Biofuel debate faces showdown in USA

An operator displays a handful of corn at an ethanol plant. Photograph: Mark Blinch/Reuters

· 25% of US corn crop already used for biofuel
· Texas governor wants biofuel target cut by 50%
· Barack Obama wants big increase to 60bn gallons

Elana Schor in Washington
guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday August 06 2008 10:48 BST

The moment of truth is at hand for US biofuels this week as environmental regulators prepare to rule on one state’s request to halve the steep national target for blending ethanol into fuel.

Texas governor Rick Perry asked the US environmental protection agency (EPA) in April to cut the national biofuels target 50% from its current level of 9bn gallons. After an unexpected delay last month, the EPA is expected to rule on Perry’s waiver request as soon as this week.

The waiver proposal has stoked a fierce political row over the future of biofuels, with some US politicians echoing their European counterparts in questioning whether ethanol’s effect on food prices limits its usefulness as an alternative to traditional fuel.

“We need to put an end to flawed government policies that distort the markets, raise food prices artificially, and pit producers against consumers,” senator John McCain said in May after he and 23 fellow Republicans endorsed an easing of the ethanol target.

Three major environmental groups have even sided with the conservative governor – albeit with different motives than Perry, who sought the waiver to protect Texas livestock producers from rising corn prices.

Suspending the biofuels target would allow the EPA the environmental sustainability of increased ethanol production, according to Friends of the Earth energy policy campaigner Kate McMahon.

“This biofuels mandate essentially dictates inaction on climate change by taking us in a useless and potentially harmful direction,” McMahon said in a statement last month.

Yet powerful supporters of increased ethanol production hail from nearly every corn-producing state in the US, including an Illinois senator named Barack Obama. In his energy plan released this week, the Democratic presidential nominee sets a 60bn-gallon target within 22 years for advanced biofuels, including cellulosic ethanol.

The ethanol industry’s US trade group, the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA), asserts that the carbon footprint of ethanol – already lower than that of conventional petrol – will only decrease as the ethanol target encourages the development of advanced biofuel.

“We’re doing everything we can, as efficiently as we can, to bring those technologies to the marketplace,” RFA spokesman Matt Hartwig said.

“But if you go in and undermine the foundation of the ethanol industry today, you’ll set back the development of those next-generation technologies.”

That more and more US corn is being diverted to make ethanol is not in dispute. The US agriculture department estimates that 25% of the nation’s corn crop, valued at $52.1bn, was used for fuel last year. That number could rise as high as 35% this year.

But the ethanol industry argues that high oil prices, not biofuels, are to blame for food prices that have risen far faster than inflation.

Only one-quarter of recent US corn price increases are attributable to the ethanol tax credit – recently reduced by Congress from 51 cents to 45 cents per gallon – according to a Purdue University study commissioned by the Farm Foundation.

A confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian last month, however, tagged biofuels as the cause of a 75% rise in worldwide food prices.

The EPA’s delay in ruling on the Texas waiver request, which sparked more than 15,000 public comments to the agency, raised concerns among those on both sides of the biofuels battle.

Eight senators from corn-producing states publicly warned EPA administrator Stephen Johnson against “any agreements being made behind closed doors”.

Meanwhile, some commodity watchers predicted that falling corn prices this summer would give the agency grounds to deny the waiver.

No matter what the EPA decides in coming days, the battle may not end right away. Biofuels supporters are likely to challenge any potential waiver in court, and Perry appears to have laid the groundwork for a lawsuit against the agency if his request is denied.

According to Carbon Control News, Perry wrote in comments to the EPA that the law requires a waiver of the ethanol target “whenever [Johnson] is able to make a reasonable determination that a major sacrifice would flow from the implementation of the mandates”.

Source : guardian.co.uk

Safari Ramadan, Rombongan Bupati Tuban Tabrak Truk

Senin, 15/09/2008 20:39 WIB
Safari Ramadan, Rombongan Bupati Tuban Tabrak Truk
TB Utama – detikSurabaya

Tuban – Gara-gara mengejar rombongan safari Ramadan Bupati Tuban, mobil dinas (mobdin) Ketua Bappeda setempat ringsek menabak truk trailer di jalur Pantura kawasan Desa Socorejo, Kecamatan Jenu, Kabupaten Tuban, Jawa Timur, Senin (15/9/2008) petang.

