WWF website 8 Dec 08;
Developed world countries with the reputation of being green technology leaders are falling behind in the huge new market for green goods and services opening up in China.
Prepared to ride the Green Dragon?, a new report from WWF, estimates that companies with environment friendly solutions are looking at market possibilities ranging from between USD$1.5 (€1.1) and USD$1.9 (€1.4) trillion to be invested in China in the period up to 2020.
The massive investments planned in environmental technology will make China a hub for development of the low cost environmental solutions necessary in a 21st century where environmental constraints will increasingly guide the global economy, notes the report.
“Western entrepreneurs and stakeholders with access to green solutions now have an unprecedented opportunity to invest in and grow with the expanding Chinese market, and thereby position themselves for an emerging, new global economy” said Børge Brende, Managing Director of the World Economic Forum, and vice-chair of The China Council (CCICED).
But a case study of Norway shows that the Western rhetoric of green investing in China is outpacing the reality,
“In spite of high goals for environmental cooperation with China, Norway‘s current engagement is fragmented and dominated by small and medium-sized enterprises. OECD countries need to scale up and aim for ambitious partnerships with China in fields where they have leading green technology;” said Rasmus Reinvang of WWF Norway, lead author of the report.
The Chinese government has set ambitious targets to move towards a clean-energy economy, including a 20% reduction in energy intensity by 2010, and a doubling of renewable energy to 15 % by 2015. China is particularly keen on developing its small-scale hydropower capacity, a market open to foreign investment, from 2006 levels of 40 Gigawatts (GW) to 125 GW by 2020.
The Chinese goal to quintuple wind power production to 30 GW by 2020 will be reached already by 2012 with the current growth rates in the Chinese wind power sector. While global renewable energy investments have been falling due to the credit crunch, investments in China are expected to increase this quarter to US$3.5 billion and further strengthening China’s wind sector.
”Deep sea off-shore wind is an area where Sino-Norwegian cooperation could speed up commercialization of a whole new industry and contribute greatly to tackling global warming.” Said Chen Dongmei, head of the Climate and Energy programme for WWF in China.
Best of our wild blogs: 8 Dec 08
Singapore-Delft Water Alliance
help for our reefs, seagrasses and mangroves? on the wild shores of singapore blog
Photos from Sungei Buloh’s 15th anniversary celebrations
on the Toddycats! blog
Under your feet
on the annotated budak blog
Drongo Cuckoo in Singapore
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog
Crazy Cnidarians
more fun at the nature guides' workshop, on the wild shores of singapore blog
What Can We Learn from Cockroaches of the Sea?
on the Shifting Baselines blog
Islanders Plead at Climate Talks to Be Saved From Rising Seas
Alex Morales, Bloomberg 8 Dec 08;
Dec. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Island countries from Grenada in the Caribbean to the Maldives in the Indian Ocean are telling delegates at the United Nations climate-change talks this week that their lands may be swamped by rising seas and more powerful storms unless global warming is curbed.
Warmer temperatures are melting icecaps, expanding the volume of oceans and sending more intense hurricanes toward Grenada. Higher tides in the Tuvalu islands between Hawaii and Australia have started making groundwater too salty to drink for its 12,000 residents. The Maldives may buy land elsewhere and move all its islanders should rising waters engulf their land.
“We are already in danger -- it’s not that we Maldivians ever want to leave,” Amjad Abdulla, director-general of THE nation’s environment ministry, said in an interview at the UN global-warming talks in Poznan, Poland. Relocation plans for the 300,000 residents from the low-lying atolls south of India are being drawn up for “a worst-case scenario.”
Delegates at Poznan are negotiating a “shared vision” to open the way for a new global-warming treaty to be signed a year from now in Copenhagen. Island-state envoys say they fear an agreement struck before talks wrap up on Dec. 12 won’t ensure their survival, or be backed by pledges from industrialized nations that release the most heat-trapping greenhouse gases.
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year predicted sea levels will rise 18 to 59 centimeters (7 inches to two feet) by 2100, having risen 17 centimeters during the last century. The Maldives’s highest point is about 10 feet above sea level. The panel also said tropical cyclones are likely to increase in intensity as temperature warm.
2 Degrees Too Much
The 27-member European Union has proposed curbing global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre- industrial times.
A 2-degree limit won’t guarantee the future of the lowest- lying nations, said Leon Charles, a Grenadian delegate. “Two degrees is really not a safe level for small island states,” Charles said. “For many of them it would be like a death sentence in the long run.”
The EU, the biggest group of nations that already accepted binding emissions limits under the Kyoto treaty, also asks the developed world to cut them 20 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels.
The “shared vision” blueprint won’t likely include precise numbers on reductions by 2020, U.S. delegate Harlan Watson said at Poznan, which lies halfway between Berlin and Warsaw.
A 2-degree goal is “suicide” for islands that rise little above sea level, Selwin Hart, a spokesman from Barbados for the Alliance of Small Island States, told delegates on Dec. 2.
‘Our Extinction’
The 43-member Alliance of Small Islands group wants a 1.5- degree limit, and “agreeing to a goal that results in our extinction is not something we’re prepared to do,” Hart said.
A temperature gain of 2 degrees would kill off up to 85 percent of corals, raise sea levels, increase tropical diseases and intensify storms further, said Charles, climate-change adviser to Grenada’s finance ministry.
Ocean water expands when it’s warmer, occupying more volume as temperatures rise. The seas also have risen as the Greenland and Arctic ice sheets melt.
The UN climate panel also said temperatures have risen by 0.76 degrees since the 19th century and further gains of 1-2 degrees would result in the bleaching of most corals, a process that makes them more vulnerable to dying off.
“We’re living on coral reefs: The economy is fisheries and tourism and the coral reefs are the natural barriers from sea- level rise and storm surges,” Abdulla of the Maldives said. “If the coral reefs go, it means the death of a nation.”
As studies are carried out and the evidence stacks up that the small islands are in danger, politicians in richer nations may begin to change their stance, said Stephanie Tunmore, climate campaigner for the environmental group Greenpeace, in Poznan.
“The 2-degree target a few years ago was an incredibly radical position. It’s much more widely accepted now” and even 1.5 degrees may be endorsed, she said. “It’s very, very hard for them to say ‘we know this island and this island and these people will be obliterated.’ It becomes a moral imperative to act.”
Not waving but drowning: Island states plead at UN talks
Marlowe Hood Yahoo News 9 Dec 08;
POZNAN, Poland (AFP) – Dozens of small island nations threatened by climate change have taken their case to the UN talks here, saying rising seas are already lapping at their shores and may eventually wash some of their number off the map.
