The Confidence Interval

Denis Mukwege – A True Patriot

Gareth Allen — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 07:00:50 +0000

Words by Jacqueline Campbell. Image from The Independent.

Denis Mukwege

In the wake of the draconian cuts announced by George Osborne last week, there has been a steady increase in the ever-present grumbling of those who begrudge money being spent on international aid. “Charity starts at home,” they admonish, “we have people dying HERE!”.

They resent the budget protection afforded to the Department for International Development (DFiD) at a time when every other sector is feeling the squeeze, particularly their beloved military. They expound the virtues of patriotism, and highlight all the social injustice and suffering that goes on within our shores. Suddenly they have an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of inequality in the UK, and feel that helping vulnerable people here and giving aid to those abroad are mutually exclusive activities.

These people call themselves patriots, and say they love their country; they undoubtedly shout the loudest during international sporting events, and get misty-eyed to the opening chords of God Save the Queen. They love Great Britain, and they’ve got the bulldog tattoo to prove it.

But what does all this posturing actually mean? I’ve no doubt many people simultaneously help the needy and love their country, but I’m uncomfortable with being proud of the arbitrary label that is my nationality, particularly if it means that the children of another nation are somehow less deserving of my empathy.

Take the plight of the people in the war-torn Democratic Republic of Congo. I’ve seen people roll their eyes at the thought of yet another African country in dire straits. “Why should we help them when they don’t help themselves?” they grumble, as if the Congolese are sitting around playing Jenga and waiting for British taxpayers money to fall from the sky while their country falls to pieces.

There are people making a real difference, and working to improve their country against all odds. Many will not of heard of Denis Mukwege before. The son of a Pentecostal minister, he soon learned that prayers weren’t helping his compatriots. He studied medicine, and specialised in obstetrics and gynaecology to help deal with the overwhelming number of women suffering terrible injuries who flocked to his clinic. Many had suffered complication during childbirth, as a result of having to travel miles on foot whilst in labour, trying to escape the militia. All too often, women and girls arrive there covered in blood, urine and faeces, their bodies literally torn apart from brutal gang rape, and the soldiers’ habit of bayoneting or shooting the women’s genitalia afterwards: the ultimate act of misogyny.

Dr. Mukwege could have left D R Congo when the fighting broke out, as most of the doctors did. But not Denis Mukwege. The lack of funding, the absence of governmental support, the death threats he’s received, nothing keeps him from coming to work every day and saving the lives of thousands of women and children.

Mukwege has trained other doctors to carry out the highly specialised operations that these women desperately need to repair their damaged bodies; his clinic provides counselling for the women who have been raped, and for their families, helping to remove the stigma suffered by rape victims. There is even a dedicated care program for children conceived as a result of the rapes, and one to help children back into education who’ve been raped themselves.

This is a man who loves his homeland.

I’m not saying we can all be as admirable as Denis Mukwege, he is truly an inspiration. But we can show our love for our homeland in more meaningful ways than bitching about helping those in desperate need around the globe while waving our Union Jacks.

Denis Mukwege is making his country a better place; if there is a place for patriotism, then this is it.

Mistakes Happen, But Trust Scientists To Do Science

Gareth Allen — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 10:00:00 +0000

Words by Paul Fennell. Image from AP.

In 2007, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its Fourth Assessment Report (commonly known as AR4). The nature of its findings was clear, with the summary stating in bald terms:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal.
Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.

Rajendra Pachauri. Not perfect - get over it

Predictably, this report was controversial among those who deny the scientific reality of anthropogenic climate change. One of their lines of attack was to seize upon an error in the document. This error concerns the rate of loss of Himalayan glaciers. In fact, the error was made by the WWF (though why they asked wrestlers about complex scientific questions, I don’t know).

I am a lecturer in Chemical Engineering. One book that we use for teaching purposes, and frequently to help in our research, is “Perry’s Chemical Engineers Handbook”. Now, if you read the “multicomponent distillation” part of the (seventh edition of the) book, you will find that, half-way through the discussion of Underwood’s equations, the author of that section makes a mistake – the flows leaving his column are not 100, when his basis set is.

Of course, I did the only responsible thing to do, and used Imperial College’s press office to continually hound the leading author of the book, demanding to know how such a travesty could have happened, that he resign, and that the university where he worked be disbanded.

Well, I guess I could have done these things, but like the responsible (and self-important) engineer that I am, I e-mailed the editorial office (I also told my students about the error, thus inflating my ego further, though I suspect not necessarily their opinion of me). Apparently, the error had already been identified (deflating my ego) and so had already been corrected in the 8^th Edition. So, I wrote a note in the margin of the 7^th edition, pointing out the error, being careful not to be spotted by the librarian, who takes a different view to me over the superiority of my knowledge to that originally presented in the book.

So, what have we learned? Three things: 1. Mistakes can happen in highly technical books of around 3000 pages, with multiple authors. 2. It was corrected because as well as me, some other scientists and engineers had mentioned it. 3. I am prone to self aggrandisement.

Of course, the observant amongst you will probably have realised the parallels with the IPCC’s 4^th assessment report. Rajendra Pachauri was the Chairman of the IPCC when this happened. Now, I haven’t read the entirety of either Perry or AR4, but I can tell you this with some confidence: both have further unreported errors within them. But the fact that they do does not mean that the vast majority of the information and science within them is incorrect. If scientists never made mistakes, we’d pretty much know everything that there was to know by now. The fact that there were some errors in such large pieces of work doesn’t mean that either of the people in charge of putting the books together should be fired.

Standards of Proof

Gareth Allen — Fri, 22 Oct 2010 00:22:09 +0000

Words by Paul Fennell. Image from IPCC.

Yesterday, I wrote about how it is possible for scientists to make errors and still help make a valuable contribution to science. The reason I can be so confident of that is because of the rigour with which scientific claims are challenged from within the scientific community.

Compare and contrast the standards of proof required by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with those required by people who denigrate it. For example, Christopher Booker’s article in The Telegraph last month points to three incorrect claims which have been made (they relate to glaciers receding, crop failure in Africa and destruction of the rainforest). On the basis of these three incorrect claims, Booker immediately claims that the IPCC serves only to further its own terrible agenda, which is apparently some sort of new world order, backed up by a conspiracy amongst scientists to hide the truth, which is that climate change is not real.

Sorry Christopher, but if you take five scientists who work in one particular area to discuss their pet theories, they will come up with five different theories (actually, probably more like twelve different theories), each of which they can initially convincingly argue are the correct one.

They will then spend hours trying to shoot each other down in flames, using logic and reasoning, as opposed to personal attacks (well, mainly avoiding personal attacks). The reason that they do this is that all scientists love to be right. In fact, the only thing that scientists prefer to being right is proving someone else wrong (see yesterday’s blog).

The idea that the vast majority of climate scientists are engaged in a huge cover-up solely to obtain grants is lunacy – science does not work that way. (Oh, and the concept that people go into scientific research to somehow corruptly get rich is similarly insane – if I wanted to corruptly get rich, I’d be a banker and at least then I’d be doing it within the confines of the law). The vast majority of scientists do what they do is because they enjoy the research, and hope it will have a use someday .

One of the best examples of how the truth can be twisted is in the reporting of the use of non peer reviewed articles in the IPCC report. Booker appears to be “reporting” things that he’s read on other people’s blogs, without actually checking the facts for himself (which I did). Here is what he said:

“Not the least indictment of the IPCC’s 2007 report was the revelation that, in clear breach of its own rules, more than 5,000 of its supposedly scientific claims were not peer-reviewed but came from advocacy groups, press releases, newspaper articles, even student theses. Yet Dr Pachauri himself has repeatedly insisted that everything in his report was based on “peer-reviewed” science.”

Now, since Booker doesn’t back up his claims with actual references, because this is apparently only necessary for the people who he is attacking, I’m going to assume that he got the information from this section of the No Concensus website, which consistently attacks the IPCC. In this “analysis,” the blogger essentially says that 30% of the references listed by the IPCC are not peer reviewed. As part of her “research,” she persuaded an army of volunteers to go through and “check” the references, making the subsequent claim that:

“As the citizen audit results I released four days ago reveal, the 18,531 references cited by the IPCC are so far from being 99 percent peer-reviewed it’s laughable. A full 30 percent of them (5,587) were not published in peer-reviewed academic journals.”

Unfortunately, “volunteers” are often unable to distinguish between peer-reviewed information and non peer reviewed information, particularly when simply presented with a list, and a set of rules. Indeed, trained scientists find it hard to distinguish between what is and is not peer reviewed, simply based on looking at a reference. There are also other sources of peer-reviewed science, not contained within academic journals, but more of this later.

Now, don’t forget that the results of this “audit” are being reported by Booker (and others) as truth. Despite the fact they are published on a blog, and not in a peer-reviewed journal. A very different standard of proof.

Let’s have a look at some of the things that won’t come up as “peer reviewed literature” in the IPCC list. I have gone through the IPCC list of references, and I can see clearly there are several references which I believe are peer reviewed but which have been overlooked. Also, there are some references that do not need peer review, being in essence tables of data.

I’m going to spell out a few examples here, and numbered them according to their position in the IPCC list which you can see here. For ease of reading, I would suggest you read this blog in full first, then go back and check my references as you wish – see how I like to be peer reviewed? The blog claims that only 25 % of the references are peer reviewed in this chapter. My version of the list, complete with discussion of the standard of peer review in some of the references, and including both the papers flagged as peer reviewed by the citizen reviewers and my own flags of peer-reviewed publications is also at the end of this article.

Firstly, there are journals that the “volunteers” who are doing the “citizen audit” missed, not recognising the journals as such. Reference 31 is to the journal “Transportation.” Clearly our “citizen auditor” had never heard of this journal, and so it is dismissed.

References 59, 147 and 171 are technical papers for the Society of Automotive Engineers, which rigorously reviews submissions to the same standard as academic journals.

Reference 75 is to ATZ. For some reason this has been dismissed by our “volunteers.” ATZ is in fact the German journal of automotive technology and automotive engineers (Automobiltechnische Zeitschrift) – but it is in German, hence the difficulty.

Reference 90 is Meteorologische Zeitschrift. Again, a journal, just in German. Interestingly, later on in the list, the same journal IS recognised in reference 214.

Ok, so we have found an extra seven peer reviewed journals, what else is there?

This is when we start getting into the semantics of what peer review is. Do we mean blind peer review, where the authors don’t know the reviewers, or are there other forms?

A number of references in the list (1, 101, 155, 158, 176, 189, 191, 198, 204, 207) are to Edited Books. Now, in general the procedure for putting together an edited book is exactly the same as for putting together a journal paper. The editor is asked by the publisher to bring together a set of experts in a field and he asks them to submit one or more chapters to the book. I have been asked several times to be an anonymous peer reviewer for particular chapters in books. Regardless of whether or not the editors sent the individual chapters out for review, it is their job to edit the book, commenting and reviewing the individual chapters. Therefore, an edited book is by definition peer reviewed.

The rules of the game according to No Concensus (as spelled out in their rules) are that they always give contributions the benefit of the doubt. And don’t forget – the IPCC says (and the information at the top of the list states) that we are looking for “peer-reviewed literature,” not “journal papers”.

Now, we also have conference papers, such as 61, 143, 148, 165, 172 and 243. It is entirely possible that these have been peer reviewed extensively prior to publication. Indeed, many of the conference websites detail the process for submission of papers, together with the process for choosing which papers are accepted. They have clear published guidelines on how authors are to upload final versions of manuscripts, taking into account the comments incurred during peer review.

For example, the International Symposium on Combustion (within the proceedings of which I have published a few papers), generally sends submitted papers to at least three reviewers, and has an acceptance rate of around 33 %. Just because a paper is presented at a conference does not, of necessity, mean that it is not peer reviewed. For the case where I have been unable to determine that a conference does have peer review and prior submission of papers, I have left the citation “uncertain”.