Akibat kejadian itu, Ketua Bappeda Tuban Heri Kisworo dan supirnya, Kartono, kini dirawat di IRD RSUD Dr R Koesma Tuban. Heri Kisworo menderita luka ringan, sementara supir mobdin jenis Kijang Innova nopol S 309 EP, luka parah di bagian kepala, dada dan kakinya patah.

Sementara supir truk trailer nopol L 8493 S, Prayit Pujiano (28), asal Sukorejo, Blitar, kini diperiksa di Mapolres Tuban. Truk trailer kosong muatan ini, sedianya akan berangkat ke Surabaya setelah menurunkan muatan dari Jakarta.

Informasi yang dihimpun detiksurabaya.com menyebutkan, sore itu rombongan Bupati Tuban Haeny Relawati berangkat dari Pendapa Kabupaten Tuban menuju wilayah Kecamatan Bancar. Agendanya akan safari Ramadan di wilayah tersebut.

Ketua Bappeda Tuban yang terlambat berangkat karena kesibukan dinas, harus mengejar rombongan bupati yang dikawal polisi tersebut. Mobdin yang digenjot dengan kecepatan tinggi, akhirnya berasil mengejar rombongan di wilayah Desa Socorejo, Kecamatan Jenu.

Sialnya dari arah barat melaju dengan kecepatan tinggi truk trailer kosong muatan. Supir trailer yang gugup di depannya ada rombongan bupati dengan pengawalan polisi, tak bisa mengendalikan kendaraan.

Tepat di samping rombongan bupati, truk direm mendadak hingga bagian kepala truk oleng ke kanan sampai melintas marka jalan. Bersamaan itu mobdin Ketua Bappeda yang berada di urutan belakang rombongan melaju dengan kecepatan tinggi dari arah berlawanan.

Tabrakan pun tak bisa dihindari. Mobdin yang membentur keras bagian depan truk langsung ringsek. Demikian juga dengan kepala trailer, juga penyok melesak ke belakang.

“Mobil pejabat setelah menabrak sampai terpental, tapi pejabatnya tidak apa-apa. Supirnya yang kelihatan luka parah,” kata Abdul Ghofar, saksi mata di tempat kejadian.

Kasat Lantas Polres Tuban AKP Atim Mardiono yang dikonfirmasi didampingi Kanit Laka Satlantas Polres Tuban Faqih menyatakan, kejadian tersebut masih dalam penyelidikan. “Kejadian ini masih diselidikan petugas. Sedangkan kedua korban saatb ini dirawat di RSUD Tuban,” katanya.(gik/gik)

Sumber : detiknews.com

Transport: London still gridlocked despite congestion charge

TfL says 70,000 fewer cars enter the charge zone each day compared with 2002. Photograph: Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images

· Roads as jammed as they were in 2003, report finds
· Traffic calming and boom in roadworks get blame

Dan Milmo, transport correspondent
The Guardian,
Thursday August 7 2008

The London congestion charge is losing its battle against gridlock after it was revealed that the capital’s streets are as gridlocked now as they were before the levy was introduced.

The £8-a-day charge was considered one of the great successes of Ken Livingstone’s reign as mayor after it was introduced five years ago. However, a boom in roadworks and traffic-calming measures has squeezed driving space and pushed up congestion despite a drop in the number of vehicles entering central London.

Pedestrians are expected to bear the consequences of the fightback against lengthening tailbacks, with pedestrian schemes facing the axe and experts calling for shorter crossing times at traffic lights. Boris Johnson, the London mayor, said he would scrap plans for pedestrian areas, take action against road-digging utility companies and allow motorbikes in bus lanes to reverse the tide of congestion.

Transport for London said yesterday that gridlock in the zone is the same as it was before February 2003, when the measure was introduced. There are 100,000 fewer vehicles entering central London but they are taking longer to travel through – driving 1km takes 2.3 minutes longer than it does at quieter times of day.

The latest figures will give ample ammunition to the scheme’s opponents, particularly those who criticised the extension of the charging zone to west London last year as a measure driven more by revenue-raising than green issues. According to yesterday’s TfL report there has been no easing of congestion in the western zone since the charge was rolled out to Kensington and Notting Hill.

Johnson, who has launched a consultation into whether to scrap the extension, said: “I have always thought that the congestion charge is a blunt instrument. It has proved successful in cutting traffic coming into London but on its own has not resolved the problem of congestion. Various works and schemes going on in the capital have also eroded its impact. I am therefore introducing a more comprehensive approach to easing congestion.”

The mayor said he would force utility companies to apply for permits before starting roadworks and announced the scrapping of a plan to pedestrianise part of Parliament Square in Westminster. Traffic light signals will also be “rephased” – or left on green or red for longer periods of time – in order to smooth out traffic.

