of government leadership, this Commission has not been maximized. Red Constantino concludes “that the powers and responsibilities of this important body should be expanded, not just to implement projects, but to include a climate knowledge hub and lead the setting of long-term, climate-resilient development agenda. It should also monitor the amount, mode and use of climate finance accessed from abroad and locally.”

[uls]

^^^

what a beautiful promotional article for the ejeepney

sounds like the ejeepney is the solution to climate change

if only diesel PUJs are actually replaced by ejeepneys

if it worked this way -- 100 ejeepneys put on the road = 100 diesel PUJs taken off the road -- then ejeepneys would have contributed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions

but no PUJs are scrapped coz of ejeepneys

so how exactly do ejeepneys help the environment?

maybe it's just for public awareness

well, gotta start somewhere

[gunpla]

Well, right now, it looks like incomplete item pa ang e-jeep. I wouldn't say that it has changed our world, pero shame na lang on the detractor/s who complain against it without actually putting any effort into alternatives. Credit should be given at the very least to the people who are at least working for something they truly believe in.

From what I can see, nasa infancy pa lang ang program na yan. This is fighting political stubbornness with technological advancement. Sa ngayon, baby steps pa lang, pero pag improve ng technology, mananalo din yan over time.

Certain improvements are needed with the current e-jeeps:

-Must be able to run at 60-80 kph with full load
-Must be able to carry charge up to 150-200 km
-Batteries should last longer before replacement
-Better layout of seats for faster in/out

I can see these happening within 3-5 years. Actually, kahit na 10 years pa abutin nito, better na itong may effort kesa sa government na puro pangako. 10 years ko na din inaabangan ang proposed MRT sa Commonwealth, wala pang nangyayari.

When these advancements happen (Without too much added cost over current e-jeeps), magsisimula nang mamatay ang mga old Jeep sa manila.

An add generated revenue system that will allow for free/subsidized rides will kill off the other jeeps. Just get 1/5 of the passengers, and the drivers lose 1/5 of their income. Gutom abot nila diyan. Mapipilitan din silang sumuko na sa luma nilang jeep. More and more e-jeeps can be added then. To be fair, dapat may trade in program din ang mga old jeepney drivers, perhaps with government incentive.

Nalalabuan nga ako actually sa ibang mga tao dito e. Are they expecting na magically mawawala ang mga old jeeps at mapapalitan ng hundreds of thousands of e-jeeps agad?

[uls]

^^

yehey! another cheerleader -->

what kind of forum would this be if everyone always agreed with each other? -->

someone always has take the other side of the bet

i'm the other side

From what I can see, nasa infancy pa lang ang program na yan.

not all babies make it to adulthood

[niky]

not all babies make it to adulthood

That's why you have nurseries.

-

The problem with government-sponsored programs... if government patience wears out or the money goes... what becomes of them?

http://www.thegreencarwebsite.co.uk/...electric-cars/

Nonetheless the sixteen cars so far registered through the scheme since January 2010 represent a sixteen fold increase in electric car sales over 2009, when only one electric car was sold.

In total, the Spanish government planned to grant 80m euros worth of subsidies for those who buy by the end of next year – with the government funding 20 per cent of the purchase, up to 6,000 euros, on each car.

http://autonews.gasgoo.com/auto-news...ok-for-ev.html

The main reason for the continuous decline in BYD's share price is that its electric cars cannot achieve commercialization in a short term, said Cao He, an auto analyst with Mingzu Securities Co.

China released a plan to subsidize private purchases of electric cars in June this year. BYD's F3DM plug-in hybrid sedan and e6 electric car were both listed on the catalog as energy-efficient models to qualify for the government subsidies. Consumers can get the government subsidy of 50,000 yuan ($7,320) for buying an F3DM car and of 60,000 yuan for buying an e6 electric car.

Moreover, the local government of Shenzhen, a southern boom town of China, initialized a green-car subsidy pilot project in July to boost purchasing of new energy vehicles. The Shenzhen government added another 30,000 yuan and 60,000 yuan to the plug-in hybrid electric vehicle and pure electric vehicle respectively.

Although motivated by the favorable governments' subsidies, BYD sales have been failing to achieve its expected goals. Reportedly, BYD started selling its F3DM cars to private consumers in March 29, but sales were disappointing with only 14 units sold in April, 2 units in May and 12 units in June, which is far short of its sales target of 1000 units for 2010.

Off-topic, yes... but I've been following electric/hybrid/alternative energy car news for the past few years, already. the only countries that have a healthy electric program are the US and Japan. Specifically because both have manufacturers building the things for global consumption... so they both have vested interests in making things easier for them.

And yet... there's increasing clamor against the Volt... given that so much subsidy money went into it and it's still too expensive for most buyers at $41,000 (what you'd expect to pay for a sports car, actually).