We next come to some more difficult choices of what we mean by peer review. It is true that there are a large number of briefing papers referenced which have been written by agencies. The international energy agency (IEA), various EU reports, and also papers from individual research companies and institutions under contract are all referenced.

Now, I can claim prior and privileged knowledge for the IEA reports, since I have acted as a reviewer for a number of them. The issue here is that the IEA chooses the reviewers and publishes the report, thus leaving themselves open to accusations of a conflict of interest. However, in my personal dealings with them they have always behaved in an entirely appropriate manner. I have not included these IEA reports in my final tally, except where there is clearly a workshop commissioned to discuss what should go into the report.

EU final reports come somewhere lower in the scale of respectability – they have frequently been reviewed by external people, and though individual reports from consultancies may have been peer reviewed, the review process is somewhat opaque, and they should not be included as peer reviewed articles.

However, many institutions, such as the Pew Centre, which has been extensively referenced, do send out their publications for external peer review. Depite that, I have still not included these in my final tally.

Lastly, we have synthesis reports such as 129, 130, 131 and 182. These are the considered viewpoint of the majority of attendees and are robustly peer reviewed as produced, but for some reason have not been included in the original count.

So, perhaps half of the references have now been dealt with – what are the other half? These constitute things like manufacturers’ reports, company statistics and governmental reports. These are used in general to back up statements such as “the government of the UK has taken X steps to combat climate change;” “the usage of coal is Y in the UK;” or “Toyota claims to have reduced its carbon intensity by Z”.

For the first usage – “the government of the UK has taken X steps to combat climate change” – we are simply reporting a fact. There is no need for it to be from a peer reviewed journal.

The second usage – “the usage of coal is Y in the UK” – is potentially difficult, since it may be that the country does not report its statistics rigorously. However, there is in general no other place to find the statistics. (Actually, to be really pedantic, frequently these statistics are reported in regular peer-reviewed journals, but referenced to the government report as the primary source – thus, you could possibly include information from the journal article as peer-reviewed without referencing the primary source, though this would not be good practice.)

The final usage – “Toyota claims to have reduced its carbon intensity by Z” – is somewhat problematic, in that one is relying on the company to tell the truth (much as we relied on Enron not to be nothing more than a corporate stealing machine, and US investment banks not to be gamblers and buffoons). These references should be used with care, but can add to a scholarly work if used in moderation. For example, the references to the magazine of the society of automotive engineers (SAE) are fine if used to impart a fact “Ford has announced the production of a car which uses 10 % less steel,” but not really in the case where the article draws an inference based on what is stated in the magazine: “cars require 10 % less steel”. It is ok to use the reference to say that Ford says something, it is not ok to draw a more general conclusion. At some stage, some level of trust that the company is actually doing what it says it is doing is necessary.

In total, by careful analysis of the actual documents referenced, there are at least 32 references in the IPCC list to documents which have undergone a thorough peer review process, but which are not highlighted as such in the No Concensus findings.

There are also 17 references which might have undergone peer review. These are conferences where I was unable to determine if the papers were reviewed, and papers that were sent out for review but the agency producing the documents hand picked the reviewers.

It is clear that the rules as to what constitutes peer review are insufficiently robust to determine which references have and have not been peer reviewed. Academia peer reviews its work in many ways, and journal articles are but one.

There are also 18 references which appear to essentially be to governmental or intergovernmental datasets, and to which it is entirely appropriate to refer, even though they are not peer-reviewed journal papers. They are not used to develop a scientific argument, but for information.

This example, public and controversial as it is, shows that the subject of peer review is a complex one. On the one hand, there is a large volume of information available that is not peer reviewed, but is useful (for example, textbooks). There are also different forms of peer-reviewed information, with different standards of peer review.

The gold standard is a peer-reviewed journal paper (though we should also bear in mind that some journals are better than others). There are also conferences that are heavily peer reviewed, and there is reportage of the findings of workshops (this is where a group of scientists get together and shout at each other till they either reach a consensus, or the bar opens). Edited books also fall within this category. These should all be included as proper, peer reviewed publications.

Next, we have governmental publications and intergovernmental agency reports. These are frequently heavily peer reviewed (for example, the IPCC, the IEA and certain EU publications). The quality of the peer review can vary, but examination of the detail of the list of publications provided indicates that many of them have at least been subject to a minimum standard of peer review. Many non edited books fall within this category too – most responsible publishers will require peer review of entire books prior to publication. Briefing papers by e.g. the Pew Institute also fall into this class.

Finally, we have non peer reviewed articles, publications, etc. The use of this sort of information can be problematic. However, it depends on the context within which the references are used.

For the remaining references, the No Concensus blogger does have a point in many cases. However, as I have illustrated by my research – which I confess has not been as exhaustive as I would have liked – it is not good enough to make glib conclusions from a cursory analysis.

In compiling its report, the IPCC took an enormous range of data into account. Whilst the process, like all scientific research, was not perfect, we have to accept the findings as the best summary possible of the available literature. As a scientist, I would never describe any report as perfect, but I know that I would place more trust in the AR4 report than I would in the amateur analysis on No Concensus or the angry journalism of Christopher Booker.

Comprehensive Notes: For those of you who want to check my work, I am – as a sientist – delighted to include here my own audit of the IPCC references…

Working Group 3, Chapter 5

submitted by Donna Lafamboise, 8 March 2010

total number of references: 260

Peer reviewed references, identified as such by the original audit, Bold

Peer reviewed references, missed by the original audit, underlined.

Uncertain references (classified by PSF, original auditor was so confident she was correct she had no uncertain references) italics

Tables of Data bold italics

Assignments and notes in italics after the reference.

percentage of chapter references from peer-reviewed literature (original claim, after correction below): 24.61

percentage of verifiably peer reviewed literature (my analysis 37.3%)

possibly peer reviewed literature 6.9 %

tables of data 6.5 %.

Fraction of certain and probably peer reviewed references, together with tables of data which in general do not need peer review: 50.3 %.

This is a lower estimate, since many of e.g. the EU reports will also have undergone peer review.

NOTE: CITIZEN AUDITORS IDENTIFIED 3 ERRORS IN THIS TALLLY. THIS INCREASED THE PEER-REVIEWED COUNT FROM 61 ENTRIES TO 64 ENTRIES – AND BUMPED THE OVERALL PERCENTAGE FROM 23.46 TO 24.61. CORRECTIONS WERE MADE BY DONNA LAFRAMBOISE (WHO OFFERS HER APOLOGIES) ON MARCH 10, 2010.

1. Abbot, C., 2002: Planning a Sustainable City: The Promise and Performance of Portland’s Urban Growth Boundary. In Urban Sprawl, G.D. Squires (ed.), The Urban Land Institute, pp. 207-235.

This is a book. As you can see from my highlighting in Red, it is an edited book. Therefore, at the very least, G.D. Squires has read Abbot’s chapter, and approved it. Therefore, Abbot’s work has been peer reviewed.

2. ACEEE, 2001: Technical Options for Improving the Fuel Economy of U.S. Cars and Light Trucks by 2010-2015. DeCicco, J., F. An, and M. Ross, American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, accessed 30/05/07.

The council may or may not send its publications for independent peer review. I have asked them, and await their response.

3. ADAC, 2005: Study on the effectiveness of Directive 1999/94/EC relating to the availability of consumer information on fuel economy and CO₂emissions in respect of the marketing of new passenger cars. München, March 2003.

This is an extremely dry document, which essentially contains the responses of different EU governments to a survey about how they made available information on CO2 emissions from cars. It has been checked by the majority of the member states’ people in charge of this area for accuracy. It essentially reports data. It may have been peer-reviewed, it may not, one cannot tell.

4. ADEME, 2006: Inventories of the worldwide fleets of refrigerating and air-conditioning equipment in order to determine refrigerant emissions: the 1990 to 2003 updating, ADEME, Paris.

States information. Would be unlikely to be peer reviewed, does not need to be.

5. Airbus, 2004: Global Market Forecast 2004-2023. accessed 30/05/07.

Airbus’s own market forecast. Clearly referenced as such in the text. Is used to substantiate the “industry’s view” of the projected increase in air travel, as such, does not need to be peer reviewed.

States information. Would be unlikely to be peer reviewed, does not need to be.

(ICAO’s outlook for the future forecasts a passenger traffic demand growth of 4.3% per year to 2020. Industry forecasts offer similar prospects for growth: the Airbus Global Market Forecast (Airbus, 2004) and Boeing Current Market Outlook (Boeing, 2006) suggest passenger traffic growth trends of 5.3% and 4.9% respectively, and freight trends at 5.9% and 6.1% respectively over the next 20 or 25 years.)

6. Akerman, J. and M. Hojer, 2006: How Much Transport Can the Climate Stand? - Sweden on a Sustainable Path in 2050. Energy Policy, 34, pp. 1944-1957.

7. Altmann, M., M. Weinberger, and W. Weindorf, 2004: Life Cycle Analysis results of fuel cell ships; Recommendations for improving cost effectiveness and reducing environmental impacts. Contract no. G3RD-CT-2002-00823 in the framework of the FCSHIP project of the European Commission, Final report July 2004, 58 pp.

Could be peer reviewed, would be better to refer to a paper which came out of this work, rather than an a report.

8. An, F. and A. Sauer, 2004: Comparison of Passenger Vehicle Fuel Economy and Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards around the World. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 33 pp.

From the first page of the document:

“The Pew Center and the authors would like to thank John DeCicco of Environmental Defense,

Lew Fulton of the International Energy Agency, Paul Khanna of Natural Resources Canada, and Michael Walsh for their helpful comments on a previous draft of this report.”

Has been peer reviewed, but not anonymous peer review. Would be preferable to replace this reference with one from a journal paper presenting the results.

9. Annema, J.A., E. Bakker, R. Haaijer, J. Perdok, and J. Rouwendal, 2001: Stimuleren van verkoop van zuinige auto’s; De effecten van drie prijsmaatregelen op de CO₂-uitstoot van personenauto’s (summary in English). RIVM,Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 49 pp.

Might be peer reviewed – probably sent for external review prior to publication.

10. ARE, 2004a: Die Schwerverkehrsabgabe der Schweiz. Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung, Bern.

11. ARE, 2004b: Entwicklung des Strassengüterverkehrs nach Einführung von LSVA und 34t-limite. Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung, Bern.

12. ARE, 2006: Equitable et efficiente, la redevance sur le trafic des poids lourds liée aux prestations RPLP en Suisse. Office Fédéral du Développement Territorial, Bern.

these three articles concern the implementation of a road taxation scheme and are mainly used for data

13. Arthur Andersen Consulting, 2001: Emission trading for aviation - Workstream 3, key findings and conclusions. Report prepared for the International Air Transport Association (IATA).

14. Aunan, K., G. Patzay, H.A. Aaheim, and H.M. Seip, 1998: Health and environmental benefits from air pollution reduction in Hungary. Science of the Total Environment, 212, pp. 245-268.

15. Bach, S., 2003: Entfernungspauschale: Kürzung gerechtfertigt. DIW Wochenbericht 70(40), pp. 602-608.

16. Beers, C. van, and J.C.J.M. van den Bergh, 2001: Perseverance of perverse subsidies and their impact on trade and environment. Ecological Economics, 36, pp. 457-486.

17. Berghof, R., A. Schmitt, C. Eyers, K. Haag, J. Middel, M. Hepting, A. Grübler, and R. Hancox, 2005: CONSAVE 2050 Constrained Scenarios on Aviation and Emissions.

EU report: page 182

“Thanks as well to all European aviation experts, which have actively supported the project by contributing to the CONSAVE questionnaire action or participating in the project Review Process and the conclusive Review Workshop, especially to those which have taken the role as a workshop moderator.”

Peer reviewed.

18. Beuthe, M., F. Degransart, J-F Geerts, and B. Jourquin, 2002: External costs of the Belgian interurban freight traffic: a network analysis of their internalisation. Transportation Research, D7, 4, pp. 285-301.

