Opting to take the train instead of driving for environmental reasons? Think twice about ‘green’ transport, say scientists

June 11, 2009 at 12:32 pm

(Source: AFP via Yahoo & Science Daily)

Image Courtesy: IOP - Energy consumption and GHG emissions per PKT (The vehicle operation components are shown with gray patterns. Other vehicle components are shown in shades of blue. Infrastructure components are shown in shades of red and orange. The fuel production component is shown in green. All components appear in the order they are shown in the legend.)

Do you worry a lot about the environment and do everything you can to reduce your carbon footprint? Are you the one who frets about  tailpipe emissions, greenhouse gases and climate change?

If yes,  you must be the one who prefers to take the train or the bus rather than a plane, and avoid using a car whenever you can, faithful to the belief that this inflicts less harm to the planet.

Well, there could be a nasty surprise in store for you, for taking public transport may not be as green as you automatically think, says a new US study published in Environmental Research Letters, a publication of Britain’s Institute of Physics.  Often unknown to the public, there are an array of hidden or displaced emissions that ramp up the simple “tailpipe” tally, which is based on how much carbon is spewed out by the fossil fuels used to make a trip. Environmental engineers Mikhail Chester and Arpad Horvath at theUniversity of California at Davis say that when these costs are included, a more complex and challenging picture emerges.

In some circumstances, for instance, it could be more eco-friendly to drive into a city — even in an SUV, the bete noire of green groups — rather than take a suburban train. It depends on seat occupancy and the underlying carbon cost of the mode of transport.

The pair give an example of how the use of oil, gas or coal to generate electricity to power trains can skew the picture.

Boston has a metro system with high energy efficiency. The trouble is, 82 percent of the energy to drive it comes from dirty fossil fuels.  By comparison, San Francisco‘s local railway is less energy-efficient than Boston’s. But it turns out to be rather greener, as only 49 percent of the electricity is derived from fossils.

The paper points out that the “tailpipe” quotient does not include emissions that come from building transport infrastructure — railways, airport terminals, roads and so on — nor the emissions that come from maintaining this infrastructure over its operational lifetime.

The researchers also touch on the effect of low passenger occupancy and show that we are naïve to automatically assume one form of transport is more environmentally friendly than another. They conclude from their calculations that a half-full Boston light railway is only as environmentally friendly, per kilometre traveled, as a midsize aircraft at 38 per cent occupancy.  From cataloguing the varied environmental costs the researchers come to some surprising conclusions. A comparison between light railways in both Boston and San Franciso show that despite Boston boasting a light railway with low operational energy use, their LRT is a far larger greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter because 82 per cent of the energy generated in Boston is fossil-fuel based, compared to only 49 per cent in San Francisco.

Total life-cycle energy inputs and GHG emissions contribute an additional 155 per cent for rail, 63 per cent for cars and buses, and 32 per cent for air systems over vehicle exhaust pipe operation.

So getting a complete view of the ultimate environmental cost of the type of transport, over its entire lifespan, should help decision-makers to make smarter investments.

For travelling distances up to, say, 1,000 kilometres (600 miles), “we can ask questions as to whether it’s better to invest in a long-distance railway, improving the air corridor or boosting car occupancy,” said Chester.  The calculations are based on US technology and lifestyles.

Click here to read the entire article.    Also, you can access the PDF version of the research paper here.

Journal reference:

  • Mikhail V Chester and Arpad Horvath. Environmental assessment of passenger transportation should include infrastructure and supply chainsEnvironmental Research Letters, 2009; 4 (024008) DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/4/2/024008

Ride of the Future? – ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent George Stephanopoulos Calls Coda EV the American Answer to Japanese Prius

June 10, 2009 at 7:20 pm

(Source: ABC News & Autobloggreen)

I had an opportunity to take a ride today in a new electric car that has perhaps one of the best shots at being the U.S. answer to Japan’s popular Toyota Prius.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Designed by Santa Monica, California-based Coda Automotive, the four-door sedan isn’t powered by gas. The electric battery can plug into any standard AC outlet.

Coda says a 40-mile commute takes about 2 hours to charge.

Right now, the car and it’s battery are manufactured in China. But the company has applied for tens of millions of dollars worth of stimulus funding through the Department of Energy to build an electric battery plant in a factory in Enfield, Connecticut to fuel it’s vehicles.

