After Circle Express yesterday, another operator is set to provide Driver CPC training: this time it's TDG which will offer in-house training and third-party CPC training.

How's this for a target? Royal Mail has a goal of halving its total CO2 output by 2015 - and it's looking at radical changes to its vehicle fleet to achieve that. The news story has an interesting quote from Mark Cavill, the group's carbon management programme manager:

We would switch to so-called green fleets tomorrow if there was an urban postal delivery van available. We believe OEMs are missing a trick because commercial vehicles represent the ideal platform to showcase future propulsion technology.

They usually run predefined routes and rarely do more than 100 miles in a day so it's an ideal way to set up an infrastructure to support that industry, which would then pave the way for the mass consumer market. Our vans cover 47 miles a day on average.

Looks like a challenge to me. Are you listening, LDV?

And also on the green agenda... Sometimes the USA makes you shake your head in disbelief. Here's a story from a couple of months ago, from the estimable Land Line website (the official publication of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers' Association):

The chairman of the U.S. House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit said this week that he is not in favor of slowing trucks down through electronic limiters or a national speed limit.

Subcommittee Chairman Peter DeFazio, D-OR, questioned proposals brought forward by the ATA during a hearing Tuesday, Jan. 27, on the topic of energy reduction and environmental sustainability in surface transportation.

"I've heard from safety advocates and others that rear-end collisions are a big problem - and if you're moving trucks slower, that would be a big problem," DeFazio stated during an exchange with ATA First Vice Chairman Tommy Hodges.

Hodges spoke at the hearing to promote ATA's so-called green initiatives, which include idle-reduction, congestion relief and slowing down trucks.

DeFazio said idle reduction and congestion relief are important issues, but the subcommittee was not interested in pursuing a national speed limit or mandatory speed limiters.

"I don't think this committee is going to go back and pre-empt the states for what the (Government Accountability Office) and others say are dubious savings in terms of fuel," DeFazio stated.

(Here's the story in full)

It just seems amazing to us that the US can still be against the idea of speed limiters or even a national speed limit - or that the fuel savings from restricting your speed can be regarded as 'dubious'. But the bit that really gets me is the idea that speed limiters would be likely to cause more rear-end collisions!