19. Biddle, T., 2006: Approval of a Fully Synthetic Fuel for Gas Turbine Engines. TRB 23 Jan. 2006, accessed 30/05/07.

20. Boeing, 2006: Current Market Outlook 2006, accessed 30/05/07

States information. Would be unlikely to be peer reviewed, does not need to be.

21. Booz Allen & Hamilton, 1999: Effects of Public Transport System Changes on Mode Switching and Road Traffic Levels. Transfund New Zealand.

22. Bose, R., and D. Sperling, 2001: Transportation in Developing Countries: Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for Delhi, India. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 43 pp.

Page 5. The Pew Center gratefully acknowledges Anita Ahuja of Conserve, Ralph Gakenheimer of MIT, and Michael Walsh, an independent transportation consultant, for their review of earlier drafts.

23. Braslow, A.L., 1999: A History of Suction-Type Laminar-Flow Control with Emphasis on Flight Research, http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/pdf/88792main_Laminar.pdf

“I would like to express my gratitude to the following DRFC personnel: David Fisher, Lisa Bjarke, and Daniel Banks for reading the initial draft”

Not fully peer reviewed, but partially. Is essentially a book.

24. Brog, W., E. Erl, and N. Mense, 2004: Individualized Marketing: Changing Travel Behavior for a Better Environment. In Communicating Environmentally Sustainable Transport: The Role of Soft Measures. OECD (ed.), pp. 83-97.

Report of a conference convened to peer review the work stated.

25. Brueckner, J.K., 2004: Transport Subsidies, System Choice, and Urban Sprawl. Unpublished paper, Department of Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 26 pp.

26. Cameron, I., T.J. Lyons, and J.R. Kenworthy, 2004: Trends in Vehicle Kilometres of Travel in World Cities, 1960-1990: Underlying Drives and Policy Responses. Transport Policy, 11, pp. 287-298.

27. Cames, M. and O. Deuber, 2004: Emission trading in international aviation. Oeko Institute V, Berlin, ISBN 3-934490-0.

28. Capaldo, K., J.J. Corbett, P. Kasibhatla, P.S. Fishbeck, and S.N. Pandis, 1999: Effects of ship emission on sulphur cycling and radiative climate forcing over the ocean. Nature 400, pp. 743-746.

29. Cervero, R., 1998: The Transit Metropolis. Island Press, 464 pp.

Book.

30. Chandler, K., E. Eberts, and L. Eudy, 2006: New York City Transit Hybrid and CNG Buses: Interim Evaluation Results. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-540-38843, January.

31. Choo, S., P.L. Mokhtarian, and I. Salomon, 2005: Does Telecommuting Reduce Vehicle-Miles Traveled? An Aggregate Time Series for the U.S. Transportation. 32, pp. 37-64.

Peer reviewed journal missed by the original citizens.

32. Cifuentes, L. and H. Jorquera, 2002: IES Developments in Chile. October 2002, accessed 30/05/07.

33. Cifuentes, L., H. Jorquera, E. Sauma, and F. Soto, 2001: International CO-Controls Analysis Program. Final Report, December 2001, the Catholic University of Chile, 62pp.

34. Corbett, J.J. and H.W. Köhler, 2003: Updated emissions from ocean shipping. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108(D20), 4650 pp., doi:10.1029/2003JD003751.

35. Corbett, J.J. and H.W. Köhler, 2004: Considering alternative input parameters in an activity-based ship fuel consumption and emissions model: Reply to comment by Øyvind Endresen et al. on ‘Updated emissions from ocean shipping.’ Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, D23303, doi:10.1029/2004JD005030.

36. Corbett, J.J., P.S. Fischbeck, and S.N. Pandis, 1999: Global nitrogen and sulfur inventories for oceangoing ships. Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(3), pp. 3457-3470.

37. COWI, 2002: Fiscal measures to reduce CO₂ emissions from new passenger cars. Main report, EC, Brussel, 191 pp.

Report. Would be preferable to reference a journal paper.

38. Cullinane, C., 2002: The Relationship between Car Ownership and Public Transport Provision: A Case Study of Hong Kong. Transport Policy, 9, pp. 29-39.

39. Deuker, K.J., J.G. Strathman, and M.J. Bianco, 1998: Strategies to Attract Auto Users to Public Transportation. TCRP Report 40, Transportation Research Board, 105 pp.

40. DfT, 2003: Carbon to Hydrogen -Roadmap for Passenger Cars: Update of the Study. Department for Transport, UK.

41. Dill, J. and T. Carr, 2003: Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Major U.S. Cities: If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them. Transportation Research, 1828, pp. 116-123.

42. DRI, 2004: A Review of the Results in the 1997 Kahane, 2002 DRI, 2003 DRI, and 2003 Kahane. Reports on the Effects of Passenger Car and Light Truck Weight and Size on Fatality Risk. R.M. Van Auken, and J.W.Zellner, Dynamic Research Inc. DRI-TR-04-02, Torrance, CA.

43. Duoba, M., H. Lohse-Busch, and T. Bohn, 2005: Investigating Vehicle Fuel Economy Robustness of Conventional and Hybrid Electric Vehicles. EVS-21, January.

44. EAA, 2001: Moving up to aluminium -The future of road transport. European Aluminium Association, Brussels, 19 pp.

45. EC, 1999: Cycling: The Way Ahead for Towns and Cities. European Commission, Brussels, 61 pp.

46. EC, 2005: Energy and Transport in Figures 2005: Part 3: Transport. European Commission, Directorate-General for Energy and Transport, Brussels, Belgium.

47. EC, 2006: Impact assessment. Commission Staff Working Document COM (2006) 818 final, accompanying document to the Proposal for the European Parlement and the Council Amending Directive 2003/87/EC, Brussels.

48. ECMT, 2000: Strategic Environmental Assessment. OECD, European Conference of Ministers of Transport, 91 pp.

49. ECMT, 2004a: National Policies to Promote Cycling. OECD, 91 pp.

50. ECMT, 2004b: Transport and Spatial Policies: The Role of Regulatory and Fiscal Incentives. OECD, 180 pp.

51. ECMT, 2006: Reducing NO_x Emissions on the Road; Ensuring Future Exhausts Emission Limits Deliver Air Quality Standards, OECD, 50 pp.

52. ECMT, 2007: Cutting Transport CO₂ Emissions – What Progress?, OECD, 264 pp.

53. ECMT/IEA, 2005: Making cars more fuel efficient; Technology for real improvements on the road, Paris, 2005.

54. ECON, 2003: GHG Emissions from International Shipping and Aviation. ECON Report no 38400, Oslo, Norway, ISBN 82-7645-577-8, 40 pp.

55. EEA, 2003: Europe’s Environment: The Third Assessment. Environmental assessment report No 10. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.

56. EIA DOE, 2005: International Energy Outlook 2005, DOE/EIA-0484. Energy Information Administration.

57. Endresen, Ø., E. Søgård, J.K. Sundet, S.B. Dalsøren, I.S.A. Isaksen, T.F. Berglen, and G. Gravir, 2003: Emission from international sea transportation and environmental impact. Journal of Geophysical Research, 108, 4560 pp, doi:10.1029/2002JD002898.

58. Endresen, Ø., E. Sørgård, J. Bakke, and I.S.A. Isaksen, 2004: Substantiation of a lower estimate for the bunker inventory: Comment on ‘Updated emissions from ocean shipping’ by J.J. Corbett and H.W. Koehler. Journal of Geophysical Research, 109, D23302, doi.

59. Englar, R.J., 2001: Advanced Aerodynamic Devices to Improve the Performance, Economics, Handling and Safety of Heavy Vehicles. SAE paper 2001-01-2072.

SAE = society of automotive engineers.

Rigorous review process presented here: http://volunteers.sae.org/volunteers/paperreview/process.pdf

60. EPRI, 2001: Comparing the Benefits and Impacts of Hybrid Electric Vehicle Options. Report 1000349, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, July 2001.

61. Esfahani, H.S., 2001: A Political Economy Model of Resource Pricing with Evidence from the Fuel Market. ERS Working paper 200134, Economic Research Forum, Cairo, Egypt, 24 pp.

Peer reviewed conference

http://www.erf.org.eg/cms.php?id=conferences_details&conference_id=38

62. EUCAR/CONCAWE/JRC, 2006: Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Future Automotive Fuels and Powertrains in the European Context. accessed 30/05/07.

63. European Natural Gas Vehicle Association, 2002: accessed 30/05/07.

64. Ewing, R., 1997: Is Los Angeles-Style Sprawl Desirable? Journal of American Planning Association, 63(1), pp. 96-126.

65. Ewing, R. and R. Cervero, 2001: Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. Transportation Research, 1780, pp. 87-113.

66. Eyring, V., H.W. Köhler, J. van Aardenne, and A. Lauer, 2005a: Emissions from international shipping: 1. The last 50 years. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, D17305, doi: 10.1029/2004JD005619.

67. Eyring, V., H.W. Köhler, A. Lauer, and B. Lemper, 2005b: Emissions from international shipping: 2. Impact of future technologies on scenarios until 2050. Journal of Geophysical Research, 110, D17306, doi:10.1029/2004JD005620.

68. Farrell, A.E., R.J. Plevin, B.T. Turner, A.D. Jones, M. O’Hare, and D.M. Kammen, 2006: Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science, 311, pp. 506-508.

69. FESG, 2003: Report of the FESG/CAEP-6 traffic and fleet forecast (forecasting sub-group of FESG). ICAO-CAEP FESG, Montreal.

70. Fichter, C., S. Marquart, R. Sausen and D.S. Lee, 2005: The impact of cruise altitude on contrails and related radiative forcing. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 14(4), pp. 563-572.

71. Forkenbrock, D.J. and G.E. Weisbrod, 2001: Guidebook for Assessing the Social and Economic Effects of Transportation Projects. NCHRP Report 456, Transportation Research Board, 242 pp.

72. Forster, P., V. Ramaswamy, P. Artaxo, T. Berntsen, R. Betts, D.W. Fahey, J. Haywood, J. Lean, D.C. Lowe, G. Myhre, J. Nganga, R. Prinn, G. Raga, M. Schulz and R. Van Dorland, 2007: Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing. In: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M.Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

The IPCC reports are clearly peer reviewed.

73. Fouracre, P., C. Dunkerley, and G. Gardner, 2003: Mass Rapid Transit System for Cities in the Developing World. Transport Reviews, 23(3), pp. 299-310.

74. Foyt, G., 2005: Demonstration and Evaluation of Hybrid Diesel-Electric Transit Buses – Final Report. Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering report CT-170-1884-F-05-10, Hartford, CT, 33 pp.

75. Friedricht, H.E., 2002: Leightbau und Werkstoffinnovationen im Fahrzeugbau. ATZ, 104(3), pp. 258-266.

ATZ (Automobiltechnische Zeitschrift)

The journal of automotive technology and automotive engineer

76. Fujii, S. and A. Taniguchi, 2005: Travel Feedback Programs: Communicative Mobility Management Measures for Changing Travel Behavior. The Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 6, CD.

The Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies meeting requests papers, peer reviews them and they are then presented at the conference – see the call for papers below.

http://www.trip.t.u-tokyo.ac.jp/easts_isc/20101009CFP_revised.pdf

77. Fwa, T.F. 2002: Transportation Planning and Management for Sustainable Development - Singapore’s Experience. Paper presented at a Brainstorming Session on Non-Technology Options for Stimulating Modal Shifts in City Transport Systems held in Nairobi, Kenya. STAP/GEF, Washington D.C.

78. GbD, 2001: The Technology Challenge. Greener by Design, accessed 30/05/07.

79. Gilat, M. and J.M. Sussman, 2003: Coordinated Transportation and Land Use Planning in the Developing World: Case of Mexico City. Transportation Research, 1859, pp. 102-109.

80. Giuliano, G., K. Hwang, and M. Wachs, 1993: Employee Trip Reduction in Southern California: First Year Results. Transportation Research, 27A(2), pp. 125-137.

81. GM/ANL, 2005: Well-to-Wheels Analysis of Advanced Fuel/Vehicle Systems-A North American Study of Energy Use, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Criteria Pollutant Emissions. accessed 30/05/07.

