100,000 ADB-funded E-Trikes to invade PHL streets

[ghosthunter]

100,000 ADB-funded E-Trikes to invade PHL streets
December 12, 2012 2:07pm

Some 100,000 electric-powered tricycles or “E-Trikes” will soon be seen in Philippine streets, following the unveiling of an Asian Development Bank project.

This will likely jump-start the e-vehicles industry in the country and significantly cut down carbon dioxide emissions.

Under a five-year project running up to December 2017, the Manila-based lender has made available $300 million to replace 100,000 gasoline-powered tricycles.

The government, for its part, has provided a $100-million counterpart fund.

“In line with the government's plan to develop a national e-vehicle industry, the project will support the establishment of an e-vehicle parts industry, battery supply chain, and charging stations, including five off-grid solar charging stations,” the ADB said.

E-Trikes, which run on an electric motor and rechargeable lithium-ion battery, will also be introduced to Metro Manila and other urban centers under a lease-to-own arrangement.

The electric tricycles will enable the Philippine government to save more than $100 million a year in foregone fuel imports, while decreasing annual carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by about 260,000 tons, the ADB noted.

“E-Trikes are a cleaner, greener transport solution for the Philippines, and provide a better quality of life for trike drivers,” Neeraj Jain, ADB’s Philippines country director, said in a statement.

“This project can help transform transportation in the Philippines, and positions the country as a leader in electric vehicle development in Asia,” he added.

Energy Undersecretary Loreta Ayson added, “This project will lessen the Philippines’ dependence on foreign oil imports, and by fabricating and assembling the tricycles domestically, it will create up to 10,000 jobs in the 5-year project implementation.”

Without intervention, the Philippines is on a course to almost quadruple CO2 emissions in less than 25 years, according to an ADB study.

Gasoline-fueled tricycles are responsible for more than two-thirds of all air pollution generated by the country’s entire transport sector, it added. — SOA/VS, GMA News

source: 100,000 ADB-funded E-Trikes to invade PHL streets | Economy | GMA News Online | The Go-To Site for Filipinos Everywhere

[1D4LV]

ok lang, basta ba hwag sa main streets ibabyahe eh.

[uls]

yehey

dagdag 100,000 sasakyan sa kalye

tapos di babawasan ang mga tricycle, kuliglig, pedicab

[timrev]

magkano naman kaya yan Etrike na yan?

gawa ng?

[Manilablock]

ung bubong dapat kabitan ng solar panels para additional charging sa battery pag maaraw.

[stickers]

magkano naman kaya yan Etrike na yan?

gawa ng?

There already china-made e-bikes around. nasa 10-20K yung unit na parang underbone while nasa 20-30k ung parang scooter, I just don't know if its the same engine they used sa e-trykes na yan.

OT: Nice stretched tires.

[joemarski]

yehey

dagdag 100,000 sasakyan sa kalye

tapos di babawasan ang mga tricycle, kuliglig, pedicab

Hmmmn... They did say "will replace"... they didn't say "will remove"...

[carofsteel]

ung bubong dapat kabitan ng solar panels para additional charging sa battery pag maaraw.

dagdagan mo na din ng malaking propeller sa taas para pag umaandar magegenerate ng energy from wind at store nya sa battery. sagwa nga lang ng itsura.. gaano kaya katagal charging naman yan at gaano katagal pag fully loaded? May dala dalang backup battery palagi dapat.

[uls]

Hmmmn... They did say "will replace"... they didn't say "will remove"...

remove? replace?

what's the difference?

tricycle operators gonna replace their tricycles with e-trikes?

same story with ejeepneys replacing diesel jeepneys. how did that go?

i'll believe the "replacing" when for every e-trike put on the road a gasoline tricycle is taken off the road (which didnt happen when they put ejeeneys on the road. no diesel PUJ was replaced by an ejeepney. just more vehicles on the road)

operators arent gonna give up their gasoline tricycles unless somebody (ADB or govt) buys the tricycles from them and provide them with e-trikes

[uls]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Monseratto]

Give it 6 months before those things find their way to a scrapyard...