“The U.S. has zero,  absolutely no mass battery manufacturing in the United States.  So we’re going to China where they can mass produce the batteries to get these cars to market in the U.S. fast until we can get these produced here” said Kevin Czinger, president and CEO of Coda Automotive.

Coda plans to partner with aerospace battery designer Connecticut-based Yardney Technical Products to create and mass produce the first U.S. electric car battery.

The company says the plant could employ 600 people at first, and then possibly grow. Beginning next June, Coda plans to have the capacity to build 2,700 cars and 20,000 a year in 2011. By comparison, Toyota sold about 159,000second-generation Toyota Prius hybrid cars last year in the U.S.  The price tag? $45,000 — but buyers could receive a federal tax credit worth $7,500 and other state incentives that Coda says could drive the price down to $32,500.

Image Courtesy: Autobloggreen

Click here to see more hi-res pictures of the Coda sedan.

New Chrysler Takes Shape As Fiat Alliance Formalized; New CEO Marchionne starts to spin his magic immediately

June 10, 2009 at 5:09 pm

(Source: Dow Jones via Wall Street Journal & LeftLane News.com, WTOP)

Italy’s Fiat is the new owner of most of Chrysler’s assets, closing a deal Wednesday that saves the troubled U.S. automaker from liquidation and places a new company in the hands of Fiat’s CEO.  The deal creates a leaner company known as Chrysler Group LLC, which is not in bankruptcy protection and is free of billions in debt, 789 underperforming dealerships and burdensome labor costs that hobbled the old Chrysler LLC.   The future of Chrysler Group LLC began to take shape Wednesday as its new leadership announced sweeping management and organizational changes.

The announcements came as Chrysler merged its assets with Fiat SpA (FIATY), following a six-week bankruptcy process for the U.S. auto maker. The last hurdle to the sale of Chrysler assets to Fiat was cleared late Tuesday when the U.S. Supreme Court rejected creditors’ objections to the deal.

The completion of the Chrysler deal bolsters President Barack Obama’s administration, which guided Chrysler through bankruptcy and hopes that a concurrent restructuring at General Motors Corp. (GM), which filed for Chapter 11 on June 1, will also be completed quickly.

Chrysler confirmed that its new Chief Executive is Sergio Marchionne, who also serves as Fiat’s CEO. Marchionne replaces Robert Nardelli, who served as Chrysler’s chief for the past 20 months. As reported, Robert Kidder, the lead independent director at Morgan Stanley, will become chairman of Chrysler’s new board of directors. Current Vice Chairman Jim Press will be appointed deputy CEO and special advisor, the company said.

Marchionne said in a letter to Chrysler employees that the company will be more focused and nimble, benefiting significantly from its global alliance with the Italian auto maker.   The new Chrysler Group LLC noted that it would soon reopen Chrysler factories that were idled during the bankruptcy process, costing the automaker $100 million per day.

Under the old Chrysler, the automaker’s three brands – Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep – were all vertically integrated. However, Fiat has now separate all parts of Chrysler—including its Mopar parts division – with executives heading up each division. The new setup largely mirrors Fiat’s management style with its Fiat, Alfa Romeoand Lancia brands.

“The new company moves forward with significant strategic advantages, including a healthy balance sheet, a competitive cost structure, a leaner and more efficient dealer network, sound supplier agreements and significantly improved product quality and operational efficiency,” he said in the letter.

Chrysler, the smallest of the three U.S. auto makers, sought emergency government aid and was forced to file for bankruptcy in recent months owing to a steep decline in sales that drained the company’s cash. Chrysler enters this new chapter of its storied history at a time when the outlook for the auto industry remains bleak, amid continued economic weakness and tight credit conditions. Jim Press – Chrysler’s former co-president – might have been questioning his decision to move from Toyota to Chrysler in 2007 in recent weeks, but the automotive exec’s career is safe as Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has named Press the deputy CEO of the reborn Chrysler.

Michael Manley, Michale Accavitti and Peter Fong, all of whom were previously with Chrysler, will run Jeep, Dodge and Chrysler, respectively. Pietro Gorlier, who joins Chrysler from Fiat, will head Mopar.

Chrysler’s swift passage through about six weeks of bankruptcy proceedings was helped by the involvement of the Obama administration’s auto task force, which provided billions in financing and helped negotiate a deal with the company’s stakeholders.