82. Goodwin, P., 1992: A Review of New Demand Elasticities with Special Reference to Short and Long Run Effects of Price Changes. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 26, pp. 139-154.

83. Goodwin, P., 1999: Transformation of Transport Policy in Great Britain. Transportation Research, 33(7/8), pp. 655-669.

84. Goodwin, P., J. Dargay, and M. Hanly, 2004: Elasticities of Road Traffic and Fuel Consumption With Respect to Price and Income: A Review. Transport Reviews, 24(3), 275-292,

85. Gordon, P. and H.W. Richardson, 1997: Are Compact Cities a Desirable Planning Goal? Journal of American Planning Association, 63(1), pp. 95-106.

86. Grant-Muller, S.M., P.J. Mackie, H. Nellthorp, and A.D. Pearman, 2001: Economic Appraisal of European Transport Projects-the State of the Art Revisited. Transport Reviews, 21(2), pp. 237-262.

87. Green Car Congress, 2004: [website] accessed 30/05/07.

88. Greene, D.L. and A. Schafer, 2003: Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation. PEW Center, Arlington, 68 pp.

The authors and the Pew Center would like to thank Roland Hwang of the Natural Resources Defense

Council, Barry McNutt of the U.S. Department of Energy, Alan Pisarski, and Daniel Sperling of the University of California, Davis for their review of and advice on a previous draft of this report.

89. Greene, D.L., 2005: Improving the Nation’s Energy Security: Can Cars and Trucks be Made More Fuel Efficient? Testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, February.

Testimony to the house of representatives is highly critically assessed, generally by the politicians themselves, who are often briefed well on these subjects.

90. Grewe, V., M. Dameris, C. Fichter, and D.S. Lee, 2002: Impact of aircraft NO_x emissions. Part 2: effects of lowering flight altitudes. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 11, pp. 197-205.

Missed by original reviewers.

91. Gupta, S., 1999: Country environment review - India, policy measures for sustainable development Manila: Asian Development Bank [Discussion paper].

92. Gwilliam, K., K. Kojima, and T. Johnson, 2004: Reducing Air Pollution from Urban Transport. The World Bank, 16 pp.

The Air Quality Thematic Group discussed and agreed on the report in detail. Important contributors to this review process included Ronald Anderson, Asif Faiz, David Hanrahan, Pierre Graftieaux, Magda Lovei, Paul Procee, Richard Scurfield, Jitu Shah, AkiraTanabe, and Robert T. Watson. Nigel Clark, George Berry Chair of Engineering, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of West Virginia, conducted a technical review of the first version of the report in June–July 2003. Consultation drafts of this report were discussed in workshops in Bangkok, Thailand, in June 2003; Rio Janeiro, Brazil, in December 2003; and Washington, D.C., in January 2004. A Web-based consultation was conducted in March and April of 2004. Comments were received from national and international nongovernmental organizations, academics, industry, and governments. We are grateful to the participants of the workshops and all those who provided written comments during the consultation process.

93. Haight, B., 2003: Advanced Technologies are opening doors for new materials. Automotive Industries, April 2003.

94. Hamelinck, C.N., R. Janzic, A. Blake, R. van den Broek, 2005: Policy Incentive Options for Liquid Biofuels Development in Ireland. SEI, 56 pp.

95. Hamelinck, C.N. and A.P.C. Faaij, 2006: Outlook for advanced biofuels. Energy Policy, 34(17), 3268-3283.

96. Harrison, D., D. Radov and J. Patchett, 2004: Evaluation of the feasibility of Alternative Market-Based Mechanisms to Promote Low-Emission Shipping in European Sea Areas. NERA Economic Consulting, London, UK, 106 pp.

97. Harrison, D., D. Radov, J. Patchett, P. Klevnas, A. Lenkoski, P. Reschke and A. Foss, 2005: Economic instruments for reducing ship emissions in the European Union. NERA Economic Consulting, London, UK, 117 pp.

We are grateful to Nicola Robinson and Matti Vainio at DG Environment for their guidance in the study and their comments on earlier drafts. Reports prepared by Entec, with contributions from IVL, have provided data and other information for this study; we thank both companies for providing this information and for comments on a draft of the NERA report. We also are grateful to various other government agencies and private groups that provided assistance and comments, as referenced in the report.

98. HEATCO, 2006: Proposal for harmonised guidelines, Deliverable 5 to the EU Commission. IER, Developing Harmonised European Approaches for Transport Costing and Project assessment, Germany.

99. Heavenrich, R.M., 2005: Light-Duty Automotive Technology and Fuel Economy Trends, 1975 Through 2005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-420-R-05-001, July.

100. Helms, H. and U. Lambrecht, 2006: The potential contribution of light-weighting to reduce transport energy consumption. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. , 7 pp.

101. Hensher, D.A., 2001: Chapter 8 Modal Diversion. In Handbook of Transport Systems and Traffic Control. Hensher, D.A. and K.J. Button, (ed.), Pergamon, pp. 107-123.

Edited book. Hensher’s contribution has been peer reviewed at least by the editors.

102. Heywood, J. B., M. A. Weiss, A. Schafer, S. A. Bassene, and V. K. Natarajan, 2003: The Performance of Future ICE and Fuel Cell Powered Vehicles and Their Potential Fleet Impact. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Energy and the Environment, MIT LFEE 2003-004 RP, December.

103. Honda, 2004: Honda Develops Hybrid Scooter Prototype. accessed 30/05/07.

104. Hook, W., 2003: Preserving and Expanding the Role of Non-motorised Transport. GTZ, Eschborn, Germany, 35 pp.

105. Hughes, J.E., C.R. Knittel, and D. Sperling, 2006: Evidence of a Shift in the Short-Run Price Elasticity of Gasoline Demand. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis UCD-ITS-RR-06-16.

Was published as a paper in “The Energy Journal” subsequent to this. Not good practice to reference prior to publication.

106. Hylen, B. and T. Pharoah, 2002: Making Tracks-Light Rail in England and France. Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute, 91 pp.

107. ICAO, 2003: CAEP FESG Report to CAEP/6 2003.

108. ICAO, 2006: Form A – ICAO Reporting form for Air Carrier Traffic.

109. ICAO/FESG, 2003: FESG CAEP-SG20031-IP/8 10/6/03. Steering Group Meeting Report of the FESG/CAEP6 Traffic and Fleet Forecast (Forecasting sub-group of FESG), Orlando SG meeting, June 2003.

110. ICAO/FESG, 2004a: Analysis of voluntary agreements and open emission trading for the limitation of CO₂ emissions from aviation with the AERO modeling system Part I. Montreal, Canada, 57 pp.

111. ICAO/FESG, 2004b: Analysis of open emission trading systems for the limitation of CO₂ emissions from aviation with the AERO modeling system. Montreal, Canada, 77 pp.

112. ICF, 2004: Designing a greenhouse gas emissions trading system for international aviation, Study carried out for ICAO, London, UK

113. IEA Hybrid, 2006: International Energy Agency Implementing Agreement on Hybrid and Electric Vehicles. accessed 30/05/07.

114. IEA, 2001: Saving Oil and Reducing CO₂ Emissions in Transport. International Energy Agency, OECD, 194 pp.

The IEA would also like to express its appreciation to the following Member country experts for their advice and support to develop the program of analysis that led to this publication: Peter Bach, Danish Energy Agency, Thomas Becker, Danish Ministry of Environment and Energy, Skip Laitner, US Environmental Protection Agency, Peter Mallaburn, UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Brenda McIntyre, US Department of Energy, Lene Nielsen, Danish Energy Agency, Jeff Skeer, US Department of Energy, Richard Shock, AEA Technology Environment (UK), Pernille Sorensen, Danish Energy Agency, Graham White, UK Department of Trade and Industry, and Hanne Windemuller, Danish Energy Agency.

115. IEA, 2002a: Transportation Projections in OECD Regions – Detailed report. International Energy Agency, 164 pp.

116. IEA, 2002b: Bus Systems for the Future: Achieving Sustainable Transport Worldwide. International Energy Agency, 188 pp.

117. IEA, 2003: Transport Technologies and policies for energy security and CO₂ Reductions. Energy technology policy and collaboration papers, International Energy Agency, ETPC paper no 02/2003.

118. IEA, 2004a: World Energy Outlook 2004. International Energy Agency, 570 pp.

119. IEA, 2004b: Energy Technologies for a Sustainable Future: Transport. International Energy Agency, Technology Brief, 40 pp.

The work benefited greatly from input by the IEA’s technology committees and collaborative R&D programs and by other government and private-sector experts. We are indebted to all contributors and reviewers.

120. IEA, 2004c: Biofuels for Transport: An International Perspective. International Energy Agency, Paris, 210 pp.

The IEA would like to express its appreciation to David Rodgers and John Ferrell of the US Department of Energy for their advice and support in developing the analysis that led to this publication. The IEA would also like to acknowledge the following individuals who provided important contributions: Jean Cadu (Shell, UK); Christian Delahoulière (consultant, Paris); Mark Delucchi (U. C. Davis, US); Thomas Gameson (Abengoa Bioenergía, Spain); Mark Hammonds (BP, UK); Francis Johnson (Stockholm Environment Institute, Sweden); Luiz Otavio Laydner (CFA Banco Pactual, Brazil); Lee Lynd (Dartmouth College, US); Kyriakos Maniatis (EU-DG-TREN, Brussels); Tien Nguyen (US DOE, US); Isaias de Carvalho Macedo (Centro de Tecnologia Copersucar, Brazil); Jose Roberto Moreira (Cenbio, Brazil); Suzana Kahn- Ribeiro (COPPE/UFRJ, Brazil); Bernhard Schlamadinger (Joanneum Research, Austria); Harald Schneider (Shell, Germany); Leo Schrattenholzer (IIASA, Austria); Ralph Sims (Massey U., NZ); Don Stevens (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, US); Björn Telenius (National Energy Admin., Sweden); Marie Walsh (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, US); Michael Quanlu Wang (Argonne National Laboratory, US); and Nick Wilkinson (BP, UK).

121. IEA, 2004d: Reducing Oil Consumption in Transport – Combining Three Approaches. IEA/EET working paper by L. Fulton, International Energy Agency, Paris, 24 pp.

122. IEA, 2005: Prospects for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells. International Energy Agency, Paris, 253 pp.

The study benefited from input, contributions and comments provided by members and experts of the IEA Hydrogen Coordination Group, experts from the IEA Implementing Agreements, external experts (from industry and academia, other international projects and organizations) who attended the IEA Technical Workshop on 28-29 June 2005: François Moisan (France) Chairman of the Workshop, Bob Pegler (Australia), Grietus Mulder (Belgium), Peter Reilly-Roe and Maja Veljkovic (Canada), William Borthwick (European Commission), Arnaud Mercier (France), George Menzen and Hanns J. Neef (Germany), Nikos Lymberopoulos (Greece), Haruhiko Ando, Makoto Akai, Kenzo Fukuda and Yoshitaka Tamou, (Japan), Sang Jin Choi and Sung-Chul Shin (Korea), Walter Cariani, Paolo Garibaldi, Agostino Iacobazzi and Valentino Romeri (Italy), Harm Jeeninga (the Netherlands,

EC-HyWays Project), Ibrahim Gulyurtlu (Portugal), Antonio Garcia Conde and Rafael Ben (Spain), Fehmi Akgun (Turkey), Ray Eaton and David Hart (United Kingdom), Fred Joseck and Robert Wright (United States), Emmanuelle Patay (AirLiquide), Jean F. Larive (CONCAWE), Manfred Schuckert (DaimlerChrysler, EC-CUTE Project), GianCarlo Tosato (IEA ETSAP), Catherine Gregoire Padro, Paul Lucchese and Andreas Luzi (IEA HIA), Timur Guel (PSI, Switzerland), Markus Blesl and Uwe Remme (University of Stuttgart), George Eads (WBCSD). Valuable commentswere also provided by Leonardo Barreto (PSI, Switzerland), Carmen Difiglio (US-DOE), Lew Fulton (UNEP), Justin Adams and Nick Wilkinson and Steve Koonin (BP), Inigo Sabater, Angel Perez-Sainz (EC) and Gabriel Michaux (Belgium). Gary Goldstein (International Resources Group, US) and Ken Noble (Noble –Soft, Australia) provided modelling support.

