Swedish town prides itself as environmental role model

Sophie Mongalvy, Yahoo News 30 Mar 08;

The Swedish town of Vaexjoe will be "green" or will not be at all. That's the slogan in this town that has become a world leader in environmental protection and has even loftier goals.

While the European Union (EU) aims to raise its share of renewable energy consumption to 20 percent by 2020, Vaexjoe, a town of 80,000 people nestled between lakes and forests in Sweden's south, can boast of already exceeding 50 percent -- and 90 percent when it comes to heating.

Carbon dioxide emissions per inhabitant dropped by 30 percent between 1993 and 2006.

"It's a lot but we're not satisfied, we want to reduce them further," says Henrik Johansson, an environmental expert at city hall.

In fact, Vaexjoe, which in 1996 set the ambitious goal of ultimately reducing its consumption of fossil fuels to zero, wants to halve its CO2 emissions by 2010 and reduce them by 70 percent by 2050.

Those goals exceed by far the EU's objectives, which call for a reduction of 20 percent from 1990 levels by 2020.

Vaexjoe's efforts have been lauded by the European Commission, which in 2007 awarded it the Sustainable Energy for Europe award.

"We try to influence people's behaviour. It's not easy, in fact it's actually quite hard," says Johansson.

But their efforts are paying off, with people adapting to a new way of life thanks to bicycle lanes, tax breaks and free parking for "green" cars, and calendars that provide useful tips on how to protect the environment.

-- 'Today we can swim, fish and eat the fish' --

Since winning the European Commission prize, Vaexjoe has played host to numerous foreign delegations, led by China, who have come to tour the area and seek inspiration from the local initiatives.

According to the town's conservative mayor Bo Frank, Vaexjoe owes its "green" success to a longstanding commitment to the environment as well as to a tradition of political consensus on the issue.

It all began in the early 1970s, when the town agreed to clean up its heavily polluted lakes.

"Today we can swim, fish and eat the fish" from the local waters, Johansson triumphs.

Then, in 1980, following the second international oil crisis, the local heating plant which had been running on oil introduced a new fuel based on wood -- an abundant raw material in Vaexjoe's surroundings and able to provide the town with an independent source of energy.

Today, the wood fuel accounts for 98.7 percent of the fuel used at the plant, which heats the homes of 50,000 habitants in Vaexjoe and whose network continues to grow, explains Lars Ehrlen of the plant's energy unit.

In order to convince residents to change their living habits in the fight against climate change Mayor Frank believes in using both "the carrot and the stick."

He recalls that some of the measures that have been introduced have been unwelcome, but adds: "Nothing is ever popular in the beginning but people get used to everything."

For example, when the town announced some six months ago that it would only hold its conferences in cafes or restaurants that had obtained a special environmental certificate, Mats Pettersson, the co-owner of a small chain of restaurants, was disgruntled.

"I found that pretty bothersome at the beginning ... but now I think it's a good idea. The problem ... was that it was hard to find organic products," he says.

"But suppliers increasingly have what we need," he adds.

Despite the criticism, Mayor Frank remains philosophical and confident of the path he has chosen for the town.

"No one is a prophet in his own country," he says.

"It's up to Vaexjoe to lead by example," he insists, noting that he walks to work, owns a "green" car and uses low energy consumption lightbulbs in his own home.

Read more!

UN climate chief critical of changing base year for emissions cuts

Yahoo News 31 Mar 08;

The UN climate chief was critical Monday of Japanese-led calls to change the 1990 base year for cuts in gas emissions, saying the real issue was how much nations would do to fight global warming.

Japan, whose economy is steadily recovering from recession, is far behind in its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol to slash gas emissions blamed for global warming by six percent by 2012 from 1990 levels.

Ahead of global negotiations that opened Monday in Bangkok on setting post-Kyoto obligations, Japan proposed shifting the base year for future emissions cuts from 1990 to 2005.

But Yvo de Boer, head of UN climate body leading the Bangkok talks, said that changing the base year only made sense if it came with "much more ambitious" measures to curb global warming.

"To me it's like talking about a starting line of a marathon but not knowing how long the marathon is going to be," de Boer told a news conference.

"If the countries were to decide to change the base from the current base year, 1990, it means that we would be ... measuring the length of a marathon from a different starting point," he said.

"Yes, it's very interesting what base year will be chosen," he said. "But the toughest question -- the most important question, at least to me -- is by how much are rich countries willing to reduce their emissions by 2020."

The week-long talks in Bangkok are meant to sort out practicalities of meeting a UN-backed goal of finishing by the end of next year a new climate change treaty that covers obligations up to 2020.

Japan argues that the 1990 base year is biased towards the European Union, which has been pushing for further steep binding cuts from 1990 levels.

In 1990, some European Union countries were then heavily polluting members of the Soviet bloc. The base year also comes before the full privatisation of Britain's coal industry.

Chief US negotiator Harlan Watson called the Japanese proposal "an interesting idea."

"We're looking into it. There are some people to think that 1990 was advantageous to some parties," Watson told AFP.

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 31 Mar 08

Getting Naked on national TV!
the crabs are interviewed on Rouge, a talk show hosted by Eunice Olsen on the adventures with the naked hermit crabs blog

Story of Stuff inspired clips
and responses on You Tube on the story of stuff blog

Singapore F1 tests mega-watt lights during Earth Hour
on the f1 underground blog

Chek Jawa extravaganza
Double trip to the boardwalk on the wildfilms blog and more about sightings during the trip on the naked hermit crab blog with fabulous guestbook entries by Outward Bound Singapore and by participants in the public walk.

Malayan Whistling Thrush: Nesting observations
on the bird ecology blog

Read more!

Singapore to consider returning cash for scrapped cars

Policy change may help people switch to public transport, says Transport Minister
Christopher Tan, Straits Times 31 Mar 08;

FOR years, the answer has been no.

Now Transport Minister Raymond Lim wants to know if it can be yes.

He has asked the Land Transport Authority (LTA) to see if motorists can get back cash when they scrap their cars.