As part of the reorganization plan, the new Chrysler will be 20% owned by Fiat, while more than 55% will be controlled by the United Auto Workers union. Fiat’s stake could increase to 35% if the new company meets benchmarks intended to insure the development of fuel-efficient vehicles in the U.S., and it has the option to become the majority stakeholder once U.S. loans have been repaid. The U.S. and Canadian governments also have minority stakes.

The sale to Fiat SpA marks a victory for the Obama administration, which shepherded Chrysler LLC into Chapter 11 protection on April 30 with the hope that the company would emerge in a matter of months with a new partner.

“This morning’s closing represents a proud moment in Chrysler’s storied history,” said the Treasury Department in a written statement. “The Chrysler-Fiat Alliance has now exited the bankruptcy process and is poised to emerge as a competitive, viable automaker.”

The government will loan the new company $4.7 billion, to be repaid within eight years along with interest and $288 million in fees.

The Treasury had given Chrysler LLC $3.3 billion in debtor-in-possession financing to support the company throughout the bankruptcy process. Chrysler LLC remains in bankruptcy court, as it winds down operations, selling plants it doesn’t want, dispersing payments to debtholders and settling any other claims that were not transferred to the new company. Those actions could linger until next year, if not longer.

As part of the alliance, Fiat will contribute to Chrysler technology, platforms and powertrains for small- and medium-sized cars.

Details, Details, Details: A quick comparision of the House vs. Senate forms of “Cash for Clunkers” a.k.a Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS Act) bill

June 10, 2009 at 3:21 pm

(Source: Associated Press, The Detroit News, Streetsblog & Jalopnik)

With the “Cash for Clunkers” bill successfully clearing the House floor, there is a lot of chatter about the fate of this bill in the Senate.   The auto industry and Michigan lawmakers are pushing for quick Senate action on this legislation to boost auto sales, after the House overwhelmingly passed the bill Tuesday.

But it remains unclear when Senate supporters may overcome the objections of Senate appropriators and a group of senators who say the House proposal doesn’t do enough to improve fuel efficiency on the nation’s highways.

The House approved its version Tuesday, 298-199, with substantial Republican support despite the opposition of House leaders including Minority Leader John Boehner and whip Eric Cantor.

Sens. Debbie Stabenow, D-Lansing, and Sam Brownback, R-Kan., introduced a nearly identical bill in the Senate, but had to withdraw an attempt to get a floor vote last week.

Opposition came from members of the Senate Appropriations Committee, which objected to funding provisions of the bill, and from senators who want tougher fuel economy requirements.

Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., introduced a competing proposal on Monday.   Feinstein’s proposal would require drivers to achieve a 25 percent fuel-efficiency increase before receiving a tax credit for ditching their clunkers. But Michigan Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D) is pushing for a trade-in tax credit that’s very similar to Sutton’s — truck owners would only have to increase their fuel efficiency by 2 miles per gallon to be eligible.  The requirements for car trade-ins aren’t much better under the Stabenow and Sutton plans, with a mere4 mpg increase in fuel economy triggering the $3,500 tax credit.  With Rep. Sutton’s plan winning the House approval this week, Stabenow’s Senate counterpart could potentially get a leg up over Feinstein’s.

While we await the Senate action, I put together a quick side by side comparision of the two bills  (data from Associated Press).

Data Courtesy: Associated Press

Also, our friends at Jalopnik have compiled an awesome visual that simplifies the rs details of this “Cash for Clunkealong” with some great analysis about the worthiness of the program for buyers.

First of all, operable vehicles are required and there aren’t many people driving around with vehicles worth less than $1,500. Many old crappy cars, in fact, can still demand up to $2,500 on the open market. This means you’re going to get, max, $2000 for your trade-in. The least valuable qualifying cars, of course, are actually the more efficient compact vehicles, which makes getting the necessary 10 MPG improvement unlikely.

The second problem, stemming from the first, is quantifying the number of people who actually drive around in cars worth less than $2,500 and can actually afford a new car. Our instinct tells us there aren’t many people. This means people taking advantage of the program will, typically, have to be excited by the prospect of saving $1,000 or $2,000. These people should already have been swayed by intense discounting from automakers in recent months.

Image Courtesy: Jalopnik

Click here to read the entire article.