123. IEA, 2006a: Energy Technology Perspectives 2006; Scenarios & Strategies to 2050. International Energy Agency, Paris, 479 pp.

124. IEA, 2006b: World Energy Outlook 2006. International Energy Agency, Paris, 596 pp.

125. IEA, 2006c: Energy Balances of Non-OECD countries, 2003-2004. International Energy Agency, Paris, 468pp.

Basically, a table of data.

126. IEA, 2006d: CO₂ Emissions from Fuel Combustion 1971-2004. International Energy Agency, Paris, 548pp.

127. IMO, 2004: MEPC 51/INF.2, Statistical investigation of containership design with regard to emission indexing. Submitted by Germany to the 51ste of the Marine Environment Protection Committee of IMO.

128. IMO, 2005: MEPC 53/WP.11, Prevention of air pollution from ships. Report of the Working Group, 21 July 2005.

129. IPCC, 1996: IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories – workbook. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

130. IPCC, 1999: Aviation and the Global Atmosphere [Penner, J.E., D.H. Lister, D.J. Griggs, D.J. Dokken and M. McFarland (eds)]. Special report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Working Groups I and III, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

131. IPCC, 2005: Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate System. Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 478 pp.

132. JAMA, 2002: The Motor Industry of Japan 2002. Japan Automobile Manufacturers Association.

133. Japanese Statistical Bureau, 2006: Historical Statistics of Japan. Chapter 12: Transport, Statistics Bureau, Tokyo.

134. Jelinek, F., S. Carlier, J. Smith, and A. Quesne, 2002: The EUR RVSM implementation Project-Environmental Benefit Analysis. Eurocontrol, Brussels, Belgium, 77 pp.

135. JHFC, 2006: JHFC Well-to-Wheel Efficiency Analysis Results. JARI, Tsukuba, 114 pp.

136. JMLIT and IHE, 2004: The Impact Study of New Public Transport on Road Traffic. IHE, Japanese Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and Institute of Highway Economics, Japan, 169 pp.

137. Jones, P., 2004: Comments on the Roles of Soft measures in Achieving EST. In Communicating Environmentally Sustainable Transport: The Role of Soft Measures. OECD (ed.), pp. 63-66.

138. Jong, G.D. and H. Gunn, 2001: Recent Evidence on Car Cost and Time Elasticities of Travel Demand in Europe. Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, 35, pp. 137-160.

139. JRC/IPTS, 2004: Potential for Hydrogen as a Fuel for Transport in the Long Term (2020-2030) -Full Background Report.

140. JSGRIE, 2000: Guidelines for the Evaluation of Road Investment Projects. Japan Research Institute, Japanese Study Group on Road Investment Evaluation, 188 pp.

141. Kageson, J., 2005: Reducing CO₂ Emissions from New Cars, European Federation for Transport and Environment.

142. Kahane, C.J., 2003: Relationships between Vehicle Size and Fatality Risk in Model Year 1985-93 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks. Technical Report No. DOT HS 808 570, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

143. Kajitani, S., M. Takeda, A. Hoshimiya, S. Kobori, and M. Kato, 2005: The Concept and Experimental Result of DME Engine Operated at Stoichiometric Mixture. Presented at International Symposia on Alcohol Fuels (September 26-28, 2005), see http://www.eri.ucr.edu/ISAFXVCD/ISAFXVPP/CnERDEOS.pdf> accessed 30/05/07.

I cannot find evidence that this conference is peer reviewed, but it certainly may be.

144. Karekezi, S., L. Majoro, and T. Johnson, 2003: Climate Change Mitigation in the Urban Transport Sector: Priorities for the World Bank. World Bank, 53 pp.

145. Kenworthy, J.R. and F.B. Laube, 1999: Patterns of Automobile Dependence in Cities: An International Overview of Key Physical and Economic Dimensions with Some Implications for Urban Policy. Transportation Research, 33A(7/8), pp. 691-723.

146. Kenworthy, J. and F. Laube, 2002: Urban transport patterns in a global sample of cities & their linkages to transport infrastructure, land use, economics & environment. World Transport Policy & Practice, 8(3), pp. 5-19.

147. Kiesgen, G., M. Kluting, C. Bock, and H. Fischer, 2006: The New 12-Cylinder Hydrogen Engine in the 7 Series: The H₂ ICE Age Has Begun. SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-0431.

SAE = society of automotive engineers.

Rigorous review process presented here: http://volunteers.sae.org/volunteers/paperreview/process.pdf

148. Koyama, A., H. Iki, Y. Ikawa, M. Hirose, K. Tsurutani, and H. Hayashi, 2006: Proceedings of the JSAE Annual Congress, #20065913.

JSAE = Japanese society of automotive engineers.

Rigorous review process presented here: http://volunteers.sae.org/volunteers/paperreview/process.pdf

149. Lee, D.S., B. Owen, A. Graham, C. Fichter, L.L. Lim, and D. Dimitriu, 2005: International aviation emissions allocations – present day and historical. Manchester Metropolitan University, Centre for Air Transport and the Environment, Report CATE 2005-3(C)-2.

150. Lee, C. and A.V. Mouden, 2006: The 3Ds+R: Quantifying Land Use and Urban Form Correlates of Walking. Transportation Research, 11D(3), pp. 204-215.

151. Leifsson, L.T. and W.H. Mason, 2005: The Blended Wing Body Aircraft, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg, VA, accessed 30/05/07.

152. Leonardi, J. and M. Baumgartner, 2004: CO₂ efficiency in road freight transportation: Status quo, measures and potential. Transportation Research, D9(6), pp. 451-464.

153. Levinson, H.S., S. Zimmerman, J. Clinger, and S.C. Rutherford, 2002: Bus Rapid Transit: An overview. Journal of Public Transportation, 5(2), pp. 1-30.

154. Litman, T., 2003: The online TDM Encyclopedia: Mobility Management Information Gateway. Transport Policy, 10, pp. 245-249.

155. Lundqvist, L., 2003: Multifunctional land use and mobility. In Multifunctional Land Use, P. Nijkamp, C.A. Rodenburg and R. Vreeker (ed.), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam and Habiforum, pp. 37-40.

Edited book – reviewed at least by the editors

156. Lutsey, N., C.J. Brodrick, D. Sperling, and C. Oglesby, 2004: Heavy-duty truck idling characteristics: Results from a national truck survey. Transportation Research Record, 1880, pp. 29-38.

157. Mackett, R.L. and M. Edwards, 1998: The impact of new urban public transport systems: Will the expectations be met? Transportation Research, 32A(4), pp. 231-245.

158. Mackie, P. and J. Nellthorp, 2001: Chapter 10 Cost-benefit analysis in transport. In Handbook of Transport Systems and Traffic Control, D.A. Hensher and K.J. Button, (eds.), Pergamon, pp. 143-174.

Edited book

159. Mackie, P., 2005: The London congestion charge: a tentative economic appraisal. A comment on the paper by Prud’homme and Bocajero, Transport Policy, 12, pp. 288-290.

160. MacKinnon, A.C., 2005: The economic and environmental benefits of increasing maximum truck weight: the British experience. Transportation Research, D10(1), pp. 79-95.

161. Mannstein, H., P. Spichtinger, and K. Gierens, 2005: A note on how to avoid contrail cirrus. Transportation Research, 10D(5), 421-426.

162. Marintek, 2000: Study of greenhouse gas emissions from ships. Report to the IMO, by Marintek, Det Norske Veritas, Econ, Carnegie Mellon University.

163. Martin, D., D. Moon, S. Collings, and A. Lewis, 1995: Mechanisms for improved energy efficiency in transport. Overseas Development Administration, London, UK.

164. May, A.D., A.F. Jopson, and B. Matthews, 2003: Research challenges in urban transport policy. Transport Policy, 10, pp. 157-164.

165. McCallen, R.C., K. Salari, J. Ortega, L. DeChant, B. Hassan, C. Roy, W.D. Pointer, F. Browand, M. Hammache, T.Y. Hsu, A. Leonard, M. Rubel, P. Chatalain, R. Englar, J. Ross, D. Satran, J.T. Heineck, S. Walker, D. Yaste, and B. Storms, 2004: DOE’s effort to reduce truck aerodynamic drag-joint experiments and computations lead to smart design. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory paper UCRL-CONF-204819, 34^th AIAA Fluid Dynamics Conference and Exhibit, Portland, OR, United States, June 22. accessed 30/05/07

Though this is a conference, papers are submitted in advance and peer reviewed.

166. McKinley, G., Zuk, M., Hojer, M., Ávalos, M., González, I., Hernández, M., Iniestra, R., Laguna, I., Martínez, M.A., Osnaya, P., Reynales, L.M., Valdés, R., and J. Martínez, 2003: The local benefits of global air pollution control in Mexico City. Instituto Nacional de Ecologia, Instituto Nacional de Salud Publica, Mexico.

167. MIT, 2000: On the road in 2020: A life-cycle analysis of new automobile technologies. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Energy Laboratory Report #MIT EL 00-003, 153 pp.

168. MIT, 2004: Coordinated policy measures for reducing the fuel consumption of the U.S. light-duty vehicle fleet. Bandivadekar, A.P. and J.B. Heywood, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory for Energy and the Environment Report LFEE 2004-001, 76 pp.

169. Mohan, D. and D. Tiwari, 1999: Sustainable transport systems, linkages between environmental issues. Public transport, non-motorised transport and safety. Economic and Political Weekly, XXXIV(25), June 19, 1580-1596.

170. Mokhtarian, P.L., 1998: A synthetic approach to estimating the impacts of telecommuting on travel. Urban Studies, 35(2), pp. 215-241.

171. Murakami, Y. and K. Uchibori, 2006: Development of fuel cell vehicle with next-generation fuel cell stack. SAE Paper 2006-01-0034.

SAE = society of automotive engineers.

Rigorous review process presented here: http://volunteers.sae.org/volunteers/paperreview/process.pdf

172. Nash, C., P. Bickel, R. Friedrich, H. Link and L. Stewart, 2002: The environmental impact of transport subsidies. Paper prepared for the OECD Workshop on Environmentally Harmful Subsidies, Paris, 35 pp.

173. Newman, P. and J. Kenworthy, 1999: Sustainablity and cities: Overcoming automobile dependence. Island Press, Washington, D. C. 442 pp.

Book

174. NHTSA CAFE, 2006: Light truck fuel economy standards. accessed 30/05/07.

175. Niederberger, A., 2005: The Swiss climate penny: An innovative approach to transport sector emissions. Transport Policy, 12(4), pp. 303-313.

176. Nijkamp, P., B. Ubbels, and E. Verhoef, 2003: Chapter 18. Transport Investment Appraisal and the Environment. In Handbook of Transport and the Environment, D.A. Hensher and K.J. Button, (eds.). Pergamon,Amsterdam,pp. 333-355.

Edited Book

177. Nippon Steel, 2002: Advanced technology of Nippon Steel contributes to ULSAB-AVC Program. Nippon Steel News, 295, September 2002.

178. NRC, 2002: Effectiveness and impact of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards. National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 184 pp.

179. NRC/NAE, 2004: The Hydrogen Economy. National Academy Press, Washington D.C. 240 pp.

180. O’Ryan, R., D. Sperling, M. Delucchi, and T. Turrentine, 2002: Transportation in Developing Countries: Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for Chile. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 56 pp.

The Pew Center gratefully acknowledges Ralph Gakenheimer and Chris Zegras of MIT, Eduardo Sanhueza

of Climate Change and Development (a Chilean consulting firm), and Michael Walsh, an independent transportation consultant, for their review of early drafts. The authors also express their gratitude to Barbara Cifuentes of the Universidad de Chile.

