Click on the headline (link) for the full text.

Many more articles are available through the Energy Bulletin homepage

Why they fight... the Heathrow airport expansion
Joss Garman, Guardian (Comment)
Feet firmly on the ground

BAA is seeking to stop me and my fellow protesters from approaching Heathrow. But there is nothing 'wild' about our claims - quite the opposite.
---
It is not often that you wake up to find yourself described in a Times editorial as a "semi-socialist" flat-earther but on the second day of our high court hearing in which BAA is seeking to injunct me (and Lord knows how many more Britons) from even approaching Heathrow, that is the turn of phrase the Thunderer has reached for.

Leaving aside the long history of climate change denial articulated by Times leader writers until recently (who is the flat-earther?), I would like to address the writer's claim that aviation protesters are engaging in "a wild postulation" that must be challenged "by fact". Here are those "wild" claims:

• Aviation accounts for 13% of the UK's climate impact. Not figures dreamed up by "dogmatists" but instead by our own New Labour government (a group no one could accurately describe as semi-socialist).

• If government gives the go ahead to a third run way at Heathrow the climate impact of UK aviation will dramatically increase.

• Emission reductions from technological advances in aircraft design will be wiped out by aviation expansion. Waiting for an aeroplane that doesn't cause climate change is like holding out for a cigarette that doesn't cause cancer.

• As things stand there is a grave danger that the government will not listen to reason. New Labour's links to the aviation industry are so deep, the revolving door between the two so active, that peer-reviewed climate science is now being ignored by ministers in the aviation debate.

The most famous Times editorial in history was entitled: "Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel?" As BAA attempts to stifle protest and debate one might reasonably ask: who, indeed?
(2 August 2007)
I think this may be the first of similar protests to come, and is worth watching. Government/industry perceives a threat to business-as-usual and overreacts ... the struggle for public opinion is on.

Japan's hybrid train hailed as the future of rail travel
David McNeill, The Independent
It seems an unlikely venue for a potential revolution in public transport - a sleepy town in the lush, pine-carpeted mountains of rural Japan. But this is where travellers began paying yesterday to board the world's first hybrid train service.

The brightly coloured Hybrid Train E200 pulled quietly out of the station carrying about 100 passengers. It was waved off by cheering schoolchildren, a crew of traditional Taiko drummers and several ecstatic trainspotters.

Mikihiro Kobayashi, a 27-year-old engineer who took the day off work to see the E200's debut, said: "I love trains and wanted to check this one out for myself. I hope Japan exports it because the environment is becoming a big issue around the world."

Looking like a slightly sleeker version of the mechanical warhorses that ferry millions of Japanese to work and school every day, the train might pass unnoticed by the keenest trainspotter. But inside it is quieter than a conventional train, thanks to a battery-powered motor that powers it at low speeds.

Screens in each carriage give all the detail any passenger could want. Designed and run by the transport giantJapan Rail (JR), each 180-million-yen train is powered by a super fuel-efficient diesel engine and lithium-ion batteries that recharge every time the brakes are applied, a system that cuts power, noise and emissions by up to 60 per cent.

Kenji Motate, of JR East, said: "We're very proud of it. This is a very beautiful area so it is fitting that a train so kind to the environment is debuting here."
(1 August 2007)
Contributor SP writes:
Did rail just get even more attractive?

$100m a year call to boost pedal power
Royce Millar and Stephen Moynihan, The Age
MELBOURNE must take a "quantum leap" in promoting cycling as a safe transport alternative, according to an expert report commissioned by The Age.

Professor Nick Low, Director of the Australasian Centre for Governance and Management of Urban Transport, argues that by 2030, 30 per cent of all city trips should be made by bicycle.

Although the State Government has earmarked $70 million for cycling projects over 10 years, Professor Low has called for a fivefold increase in state funding for cycling programs and infrastructure to $100 million annually.

He argues that at a time of huge environmental challenges and widespread obesity problems, "We now need to take a quantum leap in bike planning for metropolitan Melbourne."

His comments come as federal Health Minister Tony Abbott told The Age the Government saw cycling as a way to improve the health of Australians and to combat climate change and traffic congestion.

"I think every new (housing) development should be built with a footpath and every major road should have an associated bike path or else a decent shoulder where a bike can travel safely," he said.

...Bicycle Victoria general manager Harry Barber says the bike network in the middle and outer suburbs is made up of fragmented paths and trails. He says a "mind-set shift" is necessary within Government about bikes in the burbs.

Given the right conditions, says the Cycling Promotion Fund, potential for bike riding in Melbourne is enormous. Almost two thirds of all trips in Melbourne are under five kilometres.

"Many of these short car trips could comfortably be completed by bicycle," says program director Rosemarie Speidel.

"We're at this stage now where we want to accommodate bikes without infringing on cars, but if you want to get more people riding bicycles to achieve modal shift then you are going to have to give preferential treatment to bicycles."
(4 August 2007)

How arch rivals colluded to hike up cost of air travel
Dan Milmo, The Guardian
It was a phone call that cost British Airways £270m and untold damage to its reputation among passengers worldwide.

On August 9 2004 the airline's then head of communications, Iain Burns, contacted his opposite numbers at Virgin Atlantic and said BA was minded to increase the levy it puts on tickets to cover the rising cost of oil - otherwise known as its fuel surcharge.

Simultaneous announcements of price hikes followed, establishing an illicit relationship that saw six further conversations and announcements by January 2006, while the surcharge climbed from £2.50 to £30 for a one-way ticket.

Though BA yesterday distanced itself from former employees implicated in the scandal as the regulatory verdicts increased the likelihood of charges, the fines on the company are far from the end of the story.

The criminal investigation on both sides of the Atlantic, by the Office of Fair Trading and the Department of Justice, is expected to focus on who initiated the discussions at BA.

...Explainer: Fuel surcharges

Fuel surcharges were the airline industry's response to rising oil prices, which have led to a sharp rise in recent years in the price of aviation fuel. For much of the 90s the world oil price fluctuated either side of $20 a barrel but it began to rise in the new millennium.
(2 August 2007)
Contributor Stuart McCarthy writes:
Elsewhere, as crude reaches fresh record prices, airlines such as Qantas once again begin to increase their fuel 'surcharges' See Reuters.