An alliance of 43 tropical island states has set down proposals for capping global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.4 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial times.
The move is bold and could prove diplomatically troublesome at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) talks, say some observers.
As it is, the conference is still a long way from endorsing an even more modest target of two degrees Celsius (3.6 F) championed by the European Union (EU) and most green groups.
"Two degrees is simply too high," said Grenada's Leon Charles, chairman of the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS), collectively home to 41 million people.
"It is not a sector that needs to be adjusted -- we are talking about the survival of countries," he told AFP in an interview.
The new president of the Maldives, Mohamed Anni Nasheed, has said his government will begin saving now to buy a new homeland for his people to flee to in the future.
Last year, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that a rise in sea levels of 18 to 59 centimetres (7.2 to 23.2 inches) by 2100 would be enough to make both the Maldives and Tuvalu virtually uninhabitable.
Since then, the news has got worse.
"There is an informal consensus among climate scientists that sea levels will go up by about a metre (three feet) by century's end," said Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado.
The problem, Charles said, extends well beyond rising water marks.
"A 2 C (3.6 F) increase would cause a significant bleaching of coral reefs, which would devastate our food supply and our livelihoods," he said. More intense and frequent hurricanes would ruin low-lying agricultural land.
Albert Binger of Antigua and Barbuda, an adviser to the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre, points out that tourism -- underpinning the region's entire economy -- could be devastated.
Other nations, he said, should take note.
"We will be the canary in the coal mine. If we go, so will others," Binger said. "It is incumbent on our fellow citizens of the planet to keep the canary from dying."
AOSIS hesitated a long time before raising the bar by calling for the 1.5 C (2.4 F) cap.
"One of the problems was the lack of scientific work on lower stabilisation levels," said Charles, referring to projections of how different concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere might affect temperatures.
"AOSIS asked us to provide a briefing ahead of the Poznan meeting," recalled Bill Hare, a scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, and an IPCC lead author.
Hare reviewed the most recent findings and created a new model, which showed oceans rising by up to a metre (3.33 feet) by 2100.
"In the longer term -- a couple of centuries -- it is very difficult to limit sea level rise below a couple of metres, even at 1.5 C," he said.
The main culprit, say scientists, are continent-sized icesheets covering Greenland and Antarctica that appear to be melting far more quickly than thought only a few years ago.
The Greenland ice mass alone would boost ocean levels by seven meters (22.75 feet), although this process would take centuries, even in pessimistic scenarios.
For the island states, Charles insists, 1.5 C (2.4 F) is not a negotiating position.
"For some of us it is an issue of survival. When you have to move to another country, how do you place a value on the loss of culture and livelihood?", he said.
"The challenge is not discussing relocation, the challenge is to get the Convention to take positions that will prevent us from dying."
Dec. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Island countries from Grenada in the Caribbean to the Maldives in the Indian Ocean are telling delegates at the United Nations climate-change talks this week that their lands may be swamped by rising seas and more powerful storms unless global warming is curbed.
Warmer temperatures are melting icecaps, expanding the volume of oceans and sending more intense hurricanes toward Grenada. Higher tides in the Tuvalu islands between Hawaii and Australia have started making groundwater too salty to drink for its 12,000 residents. The Maldives may buy land elsewhere and move all its islanders should rising waters engulf their land.
“We are already in danger -- it’s not that we Maldivians ever want to leave,” Amjad Abdulla, director-general of THE nation’s environment ministry, said in an interview at the UN global-warming talks in Poznan, Poland. Relocation plans for the 300,000 residents from the low-lying atolls south of India are being drawn up for “a worst-case scenario.”
Delegates at Poznan are negotiating a “shared vision” to open the way for a new global-warming treaty to be signed a year from now in Copenhagen. Island-state envoys say they fear an agreement struck before talks wrap up on Dec. 12 won’t ensure their survival, or be backed by pledges from industrialized nations that release the most heat-trapping greenhouse gases.
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year predicted sea levels will rise 18 to 59 centimeters (7 inches to two feet) by 2100, having risen 17 centimeters during the last century. The Maldives’s highest point is about 10 feet above sea level. The panel also said tropical cyclones are likely to increase in intensity as temperature warm.
2 Degrees Too Much
The 27-member European Union has proposed curbing global warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre- industrial times.
A 2-degree limit won’t guarantee the future of the lowest- lying nations, said Leon Charles, a Grenadian delegate. “Two degrees is really not a safe level for small island states,” Charles said. “For many of them it would be like a death sentence in the long run.”
The EU, the biggest group of nations that already accepted binding emissions limits under the Kyoto treaty, also asks the developed world to cut them 20 percent by 2020 from 1990 levels.
The “shared vision” blueprint won’t likely include precise numbers on reductions by 2020, U.S. delegate Harlan Watson said at Poznan, which lies halfway between Berlin and Warsaw.
A 2-degree goal is “suicide” for islands that rise little above sea level, Selwin Hart, a spokesman from Barbados for the Alliance of Small Island States, told delegates on Dec. 2.
‘Our Extinction’
The 43-member Alliance of Small Islands group wants a 1.5- degree limit, and “agreeing to a goal that results in our extinction is not something we’re prepared to do,” Hart said.
A temperature gain of 2 degrees would kill off up to 85 percent of corals, raise sea levels, increase tropical diseases and intensify storms further, said Charles, climate-change adviser to Grenada’s finance ministry.
Ocean water expands when it’s warmer, occupying more volume as temperatures rise. The seas also have risen as the Greenland and Arctic ice sheets melt.
The UN climate panel also said temperatures have risen by 0.76 degrees since the 19th century and further gains of 1-2 degrees would result in the bleaching of most corals, a process that makes them more vulnerable to dying off.
“We’re living on coral reefs: The economy is fisheries and tourism and the coral reefs are the natural barriers from sea- level rise and storm surges,” Abdulla of the Maldives said. “If the coral reefs go, it means the death of a nation.”
As studies are carried out and the evidence stacks up that the small islands are in danger, politicians in richer nations may begin to change their stance, said Stephanie Tunmore, climate campaigner for the environmental group Greenpeace, in Poznan.
“The 2-degree target a few years ago was an incredibly radical position. It’s much more widely accepted now” and even 1.5 degrees may be endorsed, she said. “It’s very, very hard for them to say ‘we know this island and this island and these people will be obliterated.’ It becomes a moral imperative to act.”
Not waving but drowning: Island states plead at UN talks
Marlowe Hood Yahoo News 9 Dec 08;
POZNAN, Poland (AFP) – Dozens of small island nations threatened by climate change have taken their case to the UN talks here, saying rising seas are already lapping at their shores and may eventually wash some of their number off the map.