By scrutinising this sacred cow, he is showing how serious he is about finding ways to persuade people to give up their cars.

He hopes that some who get their money back - and the amount could run to thousands of dollars per motorist - would choose not to buy a new car and switch to public transport instead.

Since 2003, around 80,000 passenger cars have been scrapped each year before turning 10 years old, with the Government refunding the so-called unused portions of the Additional Registration Fee and Certificate of Entitlement.

People have been known to scrap cars as new as two years old, though most do so only after the vehicles turn five years old.

At present, the refunds come as paper rebates which can be used only to buy another vehicle.

Given the number of vehicles scrapped and the youthfulness of many of the vehicles, a change in policy could see the Government refunding $2 billion each year.

Mr Lim said that the LTA would work with the Finance Ministry to see if the change could be made.

'You have to look at our overall objective - to have a decisive shift towards public transport,' he said. 'So we should look at whether we can have any incentive to help people make the shift.'

He was speaking at the launch of the Land Transport Masterplan, a 101-page paper outlining the Land Transport Review which he announced in January. It called for an overhaul of the bus and train systems as well as major changes aimed at car owners.

'As I said when we launched the Land Transport Review, we will leave no stone unturned,' he said. 'So this is one more stone that I'm turning up to have a look at, to see if it can be done.'

Motorists have long asked for rebates to be paid in cash, but the answer always been no. The reason usually given: The rebate is a discount on taxes paid upfront and not meant as a cash refund.

Mr Lim expects a decision on the change within six months.

Among motorists who welcomed the possible change was engineer Shreejit Changaroth, 51, who said: 'I know people with old cars who are not scrapping them simply because they can't use the rebates for anything else but to buy another car.'

Motor traders however, may lose a source of income, because they rake in a significant amount from trading the rebates between those who scrap and those who buy cars.

Mr Raymond Tang, managing director of used car trader Yong Lee Seng, said that this has been a 'business opportunity' for traders for years.

Singapore Vehicle Traders Association president Neo Nam Heng said that cash rebates would be 'fair to car owners', but the impact on traders would be clear only when details are out.

Cash incentive to give up your car?
Lin Yanqin, Today Online 31 Mar 08;

APART from increasing the number of Electronic Road Pricing gantries and reducing Certificate Of Entitlement (COE) quotas, a cash incentive could soon be introduced to encourage motorists to give up their cars.

The Ministry of Transport is studying the possibility of offering COE and Preferential Additional Registration Fee (PARF) rebates in cash instead of credit, to encourage greater use of public transport and manage vehicle population growth.

The idea of giving cash rebates was first raised during the recent Budget debate by MP Inderjit Singh. Over the next four to six months, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will work with the Ministry of Finance to see if this is feasible, said Transport Minister Raymond Lim at the launch of the Land Transport Masterplan report yesterday.

Pointing out that COE and PARF rebates were currently paid in credits that could only be used when buying another car, Mr Lim said: "The principle motivation behind this review is to provide incentives for someone who says 'I want to give up my car and I'm switching to public transport'".

In spite of past efforts to curb the vehicle population, the rate of increase has outstripped road development. The total vehicle population currently stands at 850,000.

When asked what would stop a person from using the cash rebate to buy another car, Mr Lim responded: "That can happen, I agree. That's why we need to study this carefully to see how best to do this."

Currently, PARF and COE rebates can be used to offset upfront vehicle taxes and fees when one registers a car, such as the PARF, the COE quota premium, the registration fee, and the $10,000 used-car surcharge.

A driver who deregisters his car before the COE expires will get a rebate on the quota premium paid, pegged to the number of months and day remaining on the COE, while PARF is computed based on the age of the car.

For example, a car deregistered nine years before the COE expires will receive $15,221, based on a paid premium of $16,897.

Most motorists opt to buy another car so they don't lose out on these credits.

LTA chief executive Yam Ah Mee said that the suggestion of cash rebates came up frequently during the LTA's feedback sessions with some 4,500 motorists over the past few months.

"If the rebate only used for buying another car, in terms of the number of cars on the road, it may still be the same or even more," he said.

Also launched yesterday was LTA's Community Outreach Programme, which will involve 14 dialogue sessions with grassroots leaders from all constituencies over the next six months to discuss land transport policies and plans that could affect their communities.

Other outreach efforts include site visits and roadshows, as well as a community guide that will outline the initiatives detailed in the Masterplan.

LTA may give cash rebates to persuade more to switch to public transport
Channel NewsAsia 30 Mar 08;

SINGAPORE: The Land Transport Authority (LTA) is considering giving cash instead of credits when one gives up his or her car to persuade more people to opt for public transport.

Transport Minister Raymond Lim said he has asked LTA to work with the Finance Ministry to see if Certificate of Entitlement (COE) and Additional Registration Fee (ARF) rebates can be given in cash when motorists decide to give up their cars.

This study should take about four to six months.

A whole slew of measures was announced from late January on improving bus and rail services to get more people to use public transport. A more extensive ERP system was also set up as part of the deal to keep traffic smooth.

But what kind of push do people actually need to give up their cars?

One idea that has been tossed about and was recently brought up by MP Inderjit Singh during the Budget debate is to give cash incentives.

The current situation is that when a motorist gives up his or her car, ARF and COE rebates are given in terms of credits. In order not to lose out, motorists usually end up using these credits to purchase another car.

Many people have given the feedback that if these rebates are given to them in cash, it would be more of an incentive for them not to buy another car.

But by that same token, motorists could – just as easily – take the cash rebate and purchase another vehicle.

Mr Lim said: "That can happen – I agree. That is why I said we have to study this very carefully. If we are going to do this, how best are we going to do it?"

The transport minister was speaking at the release of the detailed Masterplan report on Sunday, which marks out in detail the announcements made recently and the plans on the road map for the next 15 years, with a simpler illustrated version for the community at large.

The Community Outreach Programme to solve day-to-day problems like parking was also launched on the same day.