Big Ed, the ‘New GM’ Board Chair, says “I don’t know anything about cars”; Vows to ‘Learn About Cars’ on the job

June 10, 2009 at 2:22 pm

(Source: Bloomberg)

Edward E. Whitacre Jr. built AT&T Inc. into the biggest U.S. provider of telephone service over a 43-year-career. By his own admission, he becomes chairman of General Motors Corp. knowing nothing about the auto industry.

The 6-foot-4-inch Texan nicknamed “Big Ed” said steering the nation’s largest automaker after bankruptcy is “a public service.” People who know him say he can meet GM’s need for the type of transformation he orchestrated at Dallas-based AT&T.

“I don’t know anything about cars,” Whitacre, 67, said yesterday in an interview after his appointment. “A business is a business, and I think I can learn about cars. I’m not that old, and I think the business principles are the same.”

Whitacre’s selection bucks more than a half-century of tradition at GM, where the only non-executives to lead the board since 1937 were interim ChairmanKent Kresa and John Smale, who held the job from 1992 through 1995. Whitacre will take the post when Detroit-based GM exits Chapter 11, perhaps by Aug. 31.

A bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering and record in shaping a “monolithic” AT&T into a diversified enterprise make Whitacre “a good choice,” said Jim Hall, principal of 2953 Analytics auto-consulting firm in Birmingham, Michigan.

“He was one of the guys who helped create a new AT&T that wasn’t so dependent on land-line phone service,” said Hall, a former GM engineer. “There’s a parallel with General Motors. GM is not now about just making cars. It’s about re-creating itself as a 21st-century car company. They have to have somebody at the top that understands they have to make a new GM.”

“Lots of conversations” followed with Steven Rattner, the Wall Street dealmaker running President Barack Obama’s car task force, said Whitacre, adding that Treasury’s message was: “We need your help. It’s a great company. You could be a lot of assistance to GM.”

Whitacre announced his retirement in 2007, leaving with compensation valued at $158.5 million, according to the Corporate Library in Portland, Maine.

GM’s directors are now working for $1 a year. The automaker plans to disclose board compensation terms when it announces the rest of the new members, said Julie Gibson, a spokeswoman.

“He started the whole telecom consolidation because he recognized that scale was going to be important,” said Jim Ellis, 66, a former general counsel at AT&T, who worked with Whitacre for about 30 years. “He had a vision to build the company, to increase the sales and the size, the efficiency.”

The ability to sustain a “global enterprise” and set clear lines of responsibility is pivotal to GM’s future, said Michael Robinet, an automotive analyst at CSM Worldwide Inc. in Northville, Michigan.

Whitacre, a resident of San Antonio, a South Texas city of 1.2 million, will set a different cultural and geographic tone at GM, said Kahan and Ellis, the former AT&T executives.  As a “man of action,” Whitacre won’t sit still, Kahan said. “He doesn’t like long meetings,” Kahan said. “He’ll be fresh air.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Have interesting ideas for solving the traffic congestion problem? ITS Congestion Challenge gives $50,000 for the best idea

June 10, 2009 at 11:08 am

The Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America), in partnership with IBM and Spencer Trask Collaborative Innovations (STCI), has launched a global challenge to identify innovative ideas for combating transportation congestion.

“The average metropolitan commuter in the U.S. spends nearly a full work week stuck in traffic each year, wasting precious time and fuel and impacting the environment, safety conditions on roads, and economic productivity to the tune of more than 1 percent of GDP,” said ITS America President and CEO Scott Belcher. “Allowing congestion to grind cities, suburbs and supply chains to a halt every morning and afternoon is unacceptable when we have innovative tools, technologies, and strategies available to manage our transportation systems and utilize our infrastructure more effectively.”

The ITS Congestion Challenge is a global competition to identify the best and most creative ideas to effectively reduce congestion and its impacts on the economy, environment, and quality of life.

The competition is open to entrepreneurs, commuters, transportation experts, researchers, universities, and citizens from all fields around the globe. All ideas will be reviewed discussed and rated by an open global community, to determine the best and most creative ideas to effectively solve the consequences of traffic congestion.

The winner will be announced during the 16th World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems in Stockholm, Sweden, September 21 – 25, 2009, and will receive a cash investment of $50,000 USD, as well as development and implementation support to pursue turning the ideas into real-world solutions.