181. OECD, 2003: Reforming transport taxes. Paris, 199 pp

182. OECD, 2004a: Synthesis report on environmentally harmful subsidies. OECD publication SG/SD(2004)3/FINAL, Paris, France Priorities for the World Bank. African Energy.

Synthesis reports take into account the viewpoints of the contributors – they have been peer reviewed.

183. OECD, 2004b: Current international shipping market trends – community maritime policy and legislative initiatives. OECD Workshop on Maritime Transport, Paris.

184. Olivier, J.G.J., A.F. Bouwman, C.W.M. van der Maas, J.J.M. Berdowski, C. Veldt, J.P.J. Bloos, A.J.H. Visschedijk, P.Y.J. Zandveld, and J.L. Haverlag, 1996: Description of EDGAR Version 2.0: A set of global emission inventories of greenhouse gases and ozone-depleting substances for all anthropogenic and most natural sources on a per country basis and on 1°x1° grid. RIVM, Bilthoven, The Netherlands, 171 pp.

185. ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratory), 2006: Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 25. Oak Ridge National Laboratory report ORNL-6974, 332pp.

186. Owen, N. and R. Gordon, 2002: Carbon to hydrogen – roadmaps for passenger cars: A study for the transport and the Department of Trade and Industry. Ricardo Consulting Engineers, Ltd, November 2002, RCEF.0124.31.9901, 174 pp.

187. Owen, B. and D.S. Lee, 2005: International aviation emissions – future cases. Study on the allocation of emissions from international aviation to the UK inventory – CPEG7. CATE-2005-3(C)-3, Centre for Air Transport and the Environment, Manchester Metropolitan University.

188. Owen, B. and D.S. Lee, 2006: Allocation of international aviation emissions from scheduled air traffic-Future cases, 2005 to 2050 (Report 3 of 3). Manchester Metropolitan University, Centre for Air Transport and the Environment, CATE-2006-3(C)-3A, Manchester, UK, 37 pp.

189. Page, M., 2005: Chapter 34. Non-motorized transport policy. In Handbook of Transport Strategy, Policy and Institutions, D.A. Hensher and K.J. Button, (eds.), Pergamon, pp. 581-596.

Edited Book.

190. Pandey, R and G. Bhardwaj, 2000: Economic policy instruments for controlling vehicular air pollution. New Delhi: National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.

191. Pickrell, D., 1999: Transportation and land use. In Essays in Transportation Economics and Policy, J. Gomez-Ibanez, W.B. Tye, and C. Winston (eds.), Brookings, pp. 403-435.

Edited Book

192. Plotkin, S., D. Greene, and K.G. Duleep, 2002: Examining the potential for voluntary fuel economy standards in the United States and Canada. Argonne National Laboratory report ANL/ESD/02-5, October 2002.

193. Plotkin, S., 2004: Fuel economy initiatives: International comparisons. In Encyclopedia of Energy, 2, 2004 Elsevier.

194. Power System, 2005: Press release 2005.6.27. Development of High Power and High Energy Density Capacitor (in Japanese). accessed 30/05/07.

195. PRESAV, 2003: The potential for Renewable Energy Sources in aviation. Imperial College, London, 78 pp.

196. Prozzi, J.P., C. Naude, and D. Sperling, 2002: Transportation in Developing Countries: Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for South Africa. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 52 pp.

The Pew Center gratefully acknowledges Ogunlade Davidson of the University of Cape Town, Ralph

Gakenheimer of MIT, Talia McCray of the Université de Laval, and Michael Walsh, an independent transportation consultant, for their review of earlier drafts.

197. Prud’homme, R. and J.P. Bocarejo, 2005: The London congestion charge: a tentative economic appraisal. Transport Policy, 12, pp. 279-287.

198. Pucher, J., 2004: Chapter 8. Public Transportation. In The Geography of Urban Transportation, S. Hanson and G. Giuliano (eds.), Guilford, pp. 199-236.

Edited Books.

199. Pulles, J.W., 2002: Aviation emissions and evaluation of reduction options/AERO. Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Watermanagement, Directorate-General of Civil Aviation, The Hague, The Netherlands.

200. QinetiQ, 2004: AERO2k Global Aviation Emissions Inventories for 2002 and 2025. QinetiQ Ltd, Hampshire, UK.

201. REN21. 2006: Renewables -Global Status Report- 2006 Update, REN21, Paris, 35 pp.

Synthesis report. The authors and reviewers are given on page 8.

http://www.ren21.net/globalstatusreport/REN21_GSR_2010_full.pdf

202. Resource Analysis, MVA Limited, Dutch National Aerospace Laboratory and International Institute of Air and Space Law, 1999: Analysis of the taxation of aircraft fuel. Produced for European Commission, Delft, TheNetherlands.

203. Ribeiro, S.K. and P.S. Yones-Ibrahim, 2001: Global warming and transport in Brazil - Ethanol alternative. International Journal of Vehicle Design 2001, 27(1/2/3/4), pp. 118-128.

204. Richardson, H.W. and C.H. Bae, 2004: Chapter 15. Transportation and urban compactness. In Handbook of Transport Geography and Spatial Systems, D.A. Hensher, K.J. Button, K.E. Haynes, and P.R. Stopher(eds.), Pergamon, pp. 333-355.

Edited Book.

205. Richmond, J., 2001: A whole-system approach to evaluating urban transit investments. Transport Reviews, 21(2), pp. 141-179.

206. Riedy, C., 2003: Subsidies that encourage fossil fuel use in Australia. Working paper CR2003/01, Institute for sustainable futures, Sydney, Australia, 39 pp.

207. Rietveld, P., 2001: Chapter 19 Biking and Walking: the Position of Non-motorized Transport Modes in Transport Systems. In Handbook of Transport Systems and Traffic Control. D.A. Hensher and K.J. Button, (eds.), Pergamon, pp. 299-319.

208. Ross, M., D. Patel, and T. Wenzel, 2006: Vehicle design and the physics of traffic safety. Physics Today, January, pp. 49-54.

209. Rye, T., 2002: Travel Plans: Do They Work? Transport Policy, 9(4), pp. 287-298.

210. SAE International, 2003a: A powerful mix. Automotive Engineering International, 111(5), pp. 50-56.

211. SAE International, 2003b: A different automatic. Automotive Engineering International, 111(7), pp. 32-36.

212. SAE International, 2004: Trucks get aerodynamic touch. Automotive Engineering International, 112(7), pp. 67-69.

213. Sanyo, 2005: On-line catalog, accessed 30/05/07.

214. Sausen, R., I. Isaksen, V. Grewe, D. Hauglustaine, D.S. Lee, G. Myhre, M.O. Köhler, G. Pitari, U. Schumann, F. Stordal and C. Zerefos, 2005: Aviation radiative forcing in 2000: an update on IPCC (1999).Meteorologische Zeitschrift, 114, pp. 555-561.

215. Schafer, A., 2000: Regularities in Travel Demand: An International Perspective. Journal of Transportation and Statistics, 3(3), pp. 1-31.

216. Shoup, D., 1997: Evaluating the effects of California’s parking cash-out law: eight case studies. Transport Policy, 4(4), pp. 201-216.

217. Skjølsvik, K.O., 2005: Natural gas used as ship fuel; Norway heads the development. In Navigare, February 2005, Oslo, Norway.

218. Small, K.A. and K. Van Dender, 2007: Fuel Efficiency and Motor Vehicle Travel: The Declining Rebound Effect. The Energy Journal, 28(1), pp. 25-51.

219. Song, Y. and G.J. Knaap, 2004: Measuring urban form: is Portland winning the war on sprawl? Journal of American Planning Association, 70(2), pp. 210-225.

220. Sperling, D., 1985: An analytical framework for siting and sizing biomass fuel plants. Energy, 9, pp. 1033-1040.

221. Sperling, D. and D. Salon, 2002: Transportation in developing countries: An overview of greenhouse gas reduction strategies. Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 40 pp.

The Pew Center gratefully acknowledges Ralph Gakenheimer of MIT and Michael Walsh, an independent transportation expert, for their reviews of earlier drafts.

222. Stead, D., H. Geerlings and E. Meijers, 2004: Policy integration in practice: the integration of land use planning, transport and environmental policy-making in Denmark, England and Germany. Delft University Press,Delft.

223. Stordal, F., G. Myhre, E.J.G. Stordal, W.B. Rossow, D.S. Lee, D.W. Arlander and T. Svenby, 2005: Is there a trend in cirrus cloud cover due to aircraft traffic? Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics, 5, pp. 2155-2162.

224. Syri, S., M. Amann, P. Capros, L. Mantzos, J. Cofala, and Z. Klimont, 2001: Low-CO₂ energy pathways and regional air pollution in Europe. Energy Policy, 29, pp. 871-884.

225. Taylor, M.A.P. and E.S. Ampt, 2003: Travelling Smarter Down Under: Policies for Voluntary Travel Behavior Change in Australia. Transport Policy, 10, pp. 165-177.

226. The Royal Commission on Transport and the Environment, 1994: Transport and the Environment. Oxford, 325 pp.

227. Toyota, 2004: Environmental & Social Report 2004.

228. accessed 30/05/07.

229. Toyota/Mizuho, 2004: Well-to-Wheel Analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Automotive Fuels in the Japanese Context. Mizuho, Tokyo, 122 pp.

230. Transport for London, 2005: Central London congestion charging, Impacts monitoring; Third annual report. 162pp.

231. Transport for London, 2006: Central London congestion charging. Fourth annual report, 215pp.

232. TRL, 2004: The Demand for Public Transport: A Practical Guide. Transport Research Laboratory, TRL Report, 593, 237 pp.

233. U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2005: Transportation Statistics Annual Report. Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Washington, US, 351pp.

234. U.S. DOE, 2000: Technology Roadmap for the 21^st Century Truck Program. Department of Energy, 21CT-001, 196pp.

235. UN, 2002: Plan of implementation of the World Summit on Sustainable Development. United Nations, New York.

236. UN, 2006: Review of Maritime Transport. United Nations, New York/Geneva, 160pp.

237. Veca, E. and J.R. Kuzmyak, 2005: Traveler Response to Transport System Changes: Chapter 13- Parking Pricing and Fees. TCRP Report 95, Transportation Research Board, 62 pp.

238. VTPI (Victoria Transport Policy Institute), 2005: TDM Encyclopedia, Transportation Elasticities, accessed 30/05/07.

239. Vyas, A., C. Saricks, and F. Stodolsky, 2002: The Potential Effect of Future Energy-Efficiency and Emissions-Improving Technologies on Fuel Consumption of Heavy Trucks. Argonne National Laboratory report ANL/ESD/02-4, August.

240. WBCSD, 2002: Mobility 2001: World Mobility at the End of the Twentieth Century, and its Sustainability. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, accessed 30/05/07.

241. WBCSD, 2004a: Mobility 2030: Meeting the Challenges to Sustainability. accessed 30/05/07.

242. WBSCD, 2004b: IEA/SMP Model Documentation and Reference Projection. Fulton, L. and G. Eads, accessed 30/05/07

243. WCTRS and ITPS, 2004: Urban Transport and the Environment: An International Perspective, World Conference on Transport Research Society and Institute for Transport Policy Studies, Elsevier, 515 pp.

Proceedings of a conference. Papers submitted previously, and peer reviewed.

http://www.civil.ist.utl.pt/wctr12_lisboa/int_FAQ.htm#01

244. WEC, 2004: Energy End-Use Technologies for the 21st Century. WEC, London, UK 128 pp.

245. Weiss, M.A., J.B. Heywood, E.M. Drake, A. Schafer, and F.F. AuYeung, 2000: On the Road in 2020: A Life-cycle Analysis of New Automobile Technologies, MIT Energy Laboratory, accessed 30/05/07.