Over the next six months, LTA will hold 14 dialogue sessions with grassroots leaders from all constituencies. Efforts like site visits and road shows will also be stepped up at locations where there are major projects like the construction of the Downtown Line.- CNA/so

Read more!

Think hard before going green: investors told

Business Times 31 Mar 08;

Investors must consider the theme's risks and weigh a firm's impact on the environment before taking the plunge, says SERENE CHEONG

THE spiralling costs of food and raw materials today may be more than just a passing phase, particularly with the concerns over erratic environmental impact in China, rise in global temperatures and decreasing agricultural crop output.

But amidst the gloom and doom, there is a silver lining.

It comes in the form of 'green investments', and it promises to allow the pursuit of economic progress against the backdrop of sustainability: by consciously aligning investment choices with concern for the environment.

Green investment, as its name implies, can be loosely defined as investments in products or services that help companies cope with their negative environmental impact.

While the media limelight has been focused on green assets for some time now, the increasingly mainstream concept is often mistaken for environmentally responsible investing (ERI). In reality, while the two investment approaches may overlap, ERI mainly focuses on sifting out companies with poor practices while green investments concentrate on companies that improve the environment.

So what exactly qualifies as a green investment?

The answer is not clear-cut. Though much controversy surrounds the debate as to what can be considered truly green, a green firm is widely accepted as one that does good for the environment, within its financial goals, and focuses on the bottom line. Some examples include companies that practise water purification and anti-pollution activities, or produce clean energy and biofuels.

Now, going green seems to be a good way forward with the European Union and China's increased emphasis on greener and cleaner practices. Opportunities to cash in on green assets abound locally, with easily accessible products that cater to investors of differing sophistication and risk-return appetites.

Still, as attractive as the sector might be, investors should tread cautiously and familiarise himself with the relatively new investment theme to avoid pitfalls.

Green equity
To some, investing in green equities enables the shareholders to support a firm's financial pursuits while being conscious of their carbon footprint.

Many green companies are listed on the Singapore Exchange. One such example is Wilmar International, an Asian palmoil firm providing the oil used in food products and for biodiesel feedstock. The company recently posted a fourth-quarter profit of $394.2 million, a nearly four-fold increase from $98.8 million a year ago.

Investors should also pay attention to concern that high demand for crude palm oil could push plantation owners to carry out illegal clearance of rainforests to make way for new agricultural land.

In addition, global activists are rallying against the use of food crops as biofuel feedstock for fear of skyrocketing food prices and possibly widespread starvation among the poor.

A firm's overall positive and negative impact on the environment must be weighed before coming to a conclusion.

Investors who wish to jump onto the green bandwagon should consider the theme's inherent risks, especially since green firms tend to be in the early stages of development with high outlays for technology and infrastructure.

Green funds

A fund is a convenient vehicle as it offers exposure to a basket of stocks across a number of industries, locations and market capitalisation.

In the case of funds that focus on climate change, the underlying investments may comprise companies in sustainable energy (solar, wind or hydro), energy efficiency, waste management or greenhouse gas emission reduction.

In theory, climate change funds are supposed to provide a more stable investment approach than individual equity as they invest in companies from all over the world, thus reducing unique sectoral and geographical risks.

So far, investor response, however, is understood to be lukewarm.

Two climate change funds are currently offered locally - the DWS Global Climate Change Fund by Deutsche Bank and Schroder Global Climate Change Fund.

Feedback from several personal financial consultants is that climate change funds are unpopular with local investors as the funds are too thinly traded and lack fluctuations in fund value during market boom or bust periods.

'Despite all the hype about green investments, investors ultimately park their assets in a product with the goal of reaping the highest profits possible, regardless of its social and environmental impact,' said a personal wealth manager with a local bank.

To make matters worse, green funds have been providing comparatively lower returns for the high level of risk compared to other funds that focus on China, India or small and mid-cap firms, he added.

Both DWS Global Climate Change Fund and Schroder Global Climate Change Fund are currently rated nine out of 10 for level of risk on fundsupermart.com.

'Domestic investors are treading very carefully as equity markets took a beating in recent months, so the last thing they would do is to plunge straight into an unfamiliar green sector,' said a private wealth associate with a German bank.

He added: 'Investors will naturally zoom in on the profit-making funds, and from historical prices you can see that green funds do not fulfil that. They are investing to make the most money, not do an act of charity.'

Read more!

Thai farmers keep vigil over rice stocks

Reports of thieves have growers alarmed as grain price soars in world markets
Nirmal Ghosh, Straits Times 31 Mar 08;

BANGKOK - FOR the first time ever in memory, some Thai farmers are staying up at night to watch their fields - worried that thieves will raid their standing crops or loot their stored rice.

Since the middle of the month, rumours of rice being stolen have spread across the fields in provinces from Lop Buri to Sing Buri and Ang Thong.

Although the rumours have yet to be confirmed, there is one reported case of a farmer in Ayutthaya province, near the capital Bangkok, who was robbed of 20 sacks of rice seeds worth 8,000 baht (S$350), which he had stocked ready for planting.

In response, the province's police chief has recommended that farmers work in shifts to guard their fields at night.

'I'm so scared now that thieves will steal my rice. If they really do that, it is like they are killing me because everything in my life - my money, my efforts and my hopes - have been put into it,' said farmer Somnuek Meechana, whose rice fields are almost ready for harvest, the Bangkok Post reported.

The rumours are as unprecedented as the soaring price of rice in the world markets.

The grain's price has risen to record-high levels across the world - including in rice bowl countries such as Thailand, where premium Thai rice has spiralled in price from about 9,600 baht a tonne last December to 10,500 baht a tonne today.

In January in the Philippines, a standard sack of rice was selling for 720 pesos (S$24). By this month, it had risen to 1,100 pesos.

Several rice producers and exporters in Asia have already curbed or halted exports to safeguard domestic supplies, mindful that rice is a politically sensitive commodity.

In recent weeks Cambodia and China have suspended their rice exports while India has stopped exporting its non-basmati varieties.

Meanwhile, importers, worried about shortages, have cut tariffs on rice.

