Diesel versus Electric light rail

Tim Lane writes:

We (Transport 2000 and some other individuals)
have repeatedly asked City Staff, as part of the EA,
to evaluate the following:

For any given amount of money you have to spend, you
could build a larger diesel light rail system than an electric one,
due to the lower cost per km. of not having to put up the poles,
wires, and build substations & emergency generators.

A larger system will reach more neighbourhoods, employment,
educational, shopping, & recreational areas.

Therefore, it should be more effective, for a given expenditure,
at getting more people OUT of their cars, and onto transit.

Net effect - even though your transit vehicles are diesel,
rather than electric, the reduction in car traffic results in less fuel
being burned, and less pollution being created, in your city,
than with an electric system.

Note that this argument has nothing to do with how polluting
the generation of the electricity may be.

It doesn't matter if you use Hydro, natural gas, nucular (Dubya's
pronunciation!), coal, wind, diesel generators, oil fired boilers,
or squirrel cages to generate your power.

For any given expenditure, a diesel LRT system would reduce
City-wide fuel consumption & pollution MORE than an electric
LRT system.

It would get MORE people onto transit.

City council mandated that Staff evaluate this as part of the EA.

Staff ignored this directive.