246. Williams, V., R.B. Noland, and R. Toumi, 2003: Reducing the climate change impacts of aviation by restricting cruise altitudes. Transportation Research, D7, pp. 451-464.

1. Willoughby, C., 2001: Singapore’s Motorisation Policies: 1960-2000. Transport Policy, 8, pp. 125-139.

2. Wimmer, A., T. Wallner, J. Ringler, and F. Gerbig, 2005: H₂-Direct Injection – A Highly Promising Combustion Concept. SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0108.

SAE = society of automotive engineers.

Rigorous review process presented here: http://volunteers.sae.org/volunteers/paperreview/process.pdf

3. Winkelman, S., 2006: Transportation, the Clean Development Mechanism and International Climate Policy. Center for Clean Air Policy, 8th meeting of the Transportation Research Board. Washington D.C., 24 January 2006.

4. Wit, R.C.N. and J.M.W. Dings, 2002: Economic incentives to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions from international aviation. CE Delft, Study commissioned by the European Commission, Delft, The Netherlands, 200 pp.

5. Wit, R.C.N., B. Boon, A. van Velzen, M. Cames, O. Deuber, and D.S. Lee, 2005: Giving Wings to Emission Trading; Inclusion of Aviation under the European Emission Trading System (ETS); Design and Impacts. CE Delft, 245 pp.

6. Wit, R.C.N., B. Kampman, B. Boon, P.E. Meijer, J. Olivier, and D.S. Lee, 2004: Climate impacts from international aviation and shipping; State-of-the-art on climatic impacts, allocation and mitigation policies. CE Delft, TheNetherlands, 104 pp.

7. World Bank, 1996: Sustainable Transport: Priorities for Policy Reform, A World Bank Publication.

8. World Bank, 2002: Cities on the Move – A World Bank Urban Transport Strategy Review. Private Sector Development and Infrastructure Department, Washington, D.C, 206 pp.

9. World Bank, 2004: World Development Indicators CD-ROM, World Bank, Washington, D.C.

10. Wright, L., 2004: Bus Rapid Transit Planning Guide. GTZ, Eschborn, Germany, 225 pp.

11. Wright, L., L. Fulton, 2005: Climate Change Mitigation and Transport in Developing Nations. Transport Reviews, 25(6), 691-717.

12. Yamba, F.D. and E. Matsika, 2004: Proceedings of the IPCC Expert Meeting on Industrial Technology Development, Transfer and Diffusion. Tokyo, Japan, 21-23 September 2004, pp. 278-288.

Papers submitted prior to the conference, followed by peer review.

13. Yuasa, 2000: Press release 2000.4.20 – Development of high capacity Li batteries with Mn type cathode (in Japanese). ac-cessed 30/05/07.

14. Zhou, H. and D. Sperling, 2001: Transportation in Developing Countries: Greenhouse Gas Scenarios for Shanghai. China, Pew Center on Global Climate Change, Arlington, 43 pp.

The Pew Center would like to thank Kebin He of Tsinghua University, Feng An of Argonne

National Laboratory, Ralph Gakenheimer of MIT, and Michael Walsh, an independent transportation consultant, for their review of earlier drafts.

Piece By Peace Process – Negotiating a Path

Gareth Allen — Wed, 20 Oct 2010 06:35:05 +0000

Words by Maleena Pone. Images by Thaer Ganaim / Getty Images and Arij.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas, US Special Envoy George Mitchell

In September the latest round of peace talks between Israel and Palestine resumed after a 20-month hiatus. Even before they could gain any momentum they collapsed again due to the Israelis’ inability to extend a moratorium on West Bank settlement construction. Palestinian leaders clearly stated that direct talks would not be possible unless Israel stopped the building of Jewish settlements on occupied land. A senior Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) official stated, “The resumption of talks requires tangible steps, the first of them a freeze on settlements.”

US envoy George Mitchell, however, stated, “Peace in the region and an independent and viable state for the Palestinian people will be realistically achieved through direct negotiations.” Exactly how he understood that to happen is unclear given the fact that the two leaders haven’t been in the same room for over a month now.

Previous attempts at such a resolution have also failed for one reason or another, the most recent two efforts within the last decade alone. And so here we are again, three years later, a new President and another meeting, summoned by the US government.

The complexities of the peace talks do not lie simply within the glaringly obvious differences between the political agenda of both countries, but rather in the political situation of both leaders. The way the leaders are perceived and judged in their own countries is questionable, making public support relatively feeble, particularly on the Palestinian side.

Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas participates in any talks in a relatively weakened state; he is currently enduring deep opposition within his own party, and doesn’t even seem to have enough authority to hold illegal settlers on the Palestinian West Bank accountable to common law.

In addition to that, the opposition from PLO factions and outside groups is mounting. De-facto Palestinian government Hamas has not stopped at verbal expressions of disagreement; it was behind the 31^st August shooting of four Jewish settlers near Hebron, as well as an attack near Ramallah the following day that injured two settlers. These attacks were clearly timed to disrupt the beginning of the talks and to weaken the position of the Palestinian delegation.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is backed up by a hard line right-wing coalition government, which many feel is not interested in peace when it comes to Palestine. However, he met with the US Middle East Envoy George Mitchell in Caesarea last Wednesday and said, “We are committed and I am committed to trying to get to a peace agreement that will secure Israel’s security.” On the other hand, he did not stipulate at what cost, nor did he make any comments regarding the moratorium. He seemed more pre-occupied with the flotilla that was seeking to descend upon Gaza.

Essentially, a change in both political governments is required before any peace deal can be signed.

President Obama admits, “We’ve got a lot of work to do, and there are going to be those who are going to do everything they can to try and undermine these talks but we are going to remain stalwart”. The real question remains: how possible is it for either side to make any tangible changes to core issues like Jerusalem, refugees, borders and settlements in the West Bank.

Marhin Bishara, Senior political analyst for Al Jazeera succinctly frames the positions of both sides, “For 17 years this peace process has been the Paris Hilton of international diplomacy, lots of hanging out, lots of glitter, and very little substance. What Obama is trying to do is reinvent a decade of skepticism and failures and that’s going to take a lot of effort in order to change the psychological framework laid by previous encounters.”

West Bank settlements

Bishara also believes, that the Israeli coalition government is not ready for the minimum requirements of a deal. “The evidence would suggest that there are contentious issues arising over how far the Israelis are prepared to come in order to reach an agreement. Israel says the Palestinians have to meet them halfway, but Palestine believes the Israelis need to meet them 90% of the way. The Palestinians have already made a significant part of their compromise; they have recognized Israeli territory on 78% of historical Palestine and only need to come a percentage of the way further.”

Calling for an extended moratorium will test Israel’s intentions for peace and inevitably limit their long-term progression for building illegal settlements. However, no such action has been planned, in fact Ynet news has revealed that the Israeli prime minister approved plans for new housing units to be built in predominantly Arab East Jerusalem – a move that has furthered angered the Palestinians. There are already 500,000 Israelis in more than 120 settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. Jewish settlements on occupied territory are illegal under international law but have been expanding in the West Bank for 30 years. Ultimately, for as long as the Israeli government imposes discriminatory restrictions on Palestinian residents, the tensions are bound to continue and peace is just a puzzle with pieces missing.

Mr. Abbas has said he would decide whether to quit the negotiations after consulting with Arab League foreign ministers in Libya over a week ago. However, in a statement after the meeting, they said that they would give the US another month to find a way to break the impasse.

Teetering On The Pledge

Gareth Allen — Thu, 14 Oct 2010 08:14:51 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Image from NUS.

Campbell with a pledge he intends to honour

Poor old Nick Clegg probably thought all his dreams had come true in May when he lifted his skirts in the direction of David Cameron and hopped into bed with the Tories. Deputy Prime Minister! He would get to stand at the despatch box in the House of Commons, he would definitely be on telly a lot more, he would get a whole new set of stationery… Oh yes, things were definitely on the up for Clegg and his party.

Sadly for Clegg, the last five months have been a constant struggle as he has continually compromised his principles – at least that’s what he called them before the election. The Tories have been merciless with their Liberal Democrat partners – the junior partners in this abusive relationship have been repeatedly forced to publicly humiliate themselves. From Clegg’s announcement of spending cuts specific to his home patch of Sheffield in the first week of government, it’s been clear that he wouldn’t be getting an easy ride.

We’ve already seen Vince Cable boldly go where no Tory or New Labour minister dared as he announced the privatisation of Royal Mail. Danny Alexander will be the front man later in the month when the Comprehensive Spending Review ushers in the real cuts – it’s been a phoney war until now.

But for the millions who voted Liberal Democrat in May, this week’s announcement that universities will be allowed to increase tuition fees has been the most galling yet. Cable again was put in the firing line to announce that the government would be accepting the recommendations of the Browne Report.

It has long been Liberal Democrat party policy to abolish tuition fees but, before the election they were forced to “put the policy on hold” in the face of the economic situation. I saw Clegg speak in York last October and he faced several questions on the issue from students in the audience. He wrung his hands and said that he was dead against tuition fees, but that they just couldn’t afford to make that commitment at that point. At the time, it struck me as a rather statesmanlike position to take and, for my sins, I wrote at the time “his honesty on tuition fees was genuine.”

So Liberal Democrats are rightly outraged that he is now wringing his hands once more, and changing the goalposts again. In a letter to Lib Dem MPs yesterday – many of whom signed specific pledges before the election specifically promising not to raise tuition fees – Clegg acknowledged the problem. “I am painfully aware of the pledge we all made to voters on tuition fees ahead of the general election. Departing from that pledge will be one of the most difficult decisions of my political career.” So he’s already made up his mind…

So has Menzies Campbell who, having glowered for five months from the back benches, has said he won’t support the changes. He won’t be the only one. We have to wonder how many Liberal Democrat MPs will honour the pledge they made – will more Lib Dems vote against their government than for it? If that happens, one has to wonder whether Nick Clegg is Deputy Prime Minister or Leader of the Liberal Democrats. Can he really be both?

This is the first test. It won’t be the last.

Politically Correct

Gareth Allen — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:56:17 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Image by Tom Pritchard.

Big news today from TCI Towers as we see the publication of my book Politically Correct.

Regular readers will know that I ran for parliament in this year’s general election, taking on the might of the Westminster establishment – specifically Yvette Cooper, who was my local MP. (I don’t want to spoil the end too much, but she is still my local MP…)

The book follows my adventure in politics as I tried to mount a professional challenge on a shoestring budget. With no party to support me, I called in favours from friends and cobbled together a formidable political campaign. From creating the right image and drawing up a manifesto, to getting involved in my local community, I did everything I could to make myself a credible candidate.

When the election was called, I plunged into full time campaigning – knocking on doors and meeting hundreds of voters, debating the other candidates in set piece Hustings meetings. By the time election night came around, as the rest of the country was left hanging, my own result was definitive. I didn’t become a member of parliament, but I was changed forever by my brush with democracy.

I learned everything there is to know about the arcane details of British electoral law, but I also got a valuable insight into what makes the British public tick. I had a unique view of the election – an outsider on the inside.

I’ve tried to capture that perspective in the book, and I hope you’ll enjoy it.

You can buy a copy at lulu.com.

How Marketing Works – Gap and The Little Blue Box

Gareth Allen — Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:25:18 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Image from Gap.

The Abomination

There’s a great little story in the news today that illustrates exactly how the marketing departments of major corporations operate. Before we go any further, I’d better admit that, by writing this article, I am of course adding to the publicity that Gap have generated themselves. But I reckon it’s worth it…

The story – generated from nothing entirely from within the Gap marketing department – is that a very successful trousers shop decided to change their logo. And then decided not to.

The rebrand involved a new logo on their website. As you can see from the image, the marketing people probably slaved for literally minutes before coming up with the new corporate symbol. However, when they deployed the new logo, there was “an online outcry.”

According to the BBC, “critics attacked the rebranding on social networks and online forums. More than 2,000 comments were posted on the company’s Facebook page on the issue, with many demanding the return of the traditional logo.”