Indonesia, Mongolia, Sri Lanka and South Korea have already dropped or reduced import tariffs on the grain.

The Philippines has signed a deal with Vietnam to import 1.5 million tonnes of rice.

Manila is trying to crack down on hoarders who are making the crisis worse by stockpiling rice until prices climb even further.

At the weekend, the Philippines' National Food Authority in Central Visayas suspended the operations of at least six retailers in Cebu for violations ranging from unreasonable depletion of stocks to non-display and refusal to sell rice even though they had enough stocks.

Asia is not the only region affected by a rise in food prices spawned not just by a shortage of rice, but of wheat as well.

From Africa to the United States, the cost of food has been rising. Egypt - the world's highest consumer of bread - has banned rice exports for six months on the back of worries over wheat.

The drivers of the price rises are a complex range of local and global factors including adverse weather; yields reaching a plateau; the higher cost of fertiliser; the high price of fuel; the policy neglect and decline of the agricultural sector in general; and the conversion of vast areas of farmland into areas for livestock industry and biofuels production.

Read more!

Gray wolf hunts planned after de-listing

Jessie Bonner, Associated Press Yahoo News 29 Mar 08;

Good news for gray wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains: They no longer need federal protection. The bad news for the animals? Plans are already in the works to hunt them.

Federal Endangered Species Act protection of the wolves was lifted Friday in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming, giving those states management of the estimated 1,500 gray wolves in the region.

Even though environmentalists plan to sue the federal government next month to restore wolf protections, hunts are already being scheduled by state wildlife agencies to reduce the wolf population to between 900 and 1,250.

Idaho hunters will be allowed to kill between 100-300 of the animals this fall under a plan approved by the Idaho Fish and Game Commission. The hunts are partly in response to increasing numbers of livestock being killed as the predators' population has grown.

"We manage big game for a living, we're good at it," said Steve Nadeau, who oversees large carnivores for the Idaho Fish and Game Department. "The world is watching and we know it."

Fish and Game estimates Idaho now has 800 gray wolves. Should the number of breeding pairs in Idaho fall below a target number, the animals could be brought back under federal protection.

After a series of public shouting matches between wolf advocates and opponents, comments from Idaho Department Fish and Game officials on Friday seemed largely designed to reassure both ends of the debate.

Cal Groen, director of the department, told reporters that his agency has already proven its ability to recover and maintain Idaho wolf populations. "We've exceeded all the goals the federal government set," Groen said.

But Doug Honnold, a managing attorney for the nonprofit environmental law firm Earthjustice, disagrees. Honnold said the wolf populations won't be fully recovered in Idaho and the northern Rockies until the animals number between 2,000 and 3,000.

Earthjustice, which represents 12 local and national environmental groups, plans to sue the federal government next month to continue wolf protections.

All three state plans to manage the wolves call for a reduction in their numbers, which will eventually lead to weaker breeding, Honnold said in a telephone interview from Bozeman, Mont.

"We think that would be a disaster," he said. "We've spent a lot of time, money and effort to promote wolf recovery."

Gray wolves were listed as endangered in 1973 after being hunted into near extinction, but the population has rebounded dramatically after restoration efforts began in 1995. The wolves were recently de-listed in the western Great Lakes, while the wolf population in the Southwest remains endangered.

Wildlife biologists estimate there are now 41 breeding pairs in Idaho, in 72 packs. If that number falls below 10 breeding pairs, or 15 during a three-year period, the wolves could be brought back under federal protection.

On Friday, Idaho Gov. C.L. "Butch" Otter signed a bill to allow ranchers, outfitters and pet owners to kill wolves harassing livestock. The law gives owners up to 72 hours to report wolves they've killed after catching them annoying, disturbing or stalking animals or livestock.

Read more!

Antelope in Mongolia under threat

Michael Casey, Associated Press Yahoo News 29 Mar 08;

A rare antelope species already under threat from poaching in Mongolia is facing a new danger — worsening traffic.

As affluent residents acquire motorbikes and cars in parts of western Mongolia, they are clogging roads that run along a key migration route for the saiga which, if not addressed, could reduce their already low numbers, Kim Murray Berger, an ecologist with the Wildlife Conservation Society, said Saturday.

"As we get more and more traffic through the corridor, it would potentially discourage the saiga from using it," she said, adding that could lead to the reproductive isolation of the species, reducing its genetic diversity.

The saiga — an odd animal which has a deer's body, a camel's head and a bulbous nose — has seen its numbers drop from 1 million in the 1980s to as low as 50,000 in its range, which includes Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan and the Russian Republic of Kalmykia.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the saiga in Mongolia have come under threat from poachers who were encouraged to substitute rhino horns with those of the saiga for medicinal purposes, said Berger. The animals, which number around 5,000 in the country, have also faced competition from herders for good grazing areas and seen their numbers decimated by as much as 70 percent since the 1980s by droughts.

Berger set out in 2005 with her WCS colleagues and researchers from the Mongolian Academy of Sciences to better understand the movements of the saiga. Using radio collars equipped with global positioning system on adult females, the researchers were able to determine that the animals frequently traveled along a 3-mile-wide corridor through a narrow valley. The route is also the location for a dirt road that serves as the only link villagers in the valley have with the outside world.

Berger said she hoped the study, which has been accepted for publication by the peer-reviewed publication The Open Conservation Biology Journal, would spur authorities to consider incorporating the saiga into any development plans for the area.

L. Undes, the deputy chairman of the Sustainable Development and Strategic Planning department in Mongolia's Ministry of Natural Environment, said authorities planned to expand a nature reserve for saiga, limit herders use of the corridor and step up efforts to ban hunting of the saiga.

Berger previously helped identify a key migration route for the antelope-like pronghorn in and out of Grand Teton National Park in Wyoming.

Read more!