The scheme’s backers argue that congestion would be even worse without the congestion charge, which is levied on drivers entering central London between 7am and 6pm on weekdays.

Professor Stephen Glaister, a transport specialist at Imperial College London and former TfL board member, said the figures were no surprise because congestion had been inching back to 2002 levels for years. “Congestion would be a lot worse were it not for the charge,” he said.

Congestion levels in the first three years of the charge were up to 30% lower than 2002 results, but the start of roadworks by Thames Water and other utility firms in 2006 started to push congestion back up.

TfL said cramped road space is the biggest congestion menace. It said 70,000 fewer cars enter the original charging zone compared with 2002, with 30,000 fewer entering the western zone, but gridlock has increased because the reduction in road space has been greater. TfL said utility companies make up to 14,000 applications a month to dig up London roads.

Malcolm Murray-Clark, the TfL executive who introduced the scheme, said the central zone was not under threat but admitted that the western extension could be altered or dropped altogether.

Edmund King, president of the AA, said: “It is disappointing that the charge is not doing what it says on the tin, which is to reduce congestion.”

FAQ: Is it the end of the road?

Has the congestion charge been a failure?

No. For the first three years, Ken Livingstone’s signature policy as London mayor was a success. Congestion fell by up to 30% compared with 2002 levels. Transport experts add that congestion would be even worse if the scheme was not in place – it has taken 100,000 cars out of central and western London.

What went wrong?

According to the mayor’s transport body, Transport for London, congestion shot up from 2006 when there was a dramatic increase in roadworks as London’s gas and water mains underwent repairs. Thames Water has already been convicted for breaking rules on streetworks as a result.

What does this mean for other schemes?

Manchester hopes to launch a scheme in 2013 but stresses that its plans are very different. Under the proposals motorists would be charged to pass through two cordons at peak times.

How good an eco-driver are you?

Regulator’s tips on careful motoring may save £500 a year

by Stephen Bates in Hertfordshire

The Guardian,
Wednesday September 10 2008

As the rising price of petrol starts to affect driving habits, it was perhaps only a question of time before the Driving Standards Agency, regulator of driving tests, got in on the act. Deploying an instinct which combines expediency with usefulness, the agency is today instituting eco-awareness for those undergoing the test.

Would-be drivers can expect Britain’s 2,000 examiners to comment not just on their proficiency in deciding whether it is safe to let them out on the roads alone, but also on their driving efficiency.

Roaring through the gears and sudden braking – apart from the emergency stop routine – will not mean you fail the test, but may give rise to a word of advice about the advisability of smooth acceleration from the examiner at the end. You will get a nice leaflet too.

To assess just what sort of a saving there is to be made, I was let loose on the roads of Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, with one of the DSA’s chief instructors to check my environmental awareness behind the wheel.

I like to think of myself as a pretty careful driver – 30 years without an accident and only the odd penalty point or three – but it’s fair to say that in 1977 when I passed my test the environmental impact did not play much noticeable part, not least because in those halcyon days petrol was still under a pound a gallon.

Sitting with an instructor beside me for the first time since then – in his shiny Ford estate with all the gizmos rather than my battered 20-year-old Renault 5 which only starts, like its owner, with a wheeze these days – was also a daunting experience.

Beside the satnav and the CD console – luxuries that I am also not used to – sat a small black handset like a mobile phone, ready to record every stutter and over-acceleration as we sped away on a nine-mile course through housing estates, up hills and down dales, past the estancias of suburban Hertfordshire and, briefly, down the London-bound A1. I thought I did pretty well, until we got out and Bob, the instructor, said: “Hmmm, something to work on there.”

Back at the test centre, he pointed out my shortcomings, together with notes on smoother driving, gentler acceleration, keener anticipation of traffic movements, less sudden braking and, of course, the importance of keeping the car serviced and well-maintained, uncluttered with impedimenta or wind-dragging roof racks.

“It’s a holistic view of environmentally-friendly driving,” he said, proving his command of jargon skills as well as driving ones.

“Environmentally-safe driving doesn’t mean going exceptionally slow or arriving later. Maybe you arrive in a better frame of mind, more safely – and having saved some money. These [petrol] price rises are a godsend for this scheme.”

With that, we returned to the car and proceeded along the same route again, though with rather more instruction this time, and the aggravating pointing out of my faults, including what I had fondly imagined was an energy-saving tendency to slow to a stop in neutral rather than by engaging progressively lower gears.