[_Cathy_]

Give it 6 months before those things find their way to a scrapyard...

There were e-trikes before at the BGC area. I was able to ride one, it was so slow, I felt so frustrated!

I dunno what happened to those e-trikes na. It did not even last 2 years.

[joemarski]

remove? replace?

what's the difference?

tricycle operators gonna replace their tricycles with e-trikes?

same story with ejeepneys replacing diesel jeepneys. how did that go?

i'll believe the "replacing" when for every e-trike put on the road a gasoline tricycle is taken off the road (which didnt happen when they put ejeeneys on the road. no diesel PUJ was replaced by an ejeepney. just more vehicles on the road)

operators arent gonna give up their gasoline tricycles unless somebody (ADB or govt) buys the tricycles from them and provide them with e-trikes

'yan ang sinasabi ko Sir uls. Kaya nga ang mangyayari, dagdag 100,000 sasakyan nga sa kalye pero di
naman mababawasan ang mga tricycle, kuliglig, padyaks, etc.

My point is, maganda sana kung PART OF THE PROJECT is to negotiate with tricycle operators to replace their
gas-fed trikes with e-trikes. Para bang "Kabayan, trade- in tayo. Palitan ko na lang yang gas- fed trike mo ng
e- trike para 'yan na ang gamitin mong pam- pasada". Then pag- usapan ng maayos ang "trade-in" na wag
naman sanang ma- agrabiyado ang mga operators.

Kung magtatagumpay ang usapan, kukunin ng gobyerno ang mga gas-fed trikes, papalitan nila ng e-trikes na
siyang ibibigay nila sa mga operators. In this case, puro e-trikes na ang bibiyahe sa kalye at wala ng gas-fed
trikes. 'yan ang sinasabi kong mas maganda: ALISIN ang mga gas-fed trikes, PALITAN ng e-trikes... kaya lang too
good to be true... at saka, ano naman ang gagawin ng gobyerno sa mga gas- fed trikes na kinuha nila???

[ghosthunter]

There were e-trikes before at the BGC area. I was able to ride one, it was so slow, I felt so frustrated!

I dunno what happened to those e-trikes na. It did not even last 2 years.

Many of the e-trikes ended up as junk because no replacement parts. Also operator said the units were not durable.

[Monseratto]

Hey uls, another "box" ... And the speed they appear to be running in the video, there'll be a lot pissed drivers stuck behind it...

[renzo_d10]

Agree with uls, nothing to feel happy about here because that just means another 100,000 vehicles will be set-off on our roads. Result? Possibly more congestion around the area they will cover.

It is good if it will replace the gasoline-fed tricycles, but just like what Cathy has experienced, electronic tricycles are slow, and just what GH has mentioned, they weren't durable enough, common sense lang syempre hindi papalitan ng operators ang existing trikes nila. Why? Because they may be gas-fed, they may look uglier but hell they are durable.

[ghosthunter]

Hey uls, another "box" ... And the speed they appear to be running in the video, there'll be a lot pissed drivers stuck behind it...

They are slow. There are some in Mandaluyong and getting stuck behind one along the narrower roads is frustrating.

[April_Ryan]

When the object of the game should be to rid our streets of tricycles and jeepneys - because these are unsafe for commuters who comprise majority of Pinoys (due to non-working headlights, signal lights, brakelights, no seatbelts, poorly trained drivers) - we end up buying "e" versions of the very same tricycles and jeepneys.

My wish (which will probably not happen in my lifetime) is to phase out tricycles, and keep jeepneys to the minor routes (like UP Ikot) and use buses. Drivers of public utility vehicles should be properly compensated and should only be allowed to drive for limited hours to ensure that they are alert at all times. The drivers/operators of public transportation can never be allowed to cite "poverty" as an excuse to not have working headlights, or have inhumane hours for drivers, or provide them with little or no benefits. Why? Because our laws require that public transportation exercise "extraordinary diligence" in the transport of passengers. If I may quote:

ART. 1733. Common carriers, from the nature of their business and for reasons of public policy, are bound to observe extra ordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods and for the safety of the passengers transported by them according to all the circumstances of each case.