Bromeliads for Gardens at Marina South arrive in Singapore

Channel NewsAsia 31 Mar 08;

Anton van der Schans, Assistant Director of Horticulture, Gardens by the Bay, said: "One of the things we are trying to do is to introduce more colour. Not just because it looks more attractive, it also helps to capture people's attention and imagination, and hopefully that will encourage them to learn more about the environmental messages which are behind the collection as well." These messages include how some bromeliads are endangered species because of deforestation and climate change.

SINGAPORE: Some 50,000 bromeliads have arrived in Singapore all the way from Florida to be part of the Gardens at Marina South.

Similar to the pineapple plant, about 35 percent of more than 3,475 species of bromeliads are rare. These plants can remove water pollutants and play an important role in energy conservation.

One of the species of bromeliads is the Tillandsia. It does not need soil or water because it takes what it needs from the air by converting nitrogen into nitrates.

Another bromeliad species is the Billbergia Strawberry which blooms for just one week every year.

These species are native to North and South America and they are known for their unique features.

Anton van der Schans, Assistant Director of Horticulture, Gardens by the Bay, said: "One of the things we are trying to do is to introduce more colour. Not just because it looks more attractive, it also helps to capture people's attention and imagination, and hopefully that will encourage them to learn more about the environmental messages which are behind the collection as well."

These messages include how some bromeliads are endangered species because of deforestation and climate change.

To help these plants, the experts have erected artificial trees known as 'super trees'. These trees, some of which are up to 50 metres tall, not only support the plants but are also ecologically friendly.

Kenneth Er, General Manager, Gardens by the Bay, said: "The super trees, like real trees, would also photosynthesise using photovoltaic cells - converting solar energy into electricity to run some of the functions within the trees such as lighting. We are also exploring the possibility of the trees collecting rain water."

Another environmentally friendly feature is a conservatory which will use cooling technologies that can save up to 40 percent of the amount of energy used.

"Typically, some of these species require cooler temperatures for best foliage colour and flowering, so that's where our cool glass houses come in, to help provide the conditions to really display them at their best," said Mr van der Schans.

These plants will also absorb pollutants by cleaning the water that flows into three freshwater lakes – Kallang Basin, Marina Bay and Marina Channel.

When combined, the three lakes will be Singapore's 15th reservoir which will supply 10 percent of drinking water.

Another 150,000 bromeliads will be coming to Singapore over the next two years. In all, the plants cost S$2 million.

When they have all arrived, they will be available for public viewing by 2011.

The Gardens at Marina South – situated right beside the Marina Bay Sands Integrated Resort – will open 24 hours daily.

Together with Gardens at Marina East and Gardens at Marina Central, they form Gardens by the Bay, spanning over 155 football fields.- CNA/so

A $2 milion start to a $900 million garden
Hong Xinyi, Straits Times 1 Apr 08;

IT HAS been described as a visual feast in the making, and the $893 million Gardens By The Bay project just got the first shipment of one of its main courses.

When it opens in 2011, visitors to the 54ha Marina South garden will be able to view a $2 million anchor plant collection of bromeliads, which are plants native to the tropical and subtropical regions of North and South America.

Bromeliads are resilient plants, often visually striking due to the patterned foliage and colourful blooms of some species.

More than 3,000 varieties comprising 210,000 bromeliads will be supplied by Florida nursery Tropiflora. About three shipments - 50,500 plants - have already arrived at the Gardens By The Bay site office in Marina Way. The rest will arrive over the next 18 months.

'It will be the first time that these plants are being used in such a large-scale way in a landscaped garden in South-east Asia,' said Mr Anton van Der Schans, assistant director of horticulture for Gardens By The Bay.

The plant was chosen, he said, because it was relatively low-maintenance and also provided a wide range of attractive textures, foliage and flowers.

Being built by the National Parks Board, the Gardens By The Bay - which also includes a 32ha Marina East garden and a 15ha Marina Centre garden - is expected to attract 2.7 million people every year.

Non-native flora and fauna like roses and tulips will make up much of the gardens' greenery and will be part of the main attractions.

Read more!

Thai temple fights off encroaching tide as world sea levels rise

Charlie McDonald-Gibson Yahoo News 30 Mar 08;

Crabs scuttle across the wet floor of the near-deserted Khun Samut temple, the only building left in a Thai village that has disappeared beneath the rising and advancing sea.

Waging a battle against an encroaching tide that has sent all the villagers fleeing inland, a monk in orange robes and faded tattoos meant to ward off evil spirits stalks the newly-built sea wall, planting mangrove shoots.

Somnuek Atipanya points 20 metres (65 feet) out to sea, where electricity pylons poke out of the water, now useful only for resting marine birds.

"The waves attacked here and they will destroy everything," says Somnuek, chief abbot of this Buddhist temple south of Bangkok which is surrounded by water and accessible only by a concrete walkway.

"I don't know what happened, but when the experts came they told me it was global warning and melting ice in the North Pole."

Over 30 years, the sea around Khun Samut Chin village has engulfed more than one kilometre (0.6 miles) of land, World Bank figures show, mostly because fishermen have cut down mangrove forests -- the Earth's natural sea barrier.

Tourism development, sand mining and damming rivers upstream have also taken their toll in an area naturally prone to coastal erosion.

The community have realised their errors and are trying to replant the mangroves, but the situation may soon be out of their hands as global warming sends sea levels rising and powerful storms lashing the coast.

"The process has been occurring over some time and accelerating with land use changes and local human activity," says Jitendra Shah, the World Bank's environmental coordinator in Thailand.

"Climate change impacts are likely to accelerate the pace and make things worse in the future."

Coastal erosion of varying degrees affects 21 percent of Thailand's coastline, says Greenpeace climate campaigner Tara Buakamsri, citing figures from Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University.

Along the Gulf of Thailand, seaside areas seriously affected by erosion are receding at a rate of five to 20 metres per year.

Climate scientists say that as global warming heats the Earth up, glaciers and polar ice caps will melt and sea waters will expand, sending oceans rising by at least 18 centimetres (7.2 inches), or possibly a great deal more by 2100.

World sea levels rose 3.1 millimetres per year from 1993 to 2003, the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says.