An alliance of 43 tropical island states has set down proposals for capping global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.4 degrees Fahrenheit) compared to pre-industrial times.
The move is bold and could prove diplomatically troublesome at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) talks, say some observers.
As it is, the conference is still a long way from endorsing an even more modest target of two degrees Celsius (3.6 F) championed by the European Union (EU) and most green groups.
"Two degrees is simply too high," said Grenada's Leon Charles, chairman of the Association of Small Island States (AOSIS), collectively home to 41 million people.
"It is not a sector that needs to be adjusted -- we are talking about the survival of countries," he told AFP in an interview.
The new president of the Maldives, Mohamed Anni Nasheed, has said his government will begin saving now to buy a new homeland for his people to flee to in the future.
Last year, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warned that a rise in sea levels of 18 to 59 centimetres (7.2 to 23.2 inches) by 2100 would be enough to make both the Maldives and Tuvalu virtually uninhabitable.
Since then, the news has got worse.
"There is an informal consensus among climate scientists that sea levels will go up by about a metre (three feet) by century's end," said Mark Serreze of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado.
The problem, Charles said, extends well beyond rising water marks.
"A 2 C (3.6 F) increase would cause a significant bleaching of coral reefs, which would devastate our food supply and our livelihoods," he said. More intense and frequent hurricanes would ruin low-lying agricultural land.
Albert Binger of Antigua and Barbuda, an adviser to the Caribbean Community Climate Change Centre, points out that tourism -- underpinning the region's entire economy -- could be devastated.
Other nations, he said, should take note.
"We will be the canary in the coal mine. If we go, so will others," Binger said. "It is incumbent on our fellow citizens of the planet to keep the canary from dying."
AOSIS hesitated a long time before raising the bar by calling for the 1.5 C (2.4 F) cap.
"One of the problems was the lack of scientific work on lower stabilisation levels," said Charles, referring to projections of how different concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere might affect temperatures.
"AOSIS asked us to provide a briefing ahead of the Poznan meeting," recalled Bill Hare, a scientist at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, and an IPCC lead author.
Hare reviewed the most recent findings and created a new model, which showed oceans rising by up to a metre (3.33 feet) by 2100.
"In the longer term -- a couple of centuries -- it is very difficult to limit sea level rise below a couple of metres, even at 1.5 C," he said.
The main culprit, say scientists, are continent-sized icesheets covering Greenland and Antarctica that appear to be melting far more quickly than thought only a few years ago.
The Greenland ice mass alone would boost ocean levels by seven meters (22.75 feet), although this process would take centuries, even in pessimistic scenarios.
For the island states, Charles insists, 1.5 C (2.4 F) is not a negotiating position.
"For some of us it is an issue of survival. When you have to move to another country, how do you place a value on the loss of culture and livelihood?", he said.
"The challenge is not discussing relocation, the challenge is to get the Convention to take positions that will prevent us from dying."
'Moses project' to secure future of Venice against rising seas
It sounds like something only a Bond villain could dream up: a fiendishly clever but astronomically expensive project to turn back the tide with giant steel gates bolted to the sea floor.
Nick Squires, The Telegraph 7 Dec 08;
The Moses project, however, is reality, not fantasy, and its purpose is to solve the 1,000- year-old problem of how to safeguard the irreplaceable art and architecture of Venice, which appeared so under threat in last week's "acqua alta".
Art and architecture remained intact after Monday's floods, the fourth most severe rise in water levels since records began in 1872, but Venetians were split over whether the Moses scheme could have prevented the "deluge".
"If Moses had been in operation on Monday, Venice would not have flooded," said Elena Zambardi, spokeswoman for the Consorzio Venezia Nuova, a consortium of engineering firms which is building the Moses barrier.
The project has been dogged by political feuding, environmental concerns and controversy over its exorbitant price tag: the equivalent of £3 billion, with estimated annual maintenance costs of £8 million.
Inaugurated by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in 2003, it was due to be completed by 2012 but is now expected to be operational in 2014.
It entails the construction of 78 giant steel gates across the three inlets through which water from the Adriatic surges into Venice's lagoon. The 300-tonne hinged panels, 92ft wide and 65ft high, will be fixed to massive concrete bases dug into the sea bed. They will be raised whenever a dangerously high tide is predicted. Compressed air will be pumped into the hollow panels, forcing them to rise up on their hinges, forming a barrier to the incoming waves.
Navigation locks will allow large vessels, including tankers and cruise ships, to pass in and out of the lagoon unimpeded.
Moses – "Mose" in Italian – is both an allusion to the Old Testament story of how Moses parted the waves of the Red Sea during the Israelite exodus from Egypt and a neat acronym for the project's name, Modulo Sperimentale Elettromeccanico.
"With this scheme, we will save Venice," said Ms Zambardi, from her frescoed office in a 14th-century palazzo a few steps from the Grand Canal. "It's the first time that this has been tried and the whole world is watching. It's very important for Venice, and it's important for Italy."
The underwater gates are part of a grand scheme which includes strengthening the 28-mile long, crescent-shaped sliver of land that protects Venice's lagoon from the choppy waters of the Adriatic.
"After many years of investigation and research, it seems to be the best option," said Lady Frances Clarke, the president of the British-based Venice in Peril Fund, founded after the city's worst flood, in November 1966, when a 7ft high tide devastated monuments and works of art. "It needs to be done – with the threat of climate change, who knows what the future will hold for Venice?"
Other Venetians are sceptical that Moses will guarantee them a future without gumboots and the constant threat of their homes and businesses being swamped.
"The intention is good but I don't think it will work. You can't tame the sea. And it's far too expensive," said Maria, a manager in a bustling café at the foot of Venice's most famous bridge, the Rialto.
It is not just rising sea levels with which Venice has to contend. The city is sinking as a result of subsidence caused by decades of groundwater extraction for agriculture and industry on the mainland, and offshore drilling for methane gas. This combination means that Venice has effectively sunk 23cm in the last century.
In 1900, the city's Renaissance palaces, splendid churches and 410 bridges were menaced by flooding 10 times a year. Now they are threatened up to 60 times a year.
The tidal barrier is fiercely opposed by a loose alliance of environmentalists, locals and Venice city council, including Massimo Cacciari, its left-wing philosopher mayor.
Environmental groups fear the project will disrupt the natural flow of water in and out of the lagoon and destroy fragile breeding grounds for wading birds in the Mediterranean's largest wetland.
The vocal "No Mose" campaign fears the flood barrier could become a colossal white elephant and condemns the entire exercise as an extreme example of Italian political cronyism – the project was not put out to tender but simply handed to the Consorzio Venezia Nuova on a plate.