More information is available on the competition including key attributes winning entries will be expected to incorporate. Participants will be able to post solutions, collaborate in an open community to improve solution entries, and ultimately vote for those solutions they believe best relieve the issues caused by congestion.

BREAKING: House passes ‘cash for clunkers’ legislation

June 9, 2009 at 9:30 pm

(Source:  Autoblog & Detroit Free Press)

The U.S. House approved the “cash for clunkers” legislation earlier today, paving the way for consumers to snag up to $4,500 for trading in their older vehicles for new, more fuel efficient transport.

The bill, which passed 298-119, drew overwhelming support from automakers, local business groups and dealers who claimed the passage could boost sales – further aiding GM and Chrysler’s “reinvention” – during the economic downturn.

The House bill sets aside $4 billion to pay for electronic vouchers given to owners of older vehicles toward new models. With auto sales running at their lowest rate in four decades, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill could spur sales of about 625,000 vehicles; backers are hoping for 1 million.

The act “will shore up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies,” said Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Ohio. “It will improve our environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.”

The government’s interest in goosing the vehicle market extends to its ownership inGeneral Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC, both of which are counting on a healthier U.S. market in the coming years for survival.

“The auto industry is going through a tremendous restructuring,” said Rep. Sander Levin, D-Royal Oak. “If there is not increased demand, that restructuring cannot succeed.”

Under the plan, owners of cars and trucks that get less than 18 m.p.g. could get a voucher of $3,500 to $4,500 for a new vehicle, depending on the mileage of the new model.

Supreme Court clears the way for Chrysler-Fiat deal

June 9, 2009 at 8:45 pm

(Source:  AP via Yahoo)

The Supreme Court on Tuesday cleared the way for Chrysler LLC’s sale to Fiat, turning down a last-ditch appeal by opponents that included consumer groups and three Indiana pension plans.

The court rejected a plea to block the sale of most of Chrysler’s assets to the Italian automaker. Chrysler, Fiat and the Obama administration had warned that the high court’s intervention could have scuttled the sale.

federal appeals court in New York had earlier approved the sale, but gave opponents until Monday afternoon to try to get the Supreme Court to intervene.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg ordered a temporary delay just before a 4 p.m. deadline on Monday. A little more than 24 hours later, the court freed the automakers to complete their deal.

The opponents include a trio of Indiana pension plans, consumer groups and individuals with product-related lawsuits.

The court issued a brief, unsigned opinion explaining its action. To obtain a delay, or stay, someone must show that at least four of the nine justices find that the issue raised is serious enough to warrant hearing a full appeal and that a majority of the court will conclude the lower court decision was wrong.

“The applicants have not carried that burden,” the court said.

Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock expressed disappointment with the decision and said options seem limited for opponents of the sale. “Obviously the supreme court of the land is the supreme court of the land,” Mourdock said. “The United States government has, I continue to believe, acted egregiously by taking away the traditional rights held by secured creditors.”

Click here to read the entire article.

The Auto-Oil Nexus Continues: ExxonMobil Corporation Board Member Edward Whitacre, Jr. to Become Chairman of New GM

June 9, 2009 at 5:10 pm

(Source:  The Auto Channel)

Edward E. Whitacre, Jr., former chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc., will become chairman of the New GM when the company is launched later this summer, GM’s interim Chairman Kent Kresa announced today. Kresa will continue to serve as interim chairman until the launch.

Whitacre, 67, was chairman and CEO of AT&T Inc. and its predecessor companies from 1990 to 2007. During his tenure, which began with Southwestern Bell, Whitacre led the company through a series of mergers and acquisitions–including that of AT&T in 2005–to create the nation’s largest provider of local, long distance and wireless services. He serves on the boards of ExxonMobil Corporation and the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation and holds a degree in industrial engineering from Texas Technological University.

Whitacre and Kresa, along with current board members Philip A. Laskawy, Kathryn V. Marinello, Erroll B. Davis, Jr., E. Neville Isdell and President and Chief Executive Officer Frederick A. Henderson, will serve as the nucleus of the New GM board, providing management oversight and a continuing commitment to transparency and world-class standards of corporate governance.