This is not good news for the five monks who remain at Khun Samut temple. Despite their best efforts, they may not be able to save the site from the same fate that befell Khun Samut Chin's sunken school and homes.

Visanu Kengsamut, 26, has already moved three times in his life, while his mother -- the village chief -- has fled the crumbling coast and rebuilt her home eight times, and each time the village has paid for its own relocation.

Khun Samut Chin now sits about one kilometre inland from the temple.

"We know that the cause of this is the effects of global warming," says Visanu.

"This problem, everybody should take responsibility and the government should help. If possible, the international community should come to help because they started the problem."

As the world tries to work out a new pact to battle the threat posed by global warming, poorer countries -- who the IPCC says will suffer the most from climate change -- are battling to have their voices heard.

They argue that because the industrialised world was historically most responsible for global warming, they should contribute generously to a fund to help poor countries adapt to the changing world.

The so-called adaptation and mitigation fund will likely be discussed at key United Nations climate change talks in Bangkok from March 31 to April 4.

"Whether or not it is a small contribution or major contribution related to climate change in the past, this community needs to be taken into account when they discuss about the mitigation measure or adaptation fund," says Greenpeace's Tara.

"Because they are facing the impact -- they are one of the first groups in Thailand that is facing the impact."

Read more!

Berlin zoo accused of profiting from slaughter

Kate Connolly, The Guardian 28 Mar 08;

· Bodies sold for traditional medicines, MP alleges
· Director denies surplus animals bred for income

Berlin zoo is under pressure to explain the fate of hundreds of its animals which allegedly have disappeared without trace amid accusations that they have been slaughtered and in some cases turned into potency-boosting drugs.

Claudia Hämmerling, a Green party politician, backed by several animal rights organisations, alleges that the zoo's director, Bernhard Blaszkiewitz, sold the animals to traders.

She claims to hold evidence on four Asian black bears and a hippopotamus, which were taken from Berlin, officially to go to a new home. They were transported to the Belgian town of Wortel, which has no zoo, but which does have an abattoir.

According to Hämmerling these animals were slaughtered at the abattoir. She said the systematic "overproduction of animals" at zoos, designed to attract more visitors, was to blame.

Hämmerling said she also knew of several tigers and leopards from Berlin that ended up in a tiger breeding farm in China that promoted itself as a purveyor of traditional potency-boosting medicines made from the bodies of big cats. She alleges the animals' remains were pulverised and turned into drugs.

Blaszkiewitz, who became something of a personality after the polar bear Knut was born at his zoo in December 2006, has strongly denied the charges. The bear's popularity bumped up visitor numbers and sent shares in the company soaring.

Responsible for 23,000 animals and credited with turning Berlin zoo into the city's most popular tourist attraction, Blaszkiewitz believes his detractors are spreading "untruths, half-truths and lies". He said: "The stories of slaughter have been invented. We only work with respectable zoo dealers."

He added that while animals were sent to China in the 1990s, their transfer was approved by the Federal Office for Nature Protection. Rearing animals, he said, was central to his work. He denied claims that money making was the motivating factor. "It's good for the animals, and of course our visitors should also have the chance to observe the rearing process," he said.

A spokeswoman for Hämmerling said yesterday the MP was prepared to press charges. State prosecutors will soon announce whether the case goes to court.

The zoo has been unable to shake off the charge that it has been encouraging animal births so as to boost visitors keen on "cute offspring". The phenomenon has been labelled "Knut-mania", after the cub became one of the the biggest money-spinning animals in history, thanks largely to marketing offshoots, which benefited the zoo. Knut products range from cuddly toys to credit cards.

It is believed standard practice for zoos to kill "surplus" animals. Nuremberg zoo's deputy director, Helmut Mägdefrau, was reported as saying: "If we cannot find good homes for the animals, we kill them and use them as feed." Recently an antelope in Nuremberg was fed to caged lions in front of visitors, causing outrage.

Related articles

Berlin Zoo director accused of selling animals for Chinese medicine
The Telegraph 21 Mar 08;

Read more!

Climate negotiators start work on "Kyoto II"

Ed Cropley, Reuters 29 Mar 08;

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Scientists and officials from across the world meet in Thailand this week for the first formal talks in the long process of drawing up a replacement for the Kyoto climate change pact by the end of 2009.

Around 190 nations agreed in Bali last year to start the two-year negotiations to replace Kyoto, which only binds 37 rich nations to cut emissions of greenhouse gases by an average of five percent from 1990 levels by 2012.

U.N. climate experts want the new pact to impose curbs on all countries, although there is wide disagreement about how to share out the burden between rich nations led by the United States and developing countries such as China and India.

No major decisions are likely from the Bangkok talks, which are intended mainly to establish a timetable for more rounds of negotiations culminating in a United Nations Climate Change conference in Copenhagen at the end of next year.

"The challenge is to design a future agreement that will significantly step up action on adaptation, successfully halt the increase in global emissions within the next 10-15 years and dramatically cut back emissions by 2050," said Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N.'s Climate Change Secretariat.

Although the negotiations are likely to be tough and tortuous, a series of U.N. climate change reports last year highlighted the need to curb emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide that are driving global warming.

One report in particular said it was more than 90 percent certain that human actions -- mainly burning fossil fuels -- were to blame for changes to the weather system that will bring more heatwaves, droughts, storms and rising seas.

RAPID INDUSTRIALISATION

One major issue to be tackled is the reluctance of big developing nations such as India and China to agree to any measures that might curb their rapid industrialization.

Negotiators will also have to work out how to deal with the United States -- the only rich nation not to have signed up to Kyoto -- given that President George W. Bush will be leaving the White House after November's election.

Bush pulled the United States out of Kyoto in 2001, saying the pact would hurt the U.S. economy and was unfair since it excluded big developing nations from committing to emissions cuts.

The White House has since moderated its stance by saying the Bush administration would accept emissions targets if all other big emitters do as well based on their individual circumstances.

This has tempered the criticism of the Bush administration but green groups and many poorer nations say they don't expect much progress on a replacement climate pact until a new U.S. administration takes office in January 2009.