Surveys have shown that drivers instructed in eco-driving methods achieve an average 8% saving in fuel over a year, with newly-qualified drivers managing even better at 15%.

How did I do? A saving of 0.4 of a litre of fuel on the nine miles, equivalent in an hour’s urban driving of using 1.8 litres instead of 2.2: roughly 50p for this trip but, multiplied by the 10,000 miles I might do in a year, £500.

“That’s a reasonable amount of pocket money, isn’t it?” said Bob.

Source : http://www.guardian.co.uk

Creativity Helps Rochester’s Transit System Turn a Profit

James Rajotte for The New York Times

Bus ridership in Rochester has risen 7.4 percent in two years. The transit authority uses subsidies from businesses and has cut some little-used routes.

By WILLIAM NEUMAN

Published: September 14, 2008

At a time when public transportation systems around the country are struggling with soaring fuel costs and pinched budgets, the bus system in Rochester has done something that few others would contemplate: This month, it lowered its single-ride fare.

Rochester’s Regional Transit Service is no behemoth. It carries 15 million riders a year, as many as the New York City transit system carries in two days. But as economic hard times have reduced tax revenues and increased demand for government transit subsidies, its experiences may provide valuable lessons for larger cities that are planning fare increases, like New York, Minneapolis and Cleveland.

The Rochester system, which expects to run a surplus for the third year in a row, has been able to reduce its one-ride fare in part by eliminating some low-trafficked routes, avoiding debt and aggressively raising revenues from other sources. The fare fell to $1 from $1.25 on Sept. 1.

It has, for instance, reached agreements with the local public school district, colleges and private businesses to help subsidize its operations, warning in some cases that certain routes might be cut if ridership did not increase or a local business did not help cover the cost. In recent years, income from these agreements has equaled or exceeded the income from regular passenger fares.

All the while, ridership has increased by 7.4 percent over the last two years in an area where the population has remained stable. And while only about 1 out of 6 customers pays the single-ride fare (the majority use daily, weekly or monthly passes), the transit service expects further ridership gains now with the fare cut in place.

“With gas prices at record highs, there is no better way to convince people who are beginning to look at public transportation,” said Mark R. Aesch, the chief executive of the Rochester Genesee Regional Transportation Authority, which runs the bus system.

Bus riders in interviews last week were generally pleased with the fare reduction, although some were upset that it did not extend to the multitrip passes.

“It’s the best thing that’s happened in a long time,” said Eric Johnson, 25, a construction worker who rides the bus several times a week and pays the single-trip fare. “With everything going up in price, for once something’s going down.”

Rochester’s successes seem all the more noteworthy given the trend in public transit fares around the country. In New York City, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority raised subway and bus fares for most riders last March, and it has proposed another increase that would take effect in July and a third in 2011. In Minneapolis, bus and light-rail fares are scheduled to go up next month, and in Cleveland, transit officials are considering both a fare increase and service cuts that would take place in November.

Any comparisons between Rochester’s transit system and its larger cousins must take into account the vast difference in scale. The Rochester system has 265 buses and an annual budget of $62 million. New York City Transit owns more than 4,500 buses and 6,200 subway cars, and it spends more than $6 billion a year to run them.

Still, the accomplishments in Rochester are notable. Efficiency has improved, with buses driving fewer miles, carrying more passengers and generating more revenue in fares. The transit agency has installed a satellite locator system in its buses to track whether they are on schedule. Next year, it will install electronic signs in some bus stops to tell riders when the next bus will arrive.

New York has struggled for years to make similar technologies work with its fleet, with only limited success.

And the Rochester authority has no debt, while the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the buses and subways in New York City, the Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North Railroad, is one of the biggest debtors in the nation, owing about $24 billion.

Just four years ago, the Rochester authority was in financial straits and facing large deficits. Since then, it has lobbied successfully for increases in state aid, receiving $32.8 million this year, up from $16 million four years ago. It helps that a local assemblyman, David F. Gantt, is chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee.

The authority has banked its surpluses and now has $19 million in cash reserves. New York, the authority is projecting a budget shortfall of close to $1 billion next year.

The Rochester authority has also helped itself by working out subsidy agreements with local businesses and educational institutions.

One of the most important is with the Rochester City School District, which uses the Regional Transit Service as the primary bus system for nearly all of its students in the 7th through 12th grades. Several years ago, the school district paid the equivalent of a regular fare for each student rider, according to Mr. Aesch. But about three years ago, with the transit system facing a financial crisis, he began discussions with the district about radically altering the arrangement.