"It's a monopoly," said a city official who asked not to be named. "It's already out of date. There are better alternatives but they were never considered. This is a way of funnelling a huge amount of money to business allies of the government."
But others say that city officials are simply jealous of the millions of euros that are being poured into Moses.
"Venice's politicians are only against it because they are furious that they're missing out on funds which would otherwise have gone to them," said Franco Maschiello, the president of the Venice Hoteliers' Association. "I think it's a fabulous idea. The ice caps are melting, so in future we can expect some very high tides. Of course it will work. If it doesn't, the people in charge deserve to be shot."
For 1,000 years "La Serenissima', as the Venetian Republic was known, used military force to carve out one of the world's most successful trading empires. With the Moses project, it is embarking on a battle against its greatest enemy: the sea.
Nick Squires, The Telegraph 7 Dec 08;
The Moses project, however, is reality, not fantasy, and its purpose is to solve the 1,000- year-old problem of how to safeguard the irreplaceable art and architecture of Venice, which appeared so under threat in last week's "acqua alta".
Art and architecture remained intact after Monday's floods, the fourth most severe rise in water levels since records began in 1872, but Venetians were split over whether the Moses scheme could have prevented the "deluge"."If Moses had been in operation on Monday, Venice would not have flooded," said Elena Zambardi, spokeswoman for the Consorzio Venezia Nuova, a consortium of engineering firms which is building the Moses barrier.
The project has been dogged by political feuding, environmental concerns and controversy over its exorbitant price tag: the equivalent of £3 billion, with estimated annual maintenance costs of £8 million.
Inaugurated by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi in 2003, it was due to be completed by 2012 but is now expected to be operational in 2014.
It entails the construction of 78 giant steel gates across the three inlets through which water from the Adriatic surges into Venice's lagoon. The 300-tonne hinged panels, 92ft wide and 65ft high, will be fixed to massive concrete bases dug into the sea bed. They will be raised whenever a dangerously high tide is predicted. Compressed air will be pumped into the hollow panels, forcing them to rise up on their hinges, forming a barrier to the incoming waves.
Navigation locks will allow large vessels, including tankers and cruise ships, to pass in and out of the lagoon unimpeded.
Moses – "Mose" in Italian – is both an allusion to the Old Testament story of how Moses parted the waves of the Red Sea during the Israelite exodus from Egypt and a neat acronym for the project's name, Modulo Sperimentale Elettromeccanico.
"With this scheme, we will save Venice," said Ms Zambardi, from her frescoed office in a 14th-century palazzo a few steps from the Grand Canal. "It's the first time that this has been tried and the whole world is watching. It's very important for Venice, and it's important for Italy."
The underwater gates are part of a grand scheme which includes strengthening the 28-mile long, crescent-shaped sliver of land that protects Venice's lagoon from the choppy waters of the Adriatic.
"After many years of investigation and research, it seems to be the best option," said Lady Frances Clarke, the president of the British-based Venice in Peril Fund, founded after the city's worst flood, in November 1966, when a 7ft high tide devastated monuments and works of art. "It needs to be done – with the threat of climate change, who knows what the future will hold for Venice?"
Other Venetians are sceptical that Moses will guarantee them a future without gumboots and the constant threat of their homes and businesses being swamped.
"The intention is good but I don't think it will work. You can't tame the sea. And it's far too expensive," said Maria, a manager in a bustling café at the foot of Venice's most famous bridge, the Rialto.
It is not just rising sea levels with which Venice has to contend. The city is sinking as a result of subsidence caused by decades of groundwater extraction for agriculture and industry on the mainland, and offshore drilling for methane gas. This combination means that Venice has effectively sunk 23cm in the last century.
In 1900, the city's Renaissance palaces, splendid churches and 410 bridges were menaced by flooding 10 times a year. Now they are threatened up to 60 times a year.
The tidal barrier is fiercely opposed by a loose alliance of environmentalists, locals and Venice city council, including Massimo Cacciari, its left-wing philosopher mayor.
Environmental groups fear the project will disrupt the natural flow of water in and out of the lagoon and destroy fragile breeding grounds for wading birds in the Mediterranean's largest wetland.
The vocal "No Mose" campaign fears the flood barrier could become a colossal white elephant and condemns the entire exercise as an extreme example of Italian political cronyism – the project was not put out to tender but simply handed to the Consorzio Venezia Nuova on a plate.
"It's a monopoly," said a city official who asked not to be named. "It's already out of date. There are better alternatives but they were never considered. This is a way of funnelling a huge amount of money to business allies of the government."
But others say that city officials are simply jealous of the millions of euros that are being poured into Moses.
"Venice's politicians are only against it because they are furious that they're missing out on funds which would otherwise have gone to them," said Franco Maschiello, the president of the Venice Hoteliers' Association. "I think it's a fabulous idea. The ice caps are melting, so in future we can expect some very high tides. Of course it will work. If it doesn't, the people in charge deserve to be shot."
For 1,000 years "La Serenissima', as the Venetian Republic was known, used military force to carve out one of the world's most successful trading empires. With the Moses project, it is embarking on a battle against its greatest enemy: the sea.
Temasek Holdings clarifies approach to PowerSeraya sale
Straits Times Forum 8 Dec 08;
I REFER to last Wednesday's article, 'Last of Temasek's power units sold for $3.8 billion to Malaysian company', relating to the sale of PowerSeraya.
The article suggested that the 'surprise sale' could have been driven by a need to raise funds that 'will come in handy in helping cushion losses from other investments that have soured amid the global financial crisis'. It further suggested that Temasek Holdings was concerned about not being able to secure an 'acceptable' price if it had delayed the PowerSeraya sale.
In June last year, Temasek first announced its plan to divest all of its three wholly owned power generation companies (gencos) by early next year. This was part of Temasek's commitment to support an open, competitive and efficient electricity generation market in Singapore.
When the tender sale for PowerSeraya was called off two weeks ago, Temasek had full flexibility as to how and when it would revisit this divestment, including the possibility of delaying it beyond next year if needed. Readers may remember that Temasek had, several years ago, postponed the genco sales when it judged market conditions not conducive to proceed.
In addition, as a long-term investor with net cash and minimal leverage, Temasek does not divest to raise funds to 'cushion losses'. In short, there was no pressure for Temasek to divest its gencos.
Nonetheless, Temasek is pleased to have received an unsolicited proposal which met its requirements. This willing-buyer willing-seller transaction has enabled Temasek to complete the divestment of all its genco assets in an orderly manner within the original schedule.
We hope this clarifies Temasek's approach to the sale of PowerSeraya.