The six other members of the current board will most likely retire no later than the approval of the sale of GM assets to the new entity. A selection process is currently underway for four more directors to serve on the board of the New GM. In addition, the Canadian government and the new UAW Voluntary Employee Benefit Association (VEBA) will each nominate one director, bringing the total number of New GM directors to 13.

Click  here to read the entire article.

International Benefits, Evaluation and Costs (IBEC) Working Group Seminar: Road Pricing Beyond the Technology – September 20, 2009 @ Stockholm, Sweden

June 9, 2009 at 11:39 am

Road Pricing Beyond the Technology

Sunday 20 September, 2009 @ 9.00 – 17.00

Radisson SAS Royal Viking Hotel, Vasagatan 1 SE-101 24 Stockholm, Sweden

PRELIMINARY PROGRAMME

(As of 4 June, 2009; Subject to Change)

Road Pricing is an economic instrument that can be part of a package of measures to address overall mobility. This is not a seminar about the technology of road pricing but about strategic objectives, policy, monitoring, measuring and managing of road pricing schemes which are the core values of IBEC. Be prepared for frank discussions!

The benefits of pricing include the immediate traffic impacts but also the economic and social benefits that effective pricing can generate. Of course these benefits vary widely depending on the type and scale of pricing. Systems that provide a « guaranteed » level of service, such as those that involve some form of variable pricing should help business and individual travellers to solve a key transportation problem of the 21st Century – reliability. Then, there are the environmental concerns; to what extent does road pricing provide a useful contribution to greenhouse gas reduction? But, it’s all got to be implemented, and road pricing has a public image problem to address also.

Key Issues

● What are the economic benefits of road pricing and how can they be measured?

● Can road pricing provide large scale and long-term economic stimulus for a 21st Century economy?

● How should we inform and consult with stakeholders?

● What about social equity – do we understand the social distribution of costs and benefits?

● How should we manage politics and public expectations?

● Are HOT lanes a step in the right direction or a dangerous distraction?

● What have we learned from current efforts at implementation?

● Where have real benefits been delivered and what have we learned from the failures?

Time Schedule

9:00 Welcome

9:15 Session 1: What each region is doing in Road Pricing

This session will provide an international survey of Road Pricing policies and activities from around the world. More than being descriptive, each speaker will put developments into context by explaining transport objectives and how pricing is seen as a tool to address the transport challenges faced.

Chaired and coordinated by Alan Stevens, TRL, UK

10:45 Break

11:00 Session 2: Deployment challenges in relation to Stakeholders

Public acceptance is crucial for road pricing success. In this session, experts from the Road Pricing community will describe the challenges of informing and consulting stakeholders, particularly transport users, about the benefits of pricing.

Coordinated by Jane Lappin, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, USA and Amy Ellen Polk, Citizant, Inc., USA

12:30 Buffet Lunch at the Fisk restaurant

13:15 Session 3: Evaluation challenges

This session will consist of presentations and discussion of Road Pricing deployment and evaluation challenges and how can these challenges be overcome. This will include a wide range of issues and all workshop attendees are invited to participate in the lively discussion that is anticipated.

Chaired and coordinated by Steve Morello, Egis Projects, France

14:45 Break

15:15 Session 4: Business case for society

This session will tackle the broad macro view of the economic and other benefits to society of road pricing and how we can tell if we are doing a “good job”.

Chaired by Kevin Borras, Thinking Highways, UK – Coordinated by Dick Mudge, Delcan, Inc., USA

16:45 Wrap-up

17:00 End of seminar

Registration Fee and Payment:

Fee: € 75 incl. taxes (approx. SEK 793 based on 5 May, 2009 exchange rates on www.xe.com).  It includes seminar materials, 3 coffee breaks and lunch at the venue restaurant.

For registration and other related event information, please contact:

Odile PIGNIER – Harmonised Events – Email: odile@harmonised-events.com

Tel: +33 (0)2 41 54 76 30 – Fax: +33 (0)2 85 52 00 08

Find more information @: www.ibec-its.org

The International Benefits, Evaluation and Costs (IBEC) Working Group is a cooperative working group set up to coordinate and expand international efforts, to exchange information and techniques, and evaluate benefits and costs of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). IBEC brings together the best knowledge and experience and is the focal point for discussion and debate of interest to the international ITS evaluation community. IBEC encourages more effective use of ITS evaluation information so that decision-makers can make more informed ITS investments.