Latest news with #TransportandEnvironment
Telegraph
26-04-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Germany's failing bridges could wreck Europe's ability to wage war
They are supposed to be the gold standard for efficient, high-quality engineering, but Germany's bridges are in such poor condition that allied tanks may not be able to drive over them if war breaks out with Russia. As tensions soar with Moscow, a colonel in the German reserve armed forces has raised concerns over the 'dilapidated' bridge network in his country, where as many as one in three need urgent repairs. Reserve Colonel Patrick Sensburg, the head of the Bundeswehr's reservist association, said that it would be 'impossible' to rapidly deploy tanks in Germany in a crisis if soldiers do not know which bridges are strong enough to carry them. 'The condition of many bridges in Germany is actually worrying. Around one in three is dilapidated,' he told The Telegraph. 'My main concern is that, if the weight load capacity of the bridges is unclear, tanks or other large military equipment will not have adequate exit routes in an emergency, making the rapid deployment of forces impossible.' Germany would play a crucial transit role in the event of war with Russia, with huge numbers of soldiers, tanks and other equipment passing through the country towards the eastern front. But the poor state of the German bridge network has raised concerns that soldiers and supplies would face difficult navigating through the country. A recent survey by Transport and Environment, a European lobby group, found that 16,000 bridges in Germany are dilapidated and many are not even designed to bear heavy loads, such as tanks, which weigh about 60 tons. About 5,900 of these bridges would need to be completely replaced, while the other 10,000 could be fixed with reinforcement or replacement works, the study found. German infrastructure has suffered from decades of under-investment, which has led to crumbling road, bridge and railway networks in a country historically famous for its engineering skills. Res Col Sensburg said that the new German government should fix the bridges as a top priority, relying on a new €500 billion (£420 billion) infrastructure fund announced last month by Friedrich Merz, the incoming chancellor. He said that one interim solution would be returning yellow tank signs to bridges in Germany, stating how much weight a bridge can carry. The signs were mostly removed in Germany after the Cold War because they were no longer considered necessary. 'The new federal government should invest significantly in security-relevant infrastructure and then reinstall the familiar tank signs of the past in front of bridges. They are not an interference and provide information about the load a bridge can bear,' he said. 'This also makes sense, for example, for aid after natural disasters. In Poland, the tank signs were reinstalled last year as part of the Nato exercise Steadfast Defender 2024. We should follow this example.' The dire state of Germany's bridge network was highlighted last summer by the collapse of Carola Bridge, one of the main crossing points over the Elbe in Dresden. According to Tagesspiegel, a German newspaper, the so-called Ringbahn bridge in the west of Berlin is also a cause of major concern, having been closed in March because of a crack in its supporting structure. The bridge, constructed in 1963, is due to be demolished but it remains unclear when a replacement will be completed. In September, ZDF, a German broadcaster, reported that a bridge forming part of the Meckenheim motorway junction, in west Germany, was one of the most dilapidated in the country. A Bundeswehr spokesman said that the nation's bridges were 'generally sound'. Asked whether they would collapse under the weight of tanks, she referred the question to the transport ministry. The spokesman added: 'Any potential aggressor should realise that an attack on our alliance's territory has no chance of success because we are willing and able to defend ourselves.' A German transport ministry spokesman said that modernisation work on bridges was a 'top priority', but referred the question about collapse risks to the German defence ministry, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The transport spokesman said of the renovation works: 'Due to the urgency of the situation, priority will be given to the large bridges, where modernisation is of course more complex and time-consuming than for smaller bridges.'
Yahoo
04-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Nations divided ahead of decisive week for shipping emissions
Members of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) are divided over whether to approve a carbon tax on international shipping, ahead of a meeting starting on Monday to finalise emissions-reduction measures. The carbon tax, the most ambitious measure on the table, would make it more expensive for shipping companies to emit greenhouse gases, encouraging them to curtail emissions. But some member states, including China and Brazil, are proposing other measures, arguing the carbon levy would increase the cost of goods and contribute to food insecurity. The IMO expects to come to an initial agreement by Friday next week on which mechanism to adopt to help reach carbon neutrality in shipping by 2050. The stakes are high as shipping accounts for nearly three percent of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the IMO. "(It is) difficult to say what will happen next week," Fanny Pointet, sustainable shipping manager at European advocacy group, Transport and Environment, told AFP. The United States has been notably quiet about the issue, having not commented since President Donald Trump returned to the White House. The Pacific and Caribbean island states are leading the group pushing for a carbon tax, with support from other countries including the UK. They argue that funds raised from a levy could be redistributed to nations most vulnerable to climate change to help adapt and mitigate its effects. "Climate change is a terrifying lived reality for my country," said Albon Ishoda, the Marshall Islands' representative to the IMO. - 'Terrifying lived reality' - However, around 15 countries strongly oppose the carbon levy, arguing it would exacerbate inequalities between nations and raise the costs of goods such as palm oil, cereals and corn. Concerns are also mounting that the European Union, once a supporter of a carbon tax, could water down the measure in favour of a carbon credit system. Such a system would allow companies or countries to buy and sell credits representing the right to emit a certain amount of carbon dioxide. According to University College London research, the option of no levy presents the biggest risk to meeting the shipping sector's climate goals. It could also distort fuel prices and create an uneven playing field, favouring states with strong industrial polices, such as China, researchers said. "The fastest and cheapest energy transition is brought about by a strong levy," combined with a global fuel standard to reduce the carbon intensity of fuels used by ships, they added. Challenges also remain with the fuel standard system, particularly the risk of using alternative fuels such as palm oil and soybean oil, which indirectly contribute to emissions through deforestation, Pointet explained. While Brazil defends the key role of these biofuels, more than 60 environmental protection NGOs have raised objections to their inclusion in the future shipping fuel mix. Other potential solutions include synthetic hydrogen-based fuels, currently very expensive to produce, or the installation of wind-powered propulsion systems onboard ship. pml/ajb/jkb/gil
