Editing Bus rapid transit (section)

== Cost ==
{{more citations needed section|date=October 2014}}
[[File:Saichi-stn-BRT03.jpg|thumb|The [[Kesennuma Line]] in Japan was damaged in the [[2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami|2011 tsunami]]. JR converted sections of the line into a dedicated bus rapid transit (BRT) route due to the cost of reconstructing the railway.]]
The capital cost of implementing BRT is lower than for light rail: A study by the U.S. [[Government Accountability Office]] (GAO) from 2000 found that the average capital cost per mile for busways was $13.5&nbsp;million while light rail average cost was $34.8&nbsp;million.<ref name="U.S. GAO">{{cite web|url=http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d01984.pdf|title=Bus Rapid Transit Shows Promise|author=GAO|date=September 2001|publisher=GAO|access-date=16 March 2011|archive-date=30 April 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150430210939/http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d01984.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref><!--the US is neither a leading nation in BRT nor a leading country in passenger rail. It is also famously bad at cost control. Sources describing the situation in other countries should be added.-Reply: Thanks.  2013 in other ountries please read „In higher income countries ..." and find information about lower income countries in the source. --> The total investment varies considerably due to factors such as cost of the roadway, amount of grade separation, station structures and traffic signal systems.

In 2003, a study edited by the German GTZ compared various MRT systems all over the world and concluded ″Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) can provide high-quality, metro-like transit service at a fraction of the cost of other options″.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2003-12-01 |title=Sustainable Transport: a Sourcebook for Developing Cities - Institute for Transportation and Development Policy |url=https://itdp.org/2003/12/01/sustainable-transport-a-sourcebook-for-developing-cities/ |access-date=2024-05-08 |website=Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide |language=en-US}}</ref>

In 2013, the analysis of a database of nineteen LRT projects, twenty-six HRT projects, and forty-two BRT projects specified "In higher income countries ... an HRT alternative is likely to cost up to 40 times as much as a BRT alternative".<ref>{{Cite web |date=2017-11-16 |title=The BRT Planning Guide - Institute for Transportation and Development Policy |url=https://itdp.org/2017/11/16/the-brt-planning-guide/ |access-date=2024-05-08 |website=Institute for Transportation and Development Policy - Promoting sustainable and equitable transportation worldwide |language=en-US}}</ref> and a surface LRT alternative about 4 times that of a BRT alternative.

Operational cost of running a BRT system is generally lower than light rail, though the exact comparison varies, and labor costs depend heavily on wages, which vary between countries. For the same level of ridership and demand, higher labor costs in the developed world relative to developing countries will tend to encourage developed world transit operators to prefer operate services with larger but less frequent vehicles. This will allow the service to achieve the same capacity while minimizing the number of drivers. This may come as a hidden cost to passengers in lower demand routes who experience significantly lower frequencies and longer waiting times and limit gain of ridership.

In the study done by the U.S. GAO, BRT systems usually had lower cost as well based on "operating cost per vehicle hour", as on "operating cost per revenue mile", and on "operating cost per passenger trip", mainly because of lower vehicle cost and lower infrastructure cost.<ref name="U.S. GAO" />

An ambitious light rail system runs partly grade separated (e.g. underground), which gives free right-of-way and much faster traffic compared to passing the traffic signals needed in a surface level system. Underground BRT was suggested as early as 1954.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://metrotransportationlibrary.blogspot.com/2010/05/1954-plan-for-los-angeles-underground_20.html|title = Metro's Primary Resources| date=31 May 2023 }}</ref> As long as most buses still run on diesel, air quality can become a significant concern in tunnels, but the [[Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel]] is an example of using hybrid buses, which switch to overhead electric propulsion while they are underground, eliminating diesel emissions and reducing fuel usage. Alternatives are elevated busways or - more expensive - elevated railways.<ref name=":4" />
[[File:Mettis BRT Metz.jpg|thumb|Prominent articulated "tram-like" [[Van Hool]] vehicles are used in [[Metz]], France.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.vanhool.be/ENG/highlights/vanhoolpresentst.html |title=Van Hool presents the ExquiCity Design Mettis |access-date=5 June 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130605074801/http://www.vanhool.be/ENG/highlights/vanhoolpresentst.html |archive-date=5 June 2013}}</ref>]]