"I think the U.S. really has changed," de Boer told Reuters.

All three main presidential candidates are greener than Bush and back a cap-and-trade system to encourage business to curb carbon emissions.

The United Nations wants the new treaty to be in place by the end of 2009 to give companies and investors as much advance knowledge as possible of coming changes, and national parliaments time to ratify it before 2012, when Kyoto expires.

(Additional reporting by Alister Doyle in Oslo; Editing by Michael Battye and David Fogarty)

Negotiators gather to push new UN climate treaty
Charlie McDonald-Gibson Yahoo News 30 Mar 08;

Negotiators from up to 180 countries began gathering here on Sunday for talks aimed at reaching the most ambitious treaty yet for sparing the Earth from the worst ravages of global warming.

The five-day talks, starting Monday, follow marathon negotiations in December on the Indonesian island of Bali where the world set a 2009 deadline for thrashing out a landmark pact to battle climate change.

The Bangkok meeting is the first step toward reaching that new agreement, which should take effect when commitments on cutting harmful greenhouse gas emissions under the existing Kyoto Protocol expire in 2012.

Even the United States, which pulled out of the Kyoto deal, is taking part despite its reputation as a naysayer in efforts to cut emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, which trap the sun's heat and warm the planet.

The talks "are critical in the sense that the conference in Bali last year formally agreed to launch negotiations, which have to be concluded at the end of 2009," said Yvo de Boer, head of the UN climate body tasked with hammering out the treaty.

"I don't expect many sticking points at this meeting. What this meeting has to do is agree a work programme and agree what is going to be discussed so that we know that we can meet the deadline in a year-and-a-half's time," de Boer told AFP.

He urged countries to stay focused on the task at hand, and not get bogged down in the kind of details that almost derailed the Bali talks.

"If you look at the amount of time available in Bangkok ... there is an awful amount of work to be done in very little time," he cautioned.

Talks in Bali almost fell apart as nations fought over who was historically responsible for climate change, who should foot the bill, and whether both rich and poor nations should have binding targets on cutting carbon emissions.

Europe and developing countries want rich nations to set a binding target for 2020, requiring them to slash greenhouse gas emissions to 25 to 40 percent below their levels in 1990.

Under US pressure the final Bali Roadmap did not include explicit goals. Frustration with the US stance grew so great in Bali that American delegates were booed during the conference's closing hours.

However, with the US presidential elections later this year, President George W. Bush's administration may not want to leave the White House with a legacy as holdouts against environmental progress, activists said.

"There is a kind of a legacy issue at play here for the Bush administration, I think they want to be viewed as constructive in its last year," said Angela Anderson, director of the global warming programme at the Washington-based Pew Environment Group.

No one expects a major breakthrough at the Bangkok talks, which are designed to allow countries to stake their starting positions in negotiations that will continue through next year.

"Every country comes at this now trying to figure out what's in their individual interests as well as the global interests," said Anderson.

But activists around the world have kept up the pressure by keeping the issue in the spotlight, sometimes by turning the spotlight off.

At least 26 cities across the globe joined an "Earth Hour" campaign on Saturday evening, dimming their lights for one hour to demonstrate how the planet can save energy.

The human risks of climate change were also highlighted Friday when the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution declaring the problem a human rights issue, noting that the poor are more vulnerable to the effects of global warming.

Global scientists last year delivered their starkest warning yet -- that without action, global warming could have an irreversible impact on the world, bringing hunger, floods, drought and the extinction of many plants and animals.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which is holding the Bangkok talks, has 192 member nations.

World governments in Bangkok to start talks on climate change treaty
Business Times 31 Mar 08;

(BANGKOK) Governments from nearly 200 countries will begin discussions today on forging a global warming agreement, a process that is expected to be fraught with disagreements over how much to reduce greenhouse gases and which nations should adhere to binding targets.

The week-long, United Nations climate meeting in Bangkok comes on the heels of a historic agreement reached in December to draft a new accord on global warming by 2009.

Without a pact to rein in rising greenhouse gases in the next two decades, scientist say warming weather will lead to widespread drought, floods, higher sea levels and worsening storms.

'The challenge is to design a future agreement that will significantly step up action on adaptation, successfully halt the increase in global emissions within the next 10 to 15 years, dramatically cut back emissions by 2050, and do so in a way that is economically viable and politically equitable worldwide,' said Yvo de Boer, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which is hosting the meeting.

The European Union Environment Commissioner, Stavros Dimas, said that the Bangkok meeting would determine the willingness of all parties to act quickly.

In an e-mail interview, he stressed that the need for an aggressive, long-term agreement 'to prevent climate change from reaching dangerous levels that could put billions of people at risk later this century'.

All governments, including the United States, agree emissions need to be reduced to avert an environmental catastrophe. But the major polluters remain far apart over how best to achieve these goals.

Adding to the complexity of negotiations will be disputes over how best to help poor countries adapt to environmental changes by speeding up the transfer of technology and financial assistance from rich nations.

The EU has proposed that industrialised countries slash emissions by 25 to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020. The US, which is one of the world's top polluters, has repeatedly rejected mandatory national reduction targets of the kind agreed to under the Kyoto Protocol a decade ago.

Japan, which is struggling to meet its emissions-cut obligations under the Kyoto pact, is looking for less stringent conditions this time around. It has talked of using 2005 rather than 1990 as the baseline for reductions and is campaigning for industry-based emission caps.

Under its plan, global industries such as steel or cement would set international guidelines for greenhouse gas emissions.

Proponents, including the US, say that would help set a level playing field for competitive industries.

Critics, however, worry sectoral caps could be used to favour industries in richer countries with access to more advanced technology, while those in less developed nations would suffer.

Another contentious issue will be which countries will be required to make cuts under the new pact and how best to determine the level of reductions.

While the EU says the West has to take the lead in reducing emissions, the US argued it should not have to make cuts that would hurt the US economy unless China and India agreed to the same.