Yahoo
30-01-2025
- Yahoo
The UK train routes so expensive it is cheaper to fly via Europe
It's the sort of thing that shouldn't happen in a functional transport system: a Cornish couple saved £250 on their cross-country journey by choosing to fly via Malaga rather than take the train. Kristina Coulson says that she and her husband were quoted more than £200 each to travel via train from Newquay to Crewe, where they needed to pick up a car. Instead she says that the duo were able to fly from Newquay to Malaga, before flying back into Manchester the next day. They say that the whole trip cost them £153, including one night in a hotel. It isn't the first time that someone has been able to avoid sky-high rail fares by taking circuitous flights instead. So why does this keep happening? Over the years, campaign groups like Transport and Environment have claimed that Britain's rail fares are the steepest in Europe. But some experts – like travel blogger Mark Smith, who founded the blog The Man in Seat 61 – say this isn't quite accurate. Instead, he says that UK rail operators tend to be much more ruthless in their dynamic pricing models, utilising a similar approach to low-cost airlines. In short, that means that passengers who book on the day will pay a hefty premium. In those circumstances, UK fares are generally higher than European equivalents. But those passengers who book weeks or months in advance will probably get a better deal than their peers on the continent. Of course, that's not much consolation when you need to take a short-notice train journey. But is it really cheaper to fly? Here's what our investigation unveiled. It's one of the most popular long-distance rail routes in Britain, but it certainly isn't cheap for last-minute trips. When I checked at 4pm on Monday afternoon, a seat on the 5pm train out of Kings Cross to Edinburgh was priced at £199.60, with later trains costing £150 or £130. Was it cheaper to go with budget airlines? A quick search on Ryanair's website revealed that both London and Edinburgh had regular flights to and from Budapest, meaning I could connect via the Hungarian capital. Indeed Ryanair offered me a same-day flight at 7pm from Stansted to Budapest for £97.59, with a return flight to Edinburgh the next day available for £87.99 – so a total of £185.58. It was a small saving (£14) that would inevitably be swallowed up by the costs of getting to the airport, let alone staying in Budapest. But would the picture be different if I had a bit more notice? When I decided to check train prices for Friday evening, the same journey (5pm from Kings Cross to Edinburgh Waverley) was priced at £96.80. Alternatively, Ryanair was offering a flight to Budapest for that evening for just £19.99, followed by a mid-morning flight to Edinburgh for £41. On the face of it, it was a much better saving this time around. But I still needed to factor in the cost of one night's accommodation. Not to mention that getting to Stansted on Friday afternoon required a lot more flexibility. If I could escape the office that early, then why not just get an earlier train to Edinburgh? Indeed, leaving Kings Cross at midday reduced the train ticket to £78.90, slashing Ryanair's price advantage. But was it the same story for longer train journeys? For another example, I looked at travelling between Bristol and Edinburgh – a whopping six-hour journey – on January 29. Looking on Trainline in the afternoon of January 27, the peak ticket at 9am cost £106.30, though I could travel for a fraction of that (£46) if I was prepared to wait just 35 minutes… By contrast, Ryanair had a flight from Bristol to Tenerife for just £16.99, followed by a second flight to Edinburgh for £29.43. A decent saving on the peak prices, then. Given the flights were morning and evening respectively, I could also do the detour without having to factor in hotels. The gap would give me just enough time to explore Tenerife. Yes, it would still involve some extra costs – tapas and ice cream, perhaps – but wouldn't that be more pleasant than spending the best part of seven hours on a CrossCountry train? A search on Trainline revealed that this particular journey would cost between £65 and £93.70, depending on which service you wanted to travel on. Looking on Ryanair's website, I was surprised to find that I would be better off taking the early-morning flight to the Polish city of Gdansk, before catching a return leg to Leeds Bradford Airport. Together, both flights would cost just £59.24. Even better, the return leg was just £14.25 – one of the cheapest single tickets I've seen on Ryanair in ages. Fancy a city break in Liverpool? When I checked Trainline, I was offered a peak ticket from London to Liverpool tomorrow evening for £171.30. Alternatively, Ryanair had flights for Marrakech from Stansted for £99.99 on the same day. I could then book a return to Liverpool the next morning for just £30.48. A £41 saving wasn't to be sniffed at, but would it really persuade the average traveller to reroute their journey via Morocco? I wasn't convinced. Thanks to low-cost airlines like Ryanair, it isn't hard to find instances where taking an international detour can be cheaper than relying on the railways. But the kind of big savings (£100 upwards) that Kristina Coulson enjoyed only work if the alternative is taking the busiest peak train services without any kind of pre-planning. Looking at tomorrow's peak trains from Newport to Crewe, there's only one service with tickets over £200 (the 7.12am departure), with most of them priced at around £140. If you can wait until Friday, you can do the trip for £93.60. Generally, the people who end up paying the larger ticket prices are those with less flexibility in the first place. Which means they're less likely to have the time to take a quick detour via the Canary Islands or North Africa. Still, it's nice to know the option is there – if you're feeling spontaneous enough to make the most of it. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