Myrna Thomas (Ms)
Managing Director, Corporate Affairs
Temasek Holdings
I REFER to last Wednesday's article, 'Last of Temasek's power units sold for $3.8 billion to Malaysian company', relating to the sale of PowerSeraya.
The article suggested that the 'surprise sale' could have been driven by a need to raise funds that 'will come in handy in helping cushion losses from other investments that have soured amid the global financial crisis'. It further suggested that Temasek Holdings was concerned about not being able to secure an 'acceptable' price if it had delayed the PowerSeraya sale.
In June last year, Temasek first announced its plan to divest all of its three wholly owned power generation companies (gencos) by early next year. This was part of Temasek's commitment to support an open, competitive and efficient electricity generation market in Singapore.
When the tender sale for PowerSeraya was called off two weeks ago, Temasek had full flexibility as to how and when it would revisit this divestment, including the possibility of delaying it beyond next year if needed. Readers may remember that Temasek had, several years ago, postponed the genco sales when it judged market conditions not conducive to proceed.
In addition, as a long-term investor with net cash and minimal leverage, Temasek does not divest to raise funds to 'cushion losses'. In short, there was no pressure for Temasek to divest its gencos.
Nonetheless, Temasek is pleased to have received an unsolicited proposal which met its requirements. This willing-buyer willing-seller transaction has enabled Temasek to complete the divestment of all its genco assets in an orderly manner within the original schedule.
We hope this clarifies Temasek's approach to the sale of PowerSeraya.
Myrna Thomas (Ms)
Managing Director, Corporate Affairs
Temasek Holdings
Singaporeans moving to Johor to give their pets space
Kimberly Spykerman, Straits Times 8 Dec 08;
MISS Sharon Han, 42, loved the lush grounds surrounding her rented bungalow at Seletar airbase which afforded her dogs a Doberman named Solo, and a mongrel named Jabba - the freedom to run around.
When she was told that the airbase would soon be demolished to make way for an aerospace hub, her first concern was for the dogs.
Miss Han, an office manager with a local engineering firm, said: 'Big dogs need a lot of space and you don't always have that kind of luxury in many estates here.'
She and her partner Mr Andreas Baumgartner, 48, did not think they would be able to afford another home with the kind of space that their dogs had become accustomed to in the five years they had lived there. So they moved to Bandar Nusajaya, a town in south Johor, where a 6,000 sq ft semi-detached house with lots of garden space cost them just RM$500,000 (S$210,000).
Naysayers might think that moving across the Causeway for your pets is a bit extreme but Miss Han, a Malaysian who became a Singapore permanent resident in 2000, says any inconvenience to them is a small price to pay for their 'kids'.
There were no quarantine restrictions on the dogs and they spent less than $130 getting import and export licences for them, and a health certificate from the vet.
She is not the only pet lover who has shipped out of Singapore in search of some space for beloved pooches.
With relatively few restrictions on buying homes in Malaysia - the houses have to be at least two-storeys and cost at least RM250,000 - other Singaporeans are finding it a snap to cross the border.
The Straits Times met two other couples who live in Bandar Nusajaya because they want the space for their pets. It is a 40-minute car ride from downtown Singapore.
Mr Ricky Chua and his wife Wei Ling wake up at 5am every day to feed and walk all their nine dogs before driving into Singapore to start the work day.
Both work in the construction industry - he is a senior manager with a development firm while she is a manager with a building contractor. The commute to their workplaces takes 11/2 hours, and they get home around 7pm.
Mr Chua, 44, says his 4,500 sq ft terrace house in Johor is a dream come true. Before it, the couple lived in a four-room HDB flat in Sengkang. They refrained from having a dog. 'I've always wanted at least four big dogs, and that was hard if you could only afford to live in a flat or a condominium,' he said.
They moved to Johor four years ago. Now they own two mongrels and seven Golden Retrievers. All were obtained in Johor. The couple have no children, although Mr Chua has four children from a previous marriage, who live with his in-laws.
Aside from the space, living in Johor comes with the bonus of lower costs. The Chuas, for example, spend RM1,200 a month on food and other related expenses for their dogs. In Singapore, Mr Chua says expenditure on their pets would be as high as S$2,000.
Private tutor Gabe Lim, 48, says moving to Johor has led to him spending more time with his dogs. Because travel time needs to be planned, he has become more conscientious about starting and ending work on time. He travels to his students' homes and takes about an hour to reach Singapore.
He and his wife, June, moved into a 6,300 sq ft semi-detached house in Johor at the beginning of this year. They started off with three Schnauzers and recently added two more to the brood. The couple have no children.
Mrs Lim, 38, works from home running an events management business in Singapore.
'Due to the lower cost of living, we're able to adjust our schedules to make quality time for our dogs. Back in Singapore, there's a tendency to get stuck in a rat race to maintain a certain quality of life so you end up working longer hours,' she said.
While no one regrets moving, the couples admit to missing the round-the-clock convenience of Singapore. But the commute is not necessarily as tedious as it is made out to be.
Mr Chua says: 'Travelling time from here into Singapore is almost the same as travelling from one end of Singapore to another.'
MISS Sharon Han, 42, loved the lush grounds surrounding her rented bungalow at Seletar airbase which afforded her dogs a Doberman named Solo, and a mongrel named Jabba - the freedom to run around.
When she was told that the airbase would soon be demolished to make way for an aerospace hub, her first concern was for the dogs.
Miss Han, an office manager with a local engineering firm, said: 'Big dogs need a lot of space and you don't always have that kind of luxury in many estates here.'
She and her partner Mr Andreas Baumgartner, 48, did not think they would be able to afford another home with the kind of space that their dogs had become accustomed to in the five years they had lived there. So they moved to Bandar Nusajaya, a town in south Johor, where a 6,000 sq ft semi-detached house with lots of garden space cost them just RM$500,000 (S$210,000).
Naysayers might think that moving across the Causeway for your pets is a bit extreme but Miss Han, a Malaysian who became a Singapore permanent resident in 2000, says any inconvenience to them is a small price to pay for their 'kids'.
There were no quarantine restrictions on the dogs and they spent less than $130 getting import and export licences for them, and a health certificate from the vet.
She is not the only pet lover who has shipped out of Singapore in search of some space for beloved pooches.
With relatively few restrictions on buying homes in Malaysia - the houses have to be at least two-storeys and cost at least RM250,000 - other Singaporeans are finding it a snap to cross the border.
The Straits Times met two other couples who live in Bandar Nusajaya because they want the space for their pets. It is a 40-minute car ride from downtown Singapore.
Mr Ricky Chua and his wife Wei Ling wake up at 5am every day to feed and walk all their nine dogs before driving into Singapore to start the work day.