Again, the only way forward for electricity is backwards in terms of safety and weight requirements, to allow current motors and batteries to push the vehicles further on less charge and with less attendant battery weight. And consequently, less cost.

Because making modern electric vehicles, despite the advances in technology, is still too costly.

-

As this relates to the e-jeepney... a business viability plan should be in place to guard against the fickle winds of government support. Because politicians don't stay in power forever, but consumers do. ;)

[ghosthunter]

Well, right now, it looks like incomplete item pa ang e-jeep. I wouldn't say that it has changed our world, pero shame na lang on the detractor/s who complain against it without actually putting any effort into alternatives. Credit should be given at the very least to the people who are at least working for something they truly believe in.

Maybe you are giving too much credit to the people behind e-jeep simply because they are pushing a so-called "green" product?

Maybe some of the so-called detractors are pointing out the overlooked deficiencies and hidden pitfalls of the product and the product's nature?

Maybe some of the so-called detractors are also highlighting the missing information, data and operating cost analysis NOT provided by the product's promoters, sellers & PR agents?

Maybe the so-called detractors are actually working for the public's benefit to provide a more balanced viewpoint regarding this overhyped product and it's capabilities and hidden shortcomings?

From what I can see, nasa infancy pa lang ang program na yan. This is fighting political stubbornness with technological advancement. Sa ngayon, baby steps pa lang, pero pag improve ng technology, mananalo din yan over time.

For sure the technology is obvious NOT ready to go commercial, hence why push it at all? In the end, only the public will be paying for the failure of a product in where it's key technologies are not ready to go commercial because of certain technical limits, expensive costs or both.

Certain improvements are needed with the current e-jeeps:

-Must be able to run at 60-80 kph with full load
-Must be able to carry charge up to 150-200 km
-Batteries should last longer before replacement
-Better layout of seats for faster in/out

I can see these happening within 3-5 years. Actually, kahit na 10 years pa abutin nito, better na itong may effort kesa sa government na puro pangako. 10 years ko na din inaabangan ang proposed MRT sa Commonwealth, wala pang nangyayari.

When these advancements happen (Without too much added cost over current e-jeeps), magsisimula nang mamatay ang mga old Jeep sa manila.

Why wait ten years when many or all of those improvements can be done right now?

Of course it would greatly add to the cost of the product like a more powerful electric motor or dual motor configuration and higher capacity storage batteries, all of which the product's promoters do not want to do because it would limit their sales of a unique product in the local market. it would also make it harder to buy off-the-shelf golf-cart parts to assemble into ejeeps.

An add generated revenue system that will allow for free/subsidized rides will kill off the other jeeps. Just get 1/5 of the passengers, and the drivers lose 1/5 of their income. Gutom abot nila diyan. Mapipilitan din silang sumuko na sa luma nilang jeep. More and more e-jeeps can be added then. To be fair, dapat may trade in program din ang mga old jeepney drivers, perhaps with government incentive.

Nalalabuan nga ako actually sa ibang mga tao dito e. Are they expecting na magically mawawala ang mga old jeeps at mapapalitan ng hundreds of thousands of e-jeeps agad?

Obviously you fail to see that the ejeep is an incomplete product. Where do you recharge the batteries to keep the product "green"?

How would the drivers react when they find out that their daily maximum driving range gets roughly proportionally shorter and shorter the closer they get to the battery's maximum cycle life? Anyone with a cellphone with an old worn-out battery would know this first hand.

[romski123]

^^

yehey! another cheerleader -->

....while the cheerkillers remain the same....

[gunpla]

Maybe you are giving too much credit to the people behind e-jeep simply because they are pushing a so-called "green" product?

Maybe some of the so-called detractors are pointing out the overlooked deficiencies and hidden pitfalls of the product and the product's nature?

Maybe some of the so-called detractors are also highlighting the missing information, data and operating cost analysis NOT provided by the product's promoters, sellers & PR agents?

Maybe the so-called detractors are actually working for the public's benefit to provide a more balanced viewpoint regarding this overhyped product and it's capabilities and hidden shortcomings?

Uhhh... ok?...

For sure the technology is obvious NOT ready to go commercial, hence why push it at all? In the end, only the public will be paying for the failure of a product in where it's key technologies are not ready to go commercial because of certain technical limits, expensive costs or both.

You're jumping to conclusions. Of course, money is needed for RND, and everyone from commuters to drivers to traffic enforcers to LTO pencil pushers need to get used to newer vehicle systems.

Why wait ten years when many or all of those improvements can be done right now?

Of course it would greatly add to the cost of the product like a more powerful electric motor or dual motor configuration and higher capacity storage batteries, all of which the product's promoters do not want to do because it would limit their sales of a unique product in the local market. it would also make it harder to buy off-the-shelf golf-cart parts to assemble into ejeeps.