So now the company will roll in to the rescue – they are after all nothing if not a completely democratic and transparent organisation. Mark Hansen, president of something called “Gap Brand North America,” said…

“We’ve been listening to and watching all of the comments this past week. We heard them say over and over again they are passionate about our blue box logo, and they want it back. So we’ve made the decision to do just that – we will bring it back across all channels.”

Hooray for Gap – they really do listen to their customers don’t they?

So essentially, somebody knocked up a new logo that is well within the skill set of any design undergraduate; then they leaked it out online; then they generated an artificial storm; then they saved the day. All at virtually no cost to Gap, and all splashed across the world’s media.

What is really telling is that the boss man – Hansen – works for “Gap Brand North America.” It’s a matter of record that Gap have not made a pair of trousers for decades – all the manufacturing is outsourced to the Far East. In North America, they are all about branding – they don’t have a lot to do other than glue a logo onto the adverts, and generate publicity for the brand.

This week’s events are a master class on how it’s done.

Nobel – Bluffer’s Guide to the 2010 Winners

Gareth Allen — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 13:28:59 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Images by Liu Xia, Wikipedia, and Getty Images.

The Nobel Committee have ruffled a few feathers in Beijing this year by awarding their Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese human rights campaigner currently enjoying his fourth spell at the Chairman’s pleasure in Jinzhou Prison for “inciting subversion of state power.” It’s an overtly political choice, and the Chinese government’s predictable response has been noisy bluster abroad, and information censorship at home. A spokesperson for the Chinese government claimed the award “defiles Alfred Nobel’s purpose.” Presumably they think they are more responsible custodians of his memory than the Nobel Committee. Meanwhile, foreign news channels were blacked out, and Liu Xiaobo was removed from internet search engines.

Liu has been a thorn in the Chinese authorities’ side since Tiananmen Square, but it’s his recent leadership of the Charter 08 movement. The Charter calls for political reform and human rights – specifically, democracy, a new constitution and an independent judiciary. It’s interesting that the Nobel Committee have taken such a blatant political position, although they did award the same honour to the Dalai Lama in 1989 – another man who will be waiting in vain for a Christmas card from the Chinese Communist Party.

Last year, of course, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to the newly elected Barack Obama, despite the fact he had done precious little to promote peace during his short Presidency. If the rationale then was to encourage him towards peaceful solutions, then he must be due another. Since then, he has escalated the war in Afghanistan and ordered the extra-judicial execution of suspected terrorists (including US citizens) wherever they might be encountered. Actually, on that basis, maybe next year the Peace Prize might go to the Chinese government.

Graphene

The Physics Prize has gone to Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov for their work in developing Graphene. It seems ironic that, in an age where Hawking and his theoretical physicists posit ever more theoretical dimensions for their advanced mathematics to describe, Geim and Novoselov appear to have completely got rid of a dimension. Graphene is described as a “two-dimensional material” because it has the thickness of one carbon atom. The atoms form a flat lattice of carbon that is a naturally occurring component of Graphite – in fact infinitesimally small fragments of Graphene escape into the air every time you use a pencil.

Geim and Novoselov came up with a way of extracting and isolating Graphene called – rather splendidly – micromechanical cleavage. As a result of their work, Graphene will be used as a semiconductor, enabling a significant step forward in the miniaturisation of computing.

The Chemistry Prize was shared by Richard Heck, Ei-Ichi Negishi and Akira Suzuki who have all contributed to the development of palladium reactions. They pioneered the use of the metal palladium to catalyse chemical reactions in organic molecules. This is now standard practice in the development of complex carbon molecules. Most of the chemical works of art produced in the last twenty years – from agricultural chemicals to medicines – were made possible because these blokes invented a new kind of paint.

We’re on much more familiar ground with the Medicine Prize, which was awarded to Robert G Edwards – the father of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). It’s now 32 years since the birth of Louise Brown, the first “test tube baby.” Nowadays, IVF treatment is available on the NHS and thousands of parents have children as a result of Edwards’ groundbreaking work.

IVF is not without controversy, particularly in reactionary religious communities. It’s clear that a doctor effectively creating human life in a laboratory would make you nervous if you were clinging to the belief that a god exclusively held that power. But like Galileo and Darwin, Edwards is responsible for taking human understanding of life a step forward.

Although the Nobel Prize for Literature has been won in the past by masters of the English language such as William Butler Yeats, George Bernard Shaw and Winston Churchill, it is a truly international award. Although the scientific prizes often deal with details beyond the understanding of the average reader, they can be generally be simplified in broad terms. However, when the prize is awarded for the written word, it’s almost impossible to fully appreciate the winner, unless you are fluent in the language of their work.

This year’s winner, Mario Vargas Llosa, is a prime example. A Peruvian novelist and essayist with an incredibly broad ranging output, he has written political thrillers, comedies, journalistic essays and historical fiction. Having been fiercely anti-establishment in his youth – the Peruvian Army organised public burnings of his 1963 novel The Time of The Hero – he eventually ran unsuccessfully for President in 1990. He is a profoundly influential writer in Latin America and yet, here in the English-speaking world, we remain ignorant of his work.

The Economics Prize has been awarded to Peter Diamond, Dale Mortensen and Christopher Pissarides for their “analysis of markets with search frictions.” I confess that economics as a science makes my head hurt in way that neither Physics or Chemistry can. Economic theory seems to me less “scientific” than a series of unprovable extrapolations, but I freely acknowledge my own position of ignorance in this regard.

Diamond, Mortensen and Pissarides’ work have informed policy-makers on employment regulation and social security legislation. The question is why there are often job vacancies in an economy, and yet there is still unemployment. This “search friction” has other impacts on the wider economy, such as the housing market. In America, these “search frictions” are naturally seen as a hindrance to free markets, and have been used to justify reducing government regulation of business, as well as lowering social security payments.

The Nobel Committee has been criticised by the Chinese government for it’s Peace Prize this year. But it’s clear that, in some quarters, the recipients of the Medicine and Economics Prizes might also be controversial. Nobel Prizes are an honour that garners worldwide acclaim for their winners, but generally they go in the “lifetime achievement” category – most laureates have a substantial body of work behind them, and their discoveries and breakthroughs have stood the test of time. Although history suggests they occasionally get it wrong – Henry Kissinger in 1973 still looks an odd choice – they provide a useful and fascinating look at the progress of the world.

Andrew Neil vs Sayeeda Warsi: Hobson’s Choice

Gareth Allen — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 11:00:37 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Pictures from PA and BBC.

It’s very rare these days that I feel a genuinely new and unexpected emotion. Having just turned 35, and increasingly resembling my father in word and deed, I tell myself that I have seen it all. There is nothing new under the sun, I think, as I roll my world-weary eyes towards the now onrushing second half of my own personal kick about.

So it’s with some grudging respect that I tip my hat to the BBC’s political late night impresario Andrew Neil. On Wednesday night, I found myself alone in a hotel room watching the still inexplicably employed Neil wrapping up coverage of the Conservative Party Conference with an interview of the party’s Chairman Sayeeda Warsi.

Sayeeda Warsi, who had spent the previous week criticising the Labour Party’s internal democracy despite being parachuted into her job after losing an election. Sayeeda Warsi, who embodies the most selfish stripe of working class pull-the-ladder-up-behind-you Toryism. That Sayeeda Warsi.

So now I bring you back to this surprising and not entirely welcome feeling that floated unbidden into my consciousness. Neil asked her, several times, when she had been told about the announcement on Child Benefit, and she replied, again several times, that she had no intention of telling him. At the third or fourth time of asking, I actually found myself siding with Warsi. Quite extraordinary.

Not that I particularly approve of Warsi avoiding the question. I’d actually like to know the answer for two reasons. Firstly, it speaks clearly to the decision-making process at the centre of the new government; and secondly, I love a bit of political gossip. However, neither of these reasons are anywhere near as important as the fact that the government have cut Child Benefit for higher-rate tax-payers.

No matter which side of the fence you sit on this complex moral and financial question, surely we ought to be debating the rights and wrongs of the policy, and not the tedious detail of who was told about the policy, and when they were told. Paxman did the same thing with Theresa May on Newsnight the previous evening. Later, during the same Sayeeda Warsi interview, Andrew Neil went on to ask her – five times – whether or not membership of the Conservative Party had fallen since the election. Again, she clearly wasn’t going to answer the question, and again, Andrew Neil persisted beyond any reasonable point of interest.

It all seems such a silly sport. Frankly, the number of Conservative Party members is irrelevant – they are governing! Who cares when Theresa May or Sayeeda Warsi knew about the Child Benefit changes? Let’s talk about the changes themselves.

The journalists and politicians are all complicit in this stupid distraction. As they dance around these redundant questions, the politicians are happy to be avoiding real scrutiny. Paxman and Neil revel in their reputation as interrogators without realising their ridiculous posturing removes the need for real substantive questioning. As Neil asked Warsi for the fifth time about party membership, she really didn’t need to avoid the question, because she has already avoided the difficult ones.

Shadow Cabinet Movers and Shakers

Gareth Allen — Mon, 27 Sep 2010 11:07:38 +0000

Words by Gareth Allen. Images from Ed Miliband, NTI and Sadiq Khan

At the Labour Conference in Manchester, the Milibands are struggling to adjust to their new reality. After his limp acceptance speech, Ed realises he has to make a pretty punchy speech tomorrow. This leadership election has been a clannish process that has not excited the wider public. Miliband needs Britain to start recognising him and what he stands for. His speech to conference is his first opportunity to begin that process.

In contrast, the bruised older brother David is deciding whether or not to stand for shadow cabinet elections. I think he will swallow his injured pride and be an important part of his brother’s team, but he’s going to have his moment of wallowing first.

The construction of the rest of the shadow cabinet will be fascinating. There is much talk of a “new generation,” but it’s not that simple. When in opposition, the Labour Party’s constitution means that the 19 members of the shadow cabinet are elected by MPs. Ed Miliband will be able to decide who goes where, but he might end up with a few unwelcome old stagers at the top table.

Along with Gordon Brown, Alistair Darling, Jack Straw and Bob Ainsworth have already said they will not continue on the front bench, and Peter Mandelson’s book has now made him persona non grata. But veterans of Blair and Brown cabinets like Alan Johnson and Hilary Benn will probably be in Miliband’s team whether he likes it or not. Likewise, erstwhile Deputy Leadership candidate Jon Cruddas will probably win a seat, no matter how little the new leadership might want him.

I speculated on Saturday that Andy Burnham will be consolidated into the new regime with a decent portfolio, and also wondered how Miliband would manage the threat from Ed Balls and Yvette Cooper. I believe Cooper will be given the Treasury portfolio and will do an excellent job of opposing George Osborne. Balls will be unhappy with anything seen as a demotion from his previous Education role. Perhaps he will be given the Health job, with Burnham moving to Education.

As some of the old guard move aside, there will rising stars in Miliband’s team. Liam Byrne will have a much higher profile than was afforded by his previous job as Chief Secretary to The Treasury. The press will give him grief about his “There’s no money left” note, but that will fade. He may be unleashed on the Business and Enterprise brief – the Labour opposition will have identified Vince Cable as a key chink in the coalition armour, and Byrne is tenacious and wily enough to poke him with just the right kind of stick.

Sadiq Khan will be guaranteed a senior role after masterminding Miliband’s successful leadership campaign. When Labour were in power, he was Transport Minister under Andrew Adonis, but led transport business in the Commons as Adonis was a member of the Lords. He’ll be rewarded for his work in the campaign with a higher profile. Jim Murphy, who was Scottish Secretary for the last year of Gordon Brown’s government, will be expected to finish very high in the shadow cabinet elections. If he does, he may be moved into a more senior position.

For politics geeks like me, this is an exciting time of possibilities and speculation. But for Ed Miliband, it’s a week of holding his breath as he waits to see how comfortable he is with his new team.

Nominations for shadow cabinet close on Wednesday 29^th September at 1700. Labour MPs vote from 4^th-7^th October, and the results will be announced at 2200 on the 7^th.