Both work in the construction industry - he is a senior manager with a development firm while she is a manager with a building contractor. The commute to their workplaces takes 11/2 hours, and they get home around 7pm.
Mr Chua, 44, says his 4,500 sq ft terrace house in Johor is a dream come true. Before it, the couple lived in a four-room HDB flat in Sengkang. They refrained from having a dog. 'I've always wanted at least four big dogs, and that was hard if you could only afford to live in a flat or a condominium,' he said.
They moved to Johor four years ago. Now they own two mongrels and seven Golden Retrievers. All were obtained in Johor. The couple have no children, although Mr Chua has four children from a previous marriage, who live with his in-laws.
Aside from the space, living in Johor comes with the bonus of lower costs. The Chuas, for example, spend RM1,200 a month on food and other related expenses for their dogs. In Singapore, Mr Chua says expenditure on their pets would be as high as S$2,000.
Private tutor Gabe Lim, 48, says moving to Johor has led to him spending more time with his dogs. Because travel time needs to be planned, he has become more conscientious about starting and ending work on time. He travels to his students' homes and takes about an hour to reach Singapore.
He and his wife, June, moved into a 6,300 sq ft semi-detached house in Johor at the beginning of this year. They started off with three Schnauzers and recently added two more to the brood. The couple have no children.
Mrs Lim, 38, works from home running an events management business in Singapore.
'Due to the lower cost of living, we're able to adjust our schedules to make quality time for our dogs. Back in Singapore, there's a tendency to get stuck in a rat race to maintain a certain quality of life so you end up working longer hours,' she said.
While no one regrets moving, the couples admit to missing the round-the-clock convenience of Singapore. But the commute is not necessarily as tedious as it is made out to be.
Mr Chua says: 'Travelling time from here into Singapore is almost the same as travelling from one end of Singapore to another.'
Malaysia freezes hillside projects following massive landslide
Government vows to assess all settlements for risk, but sceptics say little was done after earlier tragedies
Hazlin Hassan, Straits Times 7 Dec 08;
KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi banned hillside developments and sought a review of existing settlements after a massive landslide in a suburban part of the city killed four, crushed homes and forced thousands to evacuate.
'I am sure this will incur the wrath of individual land owners and developers but enough is enough,' Datuk Seri Abdullah said, ordering current projects to be frozen as investigations are carried out.
'Future projects will also not go on to prevent any further worsening of the soil conditions at the hilly area,' he added.
The latest disaster in Bukit Antarabangsa in Ampang on Saturday buried 14 houses, cut off access for thousands of residents and disrupted water, power and phone lines, hindering search and rescue efforts.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak yesterday sought state government support to discontinue projects in risky areas while Deputy Minister of Housing and Local Government Robert Law said owners of homes in risky areas would be asked to vacate the premises.
He said a National Slope Masterplan, due to be ready early next year, will contain a list of risky slopes and guidelines for construction.
These would be used by the Ministry to assess projects, Mr Law said during a visit to the affected site yesterday. But he did not give any details.
The upmarket estate of Bukit Antarabangsa is home to the rich-and-famous and their families. Yesterday, singer Siti Nurhaliza's husband Khalid Mohamad Jiwa described his shock at what he saw.
'House No. 13 was pushed all the way to where house No. 11 was, two lots away,' he said. The singer's cousin lives in the area but was safe.
Landslides have rocked the nation in the past. But critics and survivors of previous disasters are convinced that such tragedies will go on.
Back in 1993, 48 people died in the last major landslide that led to the infamous Highland Towers collapse. The government had announced a ban on hill-slope development then.
It was forgotten.
Saturday's landslide, which happened about a kilometre from where Highland Towers was located, prompted bitter memories for former deputy premier Musa Hitam who lost his son and daughter-in-law in the earlier tragedy.
'Nobody seems to have learnt from the lessons of the Highland Towers tragedy,' he told the national Bernama news agency.
Plastic surgeon Dr Benjamin George, 80, who survived the Highland Towers tragedy, said the cycle would go on.
'The politicians will climb up their helicopters and say all development must stop,' he said.
'There will be a stop-work order for two months but in the third month the tractors will start work again.'
Meanwhile, The Star quoted a landslide expert as saying that an abandoned project could have been the cause of the landslide on Saturday.
Dr Gue See Sew, a geotechnical engineer who specialises in landslides, said abandoned projects located on slopes make adjoining areas vulnerable, due to lack of maintenance activity.
Two rows of abandoned double storey units, are located just above the disaster-affected area, he noted, adding that the projects could have been lying idle for more than twenty years.
Malaysia bans hillside developments after landslide
Channel NewsAsia 6 Dec 08;
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia's Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has banned hillside developments after a weekend landslide in suburban Kuala Lumpur killed four people and forced thousands to evacuate.
"I am sure this will incur the wrath of individual land owners and developers but enough is enough," Abdullah said, according to Sunday's Star, ordering current projects to be frozen while soil tests are carried out.
"Future projects will also not go on to prevent any further worsening of the soil conditions at the hilly area," he told the daily after a series of landslides in northeastern Kuala Lumpur.
The latest disaster hit early Saturday, burying 14 houses at an upmarket estate, cutting off access for thousands of residents and disrupting water, electricity and phone lines.
Among the four dead was a 20-year-old who was found by his father buried under the rubble still clutching a mobile phone, the Star reported. One person is reportedly still missing.
Police ordered 3,000 to 5,000 residents living nearby to evacuate their homes.
The landslide occurred after days of heavy rains in the area, which is prone to slippages. In 2006 four people were killed and 43 homes destroyed in a nearby suburb.
And in 1993 a landslide triggered by heavy rains caused a 12-storey condominium tower to collapse, killing 48 people.
"Malaysians never want to learn from past experiences. They want good views while developers only seek to profit... no one takes safety and soil stability into consideration," the prime minister said.
"We will be courting more tragedies if we do not care and protect hillsides," he said.
- AFP/yt
Hazlin Hassan, Straits Times 7 Dec 08;
KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi banned hillside developments and sought a review of existing settlements after a massive landslide in a suburban part of the city killed four, crushed homes and forced thousands to evacuate.
'I am sure this will incur the wrath of individual land owners and developers but enough is enough,' Datuk Seri Abdullah said, ordering current projects to be frozen as investigations are carried out.
'Future projects will also not go on to prevent any further worsening of the soil conditions at the hilly area,' he added.
The latest disaster in Bukit Antarabangsa in Ampang on Saturday buried 14 houses, cut off access for thousands of residents and disrupted water, power and phone lines, hindering search and rescue efforts.
Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak yesterday sought state government support to discontinue projects in risky areas while Deputy Minister of Housing and Local Government Robert Law said owners of homes in risky areas would be asked to vacate the premises.
He said a National Slope Masterplan, due to be ready early next year, will contain a list of risky slopes and guidelines for construction.
These would be used by the Ministry to assess projects, Mr Law said during a visit to the affected site yesterday. But he did not give any details.
The upmarket estate of Bukit Antarabangsa is home to the rich-and-famous and their families. Yesterday, singer Siti Nurhaliza's husband Khalid Mohamad Jiwa described his shock at what he saw.
'House No. 13 was pushed all the way to where house No. 11 was, two lots away,' he said. The singer's cousin lives in the area but was safe.
Landslides have rocked the nation in the past. But critics and survivors of previous disasters are convinced that such tragedies will go on.
Back in 1993, 48 people died in the last major landslide that led to the infamous Highland Towers collapse. The government had announced a ban on hill-slope development then.
It was forgotten.
Saturday's landslide, which happened about a kilometre from where Highland Towers was located, prompted bitter memories for former deputy premier Musa Hitam who lost his son and daughter-in-law in the earlier tragedy.
'Nobody seems to have learnt from the lessons of the Highland Towers tragedy,' he told the national Bernama news agency.
Plastic surgeon Dr Benjamin George, 80, who survived the Highland Towers tragedy, said the cycle would go on.
'The politicians will climb up their helicopters and say all development must stop,' he said.
'There will be a stop-work order for two months but in the third month the tractors will start work again.'
Meanwhile, The Star quoted a landslide expert as saying that an abandoned project could have been the cause of the landslide on Saturday.
Dr Gue See Sew, a geotechnical engineer who specialises in landslides, said abandoned projects located on slopes make adjoining areas vulnerable, due to lack of maintenance activity.
Two rows of abandoned double storey units, are located just above the disaster-affected area, he noted, adding that the projects could have been lying idle for more than twenty years.
Malaysia bans hillside developments after landslide
Channel NewsAsia 6 Dec 08;
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia's Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has banned hillside developments after a weekend landslide in suburban Kuala Lumpur killed four people and forced thousands to evacuate.
"I am sure this will incur the wrath of individual land owners and developers but enough is enough," Abdullah said, according to Sunday's Star, ordering current projects to be frozen while soil tests are carried out.
"Future projects will also not go on to prevent any further worsening of the soil conditions at the hilly area," he told the daily after a series of landslides in northeastern Kuala Lumpur.
The latest disaster hit early Saturday, burying 14 houses at an upmarket estate, cutting off access for thousands of residents and disrupting water, electricity and phone lines.
Among the four dead was a 20-year-old who was found by his father buried under the rubble still clutching a mobile phone, the Star reported. One person is reportedly still missing.
Police ordered 3,000 to 5,000 residents living nearby to evacuate their homes.
The landslide occurred after days of heavy rains in the area, which is prone to slippages. In 2006 four people were killed and 43 homes destroyed in a nearby suburb.
And in 1993 a landslide triggered by heavy rains caused a 12-storey condominium tower to collapse, killing 48 people.
"Malaysians never want to learn from past experiences. They want good views while developers only seek to profit... no one takes safety and soil stability into consideration," the prime minister said.
"We will be courting more tragedies if we do not care and protect hillsides," he said.
- AFP/yt
Climate change: Sci-fi solutions no longer in the margins
Richard Ingham Yahoo News 7 Dec 08;
POZNAN, Poland (AFP) – With political efforts to tackle global warming advancing slower than a Greenland glacier, schemes for saving Earth's climate system that once were dismissed as crazy or dangerous are gaining in status.
Negotiating a multilateral treaty on curbing greenhouse gases is being so outstripped by the scale of the problem that those promoting a deus ex-machina -- a technical fix that would at least gain time -- are getting a serious hearing.
To the outsider, these ideas to manipulate the climate may look as if they are inspired by science fiction.
They include sucking carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air by sowing the oceans with iron dust that would spur the growth of surface plankton.
The microscopic plants would gobble up CO2 as they grow, and when they die, their carbon remains would slowly sink to the bottom of the sea, effectively storing the carbon forever.
Another idea, espoused by chemist Paul Crutzen, who won the 1995 Nobel Prize for his work on the ozone shield, is to scatter masses of sulphur dioxide particles in the stratosphere.
Swathing the world at high altitude, these particles would reflect sunlight, lowering the temperature by a precious degree or thereabouts.
More ambitious still is an idea, conceived by respected University of Arizona astronomer Roger Angel, to set up an array of deflecting lenses at a point between Earth and the Sun. Like a sunshade, they would reduce the solar heat striking the planet.
Put forward in various forums and magazines, these so-called geo-engineering proposals have been dismissed by science's mainstream as a distraction or crackpot, with the risk of further damaging the biosphere.
And even if such schemes are safe, they could cost many times more than reducing the heat-trapping pollution from fossil fuels that causes the problem, say these voices.
But as the enormity of the problem looms ever larger, geo-engineering is shedding its untouchable status.
"The notion of deploying geo-engineering research and even commercialising geo-engineering is enjoying a level of respectability in science policy circles that would have been unthinkable even three years ago," says Jim Thomas of Canadian-based watchdog group, ETC.
One reason is "the level of panic" surrounding greenhouse-gas levels, which are growing at around three percent a year and are now more than a third greater than before the Industrial Revolution, says Thomas.
Another, he suggests, is "an astonishing switch" by former climate sceptics and conservative lobby groups in the United States.
After years of denial or contestation, these powerful forces have now suddenly accepted that global warming is a problem.
They have seized on geo-engineering as a solution that would make it unnecessary to slap costly curbs on big polluters, he argues.
The scientific establishment is still far from endorsing geo-engineering.
Indeed, the UN's Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its landmark fourth assessment report last year, cautioned of the potential risk and unquantified cost of such schemes.
All the same, geo-engineering is now getting a serious look by scientists and several names are cautiously saying it would be worthwhile to at least launch small-scale experiments to see how they pan out.
This year, Britain's de-facto academy of sciences, the Royal Society, raised eyebrows when one of its journals published geo-engineering papers, which were balanced by a review by a top climatologist, Stephen Schneider of Stanford University.
The Royal Society is carrying out its own analysis of geo-engineering, although it also makes clear that this act is not a sign of its approval. The report will be published in the first half of 2009.
In an interview with AFP on the sidelines of the UN climate talks here, IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri agreed geo-engineering "is getting a closer hearing, and you are getting people who are very respectable advocating it in several cases."
"But the very fact that it's undergoing scrutiny is a good sign, because [it reveals] all the implications and all the side effects that you might be saddled with," he said.