You answered your own question. For the rest of your statement, I don't understand why you imagine that the e-jeeps are made just by a corporation who want to profit? The push for these vehicles has been heavily supported by many NGOs. Siguro naman you'll spare Greenpeace and others of
"conspiring for profit". I'm sure more people will be happy if more manufacturers for e-jeepneys came into play. A single manufacturer can only handle so much output at a time.

Obviously you fail to see that the ejeep is an incomplete product. Where do you recharge the batteries to keep the product "green"?

How would the drivers react when they find out that their daily maximum driving range gets roughly proportionally shorter and shorter the closer they get to the battery's maximum cycle life? Anyone with a cellphone with an old worn-out battery would know this first hand.

Obviously, you failed to read my post.

Certain improvements are needed with the current e-jeeps:

-Must be able to run at 60-80 kph with full load
-Must be able to carry charge up to 150-200 km
-Batteries should last longer before replacement
-Better layout of seats for faster in/out

And, no I'm not saying the e-jeepneys right now are even close to being ready. What I'm saying is that it's a program that should use continually upgrading technology to shift the paradigms of the politicians, drivers, and commuters who involve themselves in public transportation.

As I've said, when the e-jeeps become functionally and economically equivalent to current jeeps, they will be a better option. Given time, the costs of manufacturing will go down, while technologies are also improved. It's like buying a cellphone back in 1990 compared to buying a cellphone in 2000.

Also, consider this. We have several laws that prohibit smoke belching. Now, do any of these laws actually do anything? Can the owners/operators of jeeps, buses, poorly maintained cars be bothered to clean up their engines or put some sort of filter? I never said anything about carbon emissions; I know perfectly well that it just gets shifted to power plants. But I am sure that keeping a dozen, or even a hundred power plants filtered and up to environmental standards is WAY EASIER and more POSSIBLE than asking all the jeepneys to stop belching smoke. I can't say much for global warming, but I do know I'll be able to walk around Manila like in Singapore if all the smoke belching jeeps disappeared.

And if you really think you're helping the public by informing them, I sincerely suggest that you write an article and have it published by a newspaper or an automotive magazine. It is true that more people should be made aware of these shortcomings, but I believe that instead of dismissing something for its flaws, one should instead push to have those flaws corrected.

Again, the program is still in its infancy, and I do believe you should also give it more time. Nobody knows yet where exactly this is going, but it's at least better than not doing anything at all.

[niky]

....while the cheerkillers remain the same....

:hysterical: Nice comeback.

[gunpla]

^^

yehey! another cheerleader -->

what kind of forum would this be if everyone always agreed with each other? -->

someone always has take the other side of the bet

i'm the other side



not all babies make it to adulthood

I am no cheerleader. Frankly, I'd rather have all the e-jeepneys produced from China and imported here at a lower cost. However, I do believe that our jeepney systems should be revamped. Consider these:

Metro Manila is a LARGE area.
Majority of public commuters live on the threshold of poverty.

In more efficient cities like HK or Singapore, people can take trains or buses and walk shorter distances. In manila however, we cannot simply replace jeep routes with buses. You know very well how awkward and congested our streets will be if buses also went through the smaller roads.

Forget about having a comprehensive train system. The metro is too large, and the trains will be too expensive for many to use. Our present trains are already in all sorts of problems because they undercharge. Compare these to the trains in HK or Singapore. Can you imagine paying 60 Pesos upwards for a train ride? The good and efficient train systems in Singapore cost around this range. I don't think our people will take too kindly to that.

We live in a third world country, and a third world solution is needed. If we cannot convince the stubborn masa and the politicians who are too afraid of the masa, then we must force change upon them by technological and economical competition.

I couldn't care less about whoever makes the e-jeeps though, as long as they are made right.

Frankly, I appreciate sir ghosthunter's replies more because he gave counter-arguments.

[romski123]

amen to that

[ghosthunter]

You're jumping to conclusions. Of course, money is needed for RND, and everyone from commuters to drivers to traffic enforcers to LTO pencil pushers need to get used to newer vehicle systems.

What R&D are you referring to? ... To oversimplify it, all they did was get an existing electric golf cart and placed a new chassis on top of it and named it "e-jeepney".

This is why the first units had dismal performance going uphills. It would be obvious to anyone with an engineering background that an electric motor that can propel four to six people uphill will NOT be sufficient to get ten to twelve up the same hill.

The e-jeep is just a matter of mix and matching off-the-shelf components to specific technical requirements and limits.

I'm sure more people will be happy if more manufacturers for e-jeepneys came into play. A single manufacturer can only handle so much output at a time.