Mr. Aesch told school officials that the money they were paying to transport students only partly covered the cost and that the system could no longer afford the service without a significant increase in payments. The school district agreed to an increase, and it now pays about $2.22 for each student ride.

Even by paying a premium, the school district believes it is getting a good deal, said Jean-Claude Brizard, the superintendent. He said that during the current school year, the district will pay the Regional Transit Service about $10 million for student bus travel. But the district estimated that it if it contracted with a private company for the same service, the cost would be more than $2 million higher.

“We’ve saved a ton of money,” Mr. Brizard said.

The arrangement is one that transit officials in New York City could only dream of. The subway and bus system in New York City now provides millions of rides a year to students using free or half-fare passes. In turn, it receives a total of $90 million from the city and state. But according to the authority, that accounts for only half the value of the lost fares.

In Rochester, the transit system has also formed agreements with private businesses and colleges. It runs shuttle buses on the campus of the Rochester Institute of Technology and provides special weekend service to the campus, for which it receives about $1 million a year. The developer of an apartment complex in suburban Brighton pays $1,200 a year to ensure that a bus line runs by the property.

And last week, the Rochester authority announced a new agreement with Bryant & Stratton College, which has two campuses in the area. Under the deal, the college will pay $17,700 in exchange for 350 bus passes that it can distribute at a discount to students. In exchange, transit officials have agreed to continue service on a little-used section of a bus route that goes to the college’s campus in the suburb of Greece, and to run a bus there later in the day for students taking evening classes.

“They recognized that with gas prices high, and trying to attract students to the campus, they needed to keep that service in place in order to attract students to the school,” Mr. Aesch said, referring to the college’s officials.

Marc Ambrosi, a campus director for Bryant & Stratton, said, “On both sides there’s benefits.”

Expressing deep concern about the potential for future fare hikes in New York City, Gov. David A. Paterson created a commission in the spring to recommend long-term solutions to the New York authority’s deepening financial problems. But it is not clear how many of the lessons from Rochester might apply.

Jeremy Soffin, a spokesman for the authority, said that while he was not familiar with the arrangements in Rochester, the authority in New York had not pursued similar arrangements with private companies, and there were no bus routes with ridership so low that they could be discontinued.

But he said the two systems faced similar challenges.

“Even though we operate at a completely different scale,” Mr. Soffin said, “the commonality is that we both have to think creatively to fund the system where the fare doesn’t cover the cost of providing the ride.”

Source : The New York Times

Data Kecelakaan di Indonesia Bias?

Posting ini sekaligus menjawab pertanyaan Winda.

Data kecelakaan di Indonesia memang cukup bias, karena banyak kecelakaan yang tidak terdata. Sebenarnya sumber data kecelakaan di Indonesia ada di 3 instansi (yang juga terkesan sendiri2, tidak koordinatif), yaitu Kepolisian, Rumah Sakit, dan Jasa Raharja. Namun bila kita telusuri lebih lanjut, data di instansi2 ini tidak pernah sama, selalu sangat berbeda.

Bahkan pernah ada penelitian yang menyatakan bahwa jumlah kecelakaan yg sebenarnya terjadi di Indonesia punya angka 20 – 30 persen lebih tinggi dari yang terdata. Indonesia memang miskin data, namun ketika ada data pun kita sering tidak tahu harus bagaimana mengkompilasi dan mengolahnya.

Ada beberapa sebab data kecelakaan menjadi bias :

1. Karena memang tidak dilaporkan oleh yang bersangkutan (maksudnya oleh sang korban kecelakaan). Tidak dilaporkan ini juga macem2 sebabnya : ada yang karena males berurusan dengan polisi, ada yang langsung damai di jalan, etc).

2. Tidak terdeteksi (misalnya kecelakaan kecil, yg mungkin hanya berakibat cedera ringan), walaupun seharusnya tetap harus dilakukan pencatatan dan pendataan.

3. Sistem database kita yang masih payah.

4. Kurangnya koordinasi antar instansi, misalnya RS, Kepolisian dan Jasa Raharja.

Lalu harus bagaimana? Tentu saja kita harus memperbaiki keseluruhan sistem dari masing2 penyebab biasnya data tersebut. Misalnya dengan membangun sistem database yang integral di masing2 instansi, sehingga data yang masuk otomatis akan terupdate di instansi yg lain. Yang tak kalah penting adalah mensosialisasikan kepada masyarakat bahwa pencatatan data kecelakaan adalah sangat penting.

by Rizki Beo