'We're willing to take on international binding targets as long as other major economies - both developed and developing - do so,' said US negotiator Harlan Watson.

'The primary concern is the so-called leakage issue,' Mr Watson said. 'If you take commitments and you have energy intensive industries, they might want to move to other countries which don't have commitments.' China has argued that developed countries should be required to take the lead in reducing pollution because their unrestrained emissions over the past century contributed significantly to global warming.

Mr De Boer has said that requiring China and other developing countries like India and Brazil to take on binding targets 'is not realistic.'

'Developing countries see that as problematic,' he said. 'The problem of climate change as we see it today is a result of rich countries' emissions, not the result of poor countries' emissions\. \-- AP

FACTBOX: What are the U.N. Bangkok climate talks?
Reuters 31 Mar 08;

(Reuters) - Delegates from up to 190 nations will meet in Bangkok from March 31-April 4 for the first round of U.N. talks on a sweeping new pact to fight climate change.

The Bangkok meeting, totalling about 1,000 delegates led by senior government officials, will be the first formal U.N. negotiations on a U.N. climate treaty since the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated from 1995-97.

* WHY IS A NEW TREATY NEEDED?

-- The U.N. Climate Panel last year blamed human activities, led by burning fossil fuels, for a warming that it said would bring ever more droughts, heatwaves, floods and rising seas.

The panel said that world emissions of greenhouse gases -- now rising fast -- would have to peak by about 2015 and then fall sharply to limit a rise in global temperatures to no more than 2 Celsius (3.6 Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial times.

Spurred by the panel's findings, governments agreed in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2007 to work out a new climate treaty by the end of 2009 to succeed Kyoto. Bangkok will be the first stop on the "Bali roadmap".

* SO WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE KYOTO PROTOCOL?

-- Kyoto obliges 37 developed nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by an average of at least 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. The Bangkok talks will be about widening action to all nations.

Every rich country except the United States has ratified Kyoto. President George W. Bush rejected the pact in 2001, saying it would cost U.S. jobs and unfairly omitted 2012 emissions targets for developing nations such as China and India.

The Bush administration has agreed to take part in talks on a long-term treaty even though many details will be agreed after Bush steps down in January 2009. The main U.S. presidential candidates say they are committed to stepping up U.S. action.

Developing nations say they are willing to do more to curb the growth of their emissions -- but reject Kyoto-style caps because they need to use more energy to reduce poverty.

* WHAT WILL BE ACHIEVED IN BANGKOK?

-- Bangkok's main task is to agree a work programme for the next two years -- the details may show how urgently governments want to tackle climate change. After Bangkok, negotiators will meet in Bonn in June, again in August in a city yet to be decided and environment ministers will meet in Poznan, Poland, in December. Bangkok is symbolically important as the first step on the road to a deal to be agreed in Copenhagen in late 2009.

* BUT KYOTO RUNS TO 2012: WHAT'S THE HURRY?

-- The United Nations says that a new treaty needs to be in place by the end of 2009 to give national parliaments time to ratify before Kyoto runs out. A big worry is that it took two years to negotiate Kyoto and then eight to get it ratified.

And investors need time -- a power company trying to decide whether to build a coal-fired plant or a wind farm wants to know the rules on greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible.

* WHAT ARE THE STUMBLING BLOCKS TO A NEW TREATY?

-- A main issue will be how to ensure a fair share-out of the burden of curbs on greenhouse gases between rich and poor.

Developing nations want more green technologies, credits for slowing deforestation and far more aid to help them adapt to the impact of climate change such as droughts and rising seas.

(Writing by Alister Doyle; Editing by David Fogarty)

FACTBOX: What is the Kyoto Protocol?
Reuters 31 Mar 08;

(Reuters) - Delegates from up to 190 nations will meet in Bangkok from March 31-April 4 to start work on a new U.N. pact to fight climate change and succeed the Kyoto Protocol.

Here are some frequently asked questions about Kyoto:

* WHAT IS THE KYOTO PROTOCOL?

-- It is a pact agreed by governments at a 1997 U.N. conference in Kyoto, Japan, to reduce greenhouse gases emitted by developed countries to at least 5 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12. More than 170 nations have ratified the pact.

* IS IT THE FIRST AGREEMENT OF ITS KIND?

-- Governments agreed to tackle climate change at an "Earth Summit" in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 with non-binding targets. Kyoto is the follow-up.

* SO IT IS LEGALLY BINDING?

-- Kyoto has legal force from February 16, 2005. The United States, long the world's biggest source of emissions but which is being surpassed by China, came out against the pact in 2001. President George W. Bush reckoned it would be too expensive and wrongly omits 2012 emissions targets for developing nations.

* HOW WILL IT BE ENFORCED?

-- Countries overshooting their targets in 2012 will have to make both the promised cuts and 30 percent more in a second period from 2013.

* DO ALL COUNTRIES HAVE TO CUT EMISSIONS BY 5 PERCENT?

-- No, only 37 relatively developed countries have agreed to targets for 2008-12 under a principle that richer countries are most to blame. They range from an 8 percent cut for the European Union from 1990 levels to a 10 percent rise for Iceland.

* WHAT ARE 'GREENHOUSE GASES'?

-- Greenhouse gases trap heat in the earth's atmosphere. The main culprit from human activities is carbon dioxide, produced largely from burning fossil fuels. The protocol also covers methane, much of which comes from agriculture, and nitrous oxide, mostly from fertilizer use. Three industrial gases are also included.

* HOW WILL COUNTRIES COMPLY?

-- The European Union set up a market in January 2005 under which about 12,000 factories and power stations are given carbon dioxide quotas. If they overshoot they can buy extra allowances in the market or pay a financial penalty; if they undershoot they can sell them.

* WHAT OTHER MECHANISMS ARE THERE?

-- Developed countries can earn credits to offset against their targets by funding clean technologies, such as solar power, in poorer countries. They can also have joint investments in former Soviet bloc nations.

-- For Reuters latest environment blogs click on: here

(Editing by David Fogarty)

Read more!