Oh yeah, like two dozen units over the past few years is too much to handle by a single company.

Do you have the total number of e-jeeps sold since it's inception?

Obviously, you failed to read my post.

Certain improvements are needed with the current e-jeeps:

-Must be able to run at 60-80 kph with full load
-Must be able to carry charge up to 150-200 km
-Batteries should last longer before replacement
-Better layout of seats for faster in/out

Obviously you missed parts of my post that considered those. I also considered the potential skyrocketing of costs if better battery storage systems were used like lithium-ion batteries. I would have deemed that the current deep-cycle lead-acid batteries would be the best option (based on cost & availability) even it is flawed by weight and limited cycle life.

The alternative would be to introduce an electric-hybrid system that would supplement the on-board batteries when needed. The small engine can be fueled by LPG or other low cost clean burning fuel. The engine will not be connected to the transmission. It will used to run an electric generator. The engine/generator can be made into a removable module for quick servicing and/or replacement or simply to save weight when not required.

And, no I'm not saying the e-jeepneys right now are even close to being ready. What I'm saying is that it's a program that should use continually upgrading technology to shift the paradigms of the politicians, drivers, and commuters who involve themselves in public transportation.

If that is your point (a continually upgrading ejeep), what will be the selling point for the jeepney operators to buy them? Who wants to buy a product that is in a state of flux? Would you buy a car whose mechanical design is changing month on month?

If the ejeeps are not a ready product, then it should not be put to use yet until it can be deemed "ready".

Also, consider this. We have several laws that prohibit smoke belching. Now, do any of these laws actually do anything? Can the owners/operators of jeeps, buses, poorly maintained cars be bothered to clean up their engines or put some sort of filter? I never said anything about carbon emissions; I know perfectly well that it just gets shifted to power plants. But I am sure that keeping a dozen, or even a hundred power plants filtered and up to environmental standards is WAY EASIER and more POSSIBLE than asking all the jeepneys to stop belching smoke. I can't say much for global warming, but I do know I'll be able to walk around Manila like in Singapore if all the smoke belching jeeps disappeared.

If you want the air to be cleaner like in Singapore, it would help to have a cleaner diesel fuel to use. Anyone with a high tech diesel engined SUV or truck would know first hand how dirty nearly all of our diesel fuel being sold to us here.

Like in the saying, "garbage in, garbage out". If you burn dirty fuel in your engine, expect dirty smoke to come out the tail-pipe.

Basically the "clean air act" is a scam to tax motorists (using diesel powered vehicles) by making them pay whenever they inevitably blow smoke out of their tail-pipes.

And if you really think you're helping the public by informing them, I sincerely suggest that you write an article and have it published by a newspaper or an automotive magazine. It is true that more people should be made aware of these shortcomings, but I believe that instead of dismissing something for its flaws, one should instead push to have those flaws corrected.

It is not my product to correct. If they are truly concerned about their product and not profit, the company behind the e-jeep would have done it even before it was launched into the public's eyes.

Again, the program is still in its infancy, and I do believe you should also give it more time. Nobody knows yet where exactly this is going, but it's at least better than not doing anything at all.

True. Doing something is better than doing nothing.

But it would also be much better when there is less public misinformation about it as well.

[uls]

I am no cheerleader. Frankly, I'd rather have all the e-jeepneys produced from China and imported here at a lower cost. However, I do believe that our jeepney systems should be revamped. Consider these:

Metro Manila is a LARGE area.
Majority of public commuters live on the threshold of poverty.

In more efficient cities like HK or Singapore, people can take trains or buses and walk shorter distances. In manila however, we cannot simply replace jeep routes with buses. You know very well how awkward and congested our streets will be if buses also went through the smaller roads.

Forget about having a comprehensive train system. The metro is too large, and the trains will be too expensive for many to use. Our present trains are already in all sorts of problems because they undercharge. Compare these to the trains in HK or Singapore. Can you imagine paying 60 Pesos upwards for a train ride? The good and efficient train systems in Singapore cost around this range. I don't think our people will take too kindly to that.

We live in a third world country, and a third world solution is needed. If we cannot convince the stubborn masa and the politicians who are too afraid of the masa, then we must force change upon them by technological and economical competition.

I couldn't care less about whoever makes the e-jeeps though, as long as they are made right.

Frankly, I appreciate sir ghosthunter's replies more because he gave counter-arguments.

i'm not here to make counterarguments

i'm here to take a position

my position is on the other side of the cheerleaders' position

they are betting ejeepneys will replace diesel PUJs in Philippine cities and clean up the air in the process

i'm betting it won't

for now, nobody has been proven right yet

it's a long term bet

we'll see how this turns out in a few years

when diesel PUJs are finally replaced by ejeepneys, i will admit i was wrong