Such extraordinary diligence in the vigilance over the goods is further expressed in articles 1734, 1735, and 1745, Nos. 5, 6, and 7, while the extraordinary diligence for the safety of the passengers is further set forth in articles 1755 and 1756.

ART. 1755. A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost diligence of very cautious persons, with a due regard for all the circumstances.

ART. 1756. In case of death of or injuries to passengers, common carriers are presumed to have been at fault or to have acted negligently, unless they prove that they observed extraordinary diligence as prescribed in articles 1733 and 1755.

The Code Commission, in justifying this extraordinary diligence required of a common carrier, says the following:

A common carrier is bound to carry the passengers safely as far as human care and foresight can provide, using the utmost deligence of very cautions persons, with due regard for all circumstances. This extraordinary diligence required of common carriers is calculated to protect the passengers from the tragic mishaps that frequently occur in connection with rapid modern transportation. This high standard of care is imperatively demanded by the precariousness of human life and by the consideration that every person must in every way be safeguarded against all injury. (Report of the Code Commission, pp. 35-36)" (Padilla, Civil Code of the Philippines, Vol. IV, 1956 ed., p. 197).

Instead of ensuring that these codal provisions are followed so that passengers are taken cared of "as far as human care and foresight can provide", our own government allows colorum vehicles, allows blind people to get professional driver's license, allows jeepneys which do not have headlights or seatbelts, allows taxi drivers who take drugs/energy drinks just to be able to survive 24 hour shifts! A state-sanctioned violation of the very laws it passed, that's whats happening now.

End of rant.

[uls]

'yan ang sinasabi ko Sir uls. Kaya nga ang mangyayari, dagdag 100,000 sasakyan nga sa kalye pero di
naman mababawasan ang mga tricycle, kuliglig, padyaks, etc.

My point is, maganda sana kung PART OF THE PROJECT is to negotiate with tricycle operators to replace their
gas-fed trikes with e-trikes. Para bang "Kabayan, trade- in tayo. Palitan ko na lang yang gas- fed trike mo ng
e- trike para 'yan na ang gamitin mong pam- pasada". Then pag- usapan ng maayos ang "trade-in" na wag
naman sanang ma- agrabiyado ang mga operators.

Kung magtatagumpay ang usapan, kukunin ng gobyerno ang mga gas-fed trikes, papalitan nila ng e-trikes na
siyang ibibigay nila sa mga operators. In this case, puro e-trikes na ang bibiyahe sa kalye at wala ng gas-fed
trikes. 'yan ang sinasabi kong mas maganda: ALISIN ang mga gas-fed trikes, PALITAN ng e-trikes... kaya lang too
good to be true... at saka, ano naman ang gagawin ng gobyerno sa mga gas- fed trikes na kinuha nila???

if the plan wasnt to replace existing gas tricycles already out there then the plan is to reduce further increase in the number of gas tricycles --- 100,000 etrikes will replace 100,000 future gas tricycles

will 100,000 etrikes reduce the purchase of 100,000 gas tricycles in the future? i don't think so

if etrikes are a threat to gas tricycles then local motorcycle manufacturers like Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki, Yamaha must be really scared

anyone think they're scared?

[ghosthunter]

if the plan wasnt to replace existing gas tricycles already out there then the plan is to reduce further increase in the number of gas tricycles --- 100,000 etrikes will replace 100,000 future gas tricycles

will 100,000 etrikes reduce the purchase of 100,000 gas tricycles in the future? i don't think so

if etrikes are a threat to gas tricycles then local motorcycle manufacturers like Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki, Yamaha must be really scared

anyone think they're scared?

btw.... that is 100,000 e-trikes over five years.