Quoted By:
Turku, Finland. Considering a tram network, previous dismantled in 1972.
The project started in 2009 with Tampere, but Tampere went with quite direct will to proceed, whilst Turku has done delay tactics. The previous cabinet was notably against long term commitment to tram network and it ordered this "superbus" (=brt) vs tram study.
The study came out this january and ended up recommending the watered down BRT option, but was later shot fuil of holes and even general public sees it was very much local coalition-leaning large bus companies and some political connecitons talking. What is kind of reassuring is that the BRT study assumed all-electrical bi-articulated buses. People very stantly pointed out that due the limitatios of battery technolofy as of now they would require a midway-station loading infrastructure equal in price to tramway electrification or going 100% trolleybus. And all-electrics would need auxiliary winter diesel heater too. Anything even remotely sensible would be single articulated natural gas buses, but those would hardly have more seating space than bi-rear axle bus has.
The end result of all this is that at the autumn, I think the cuoncil has on its table either continue planning tram or focus on normal buses for now.