David Santillo, a senior scientist with the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at the University of Exeter, southwestern England, said scrutiny is fine, but it should not be taken as acceptance.
"There is a danger that the more these things get talks about, the more people assume that there is some inherent legitimacy with the proposals that are being put forward. That simply is not the case," said Santillo.
POZNAN, Poland (AFP) – With political efforts to tackle global warming advancing slower than a Greenland glacier, schemes for saving Earth's climate system that once were dismissed as crazy or dangerous are gaining in status.
Negotiating a multilateral treaty on curbing greenhouse gases is being so outstripped by the scale of the problem that those promoting a deus ex-machina -- a technical fix that would at least gain time -- are getting a serious hearing.
To the outsider, these ideas to manipulate the climate may look as if they are inspired by science fiction.
They include sucking carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air by sowing the oceans with iron dust that would spur the growth of surface plankton.
The microscopic plants would gobble up CO2 as they grow, and when they die, their carbon remains would slowly sink to the bottom of the sea, effectively storing the carbon forever.
Another idea, espoused by chemist Paul Crutzen, who won the 1995 Nobel Prize for his work on the ozone shield, is to scatter masses of sulphur dioxide particles in the stratosphere.
Swathing the world at high altitude, these particles would reflect sunlight, lowering the temperature by a precious degree or thereabouts.
More ambitious still is an idea, conceived by respected University of Arizona astronomer Roger Angel, to set up an array of deflecting lenses at a point between Earth and the Sun. Like a sunshade, they would reduce the solar heat striking the planet.
Put forward in various forums and magazines, these so-called geo-engineering proposals have been dismissed by science's mainstream as a distraction or crackpot, with the risk of further damaging the biosphere.
And even if such schemes are safe, they could cost many times more than reducing the heat-trapping pollution from fossil fuels that causes the problem, say these voices.
But as the enormity of the problem looms ever larger, geo-engineering is shedding its untouchable status.
"The notion of deploying geo-engineering research and even commercialising geo-engineering is enjoying a level of respectability in science policy circles that would have been unthinkable even three years ago," says Jim Thomas of Canadian-based watchdog group, ETC.
One reason is "the level of panic" surrounding greenhouse-gas levels, which are growing at around three percent a year and are now more than a third greater than before the Industrial Revolution, says Thomas.
Another, he suggests, is "an astonishing switch" by former climate sceptics and conservative lobby groups in the United States.
After years of denial or contestation, these powerful forces have now suddenly accepted that global warming is a problem.
They have seized on geo-engineering as a solution that would make it unnecessary to slap costly curbs on big polluters, he argues.
The scientific establishment is still far from endorsing geo-engineering.
Indeed, the UN's Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its landmark fourth assessment report last year, cautioned of the potential risk and unquantified cost of such schemes.
All the same, geo-engineering is now getting a serious look by scientists and several names are cautiously saying it would be worthwhile to at least launch small-scale experiments to see how they pan out.
This year, Britain's de-facto academy of sciences, the Royal Society, raised eyebrows when one of its journals published geo-engineering papers, which were balanced by a review by a top climatologist, Stephen Schneider of Stanford University.
The Royal Society is carrying out its own analysis of geo-engineering, although it also makes clear that this act is not a sign of its approval. The report will be published in the first half of 2009.
In an interview with AFP on the sidelines of the UN climate talks here, IPCC chief Rajendra Pachauri agreed geo-engineering "is getting a closer hearing, and you are getting people who are very respectable advocating it in several cases."
"But the very fact that it's undergoing scrutiny is a good sign, because [it reveals] all the implications and all the side effects that you might be saddled with," he said.
David Santillo, a senior scientist with the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at the University of Exeter, southwestern England, said scrutiny is fine, but it should not be taken as acceptance.
"There is a danger that the more these things get talks about, the more people assume that there is some inherent legitimacy with the proposals that are being put forward. That simply is not the case," said Santillo.
Climate change, drought to strain Colorado River
Mike Stark, Associated Press Yahoo News 5 Dec 08;
SALT LAKE CITY – Seven Western states will face more water shortages in the years ahead as climate change exacerbates the strains drought and a growing population have put on the Colorado River, scientists say.
"Clearly we're on a collision course between supply and demand," said Brad Udall, director of the Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado.
Although there is some disagreement about when the most dire conditions will materialize, scientists at a conference in Salt Lake City said Thursday they expect less water to be available in the coming decades.
Without fundamental shifts in water management, the result will be shortages and difficult decisions about who in the seven states the river serves will get water and who will go without, said Dave Wegner, science director for the Glen Canyon Institute, which organized the one-day conference at the University of Utah.
"To me, it's not going to be a pretty debate," Wegner said.
The changes are already being seen in reduced water flows, higher air temperatures and an unrelenting demand on the Colorado, which snakes across more than 1,400 miles and provides water for farms, businesses, cities and homes. The river serves Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah, an area where 30 million people live.
Last year, officials from the seven states and Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne signed a far-reaching agreement aimed at conserving and sharing scarce Colorado River water. The 20-year plan formalized rules for cooperating during the ongoing drought.
A study released in February by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego said there's a 50 percent chance that Lake Mead, which straddles the Arizona-Nevada state line, could run dry by 2021.
Several models by different scientists have made predictions about the future flow of the Colorado, all of which forecast less water, said Tim Barnett, one of the Scripps study's authors. The prospect of warming temperatures only increases the strain on an already strained system, he said.
"The current usage is simply not sustainable," Barnett said.
Udall quibbled with Barnett's prediction about 2021 but not the overall speculation that water in the Colorado River basin will become more scarce.
"It's a question of when," he said.
Even if the West's climate doesn't get as warm as predicted, the river system will likely be faced with shortages, said Gregory McCabe, a project chief at the U.S. Geological Survey's water resources division in Denver.
Building more reservoirs to store water probably won't be enough to mitigate the effects of changes to the system — especially warming temperatures, he said.
One of the best approaches will be to drive down demand by finding better and more ways to conserve water, McCabe said.
The Colorado has long been the source of controversy as thirsty states fight for their share to quench growing economies.
The 20th century was one of the wettest going back several centuries. But it shouldn't be assumed that water levels will remain as plentiful in the future, researchers said.
Connie Woodhouse, a University of Arizona scientist, said tree rings in the basin indicate that the amount of moisture has fluctuated widely over hundreds of years, but has tended to be drier than was seen in the last 100 years.
It's time to consider a "new normal" for shrinking water supplies in the Colorado River basin, Wegner said. That will require a sweeping re-evaluation of allocations, use, conservation, dams and legal obligations, he said.
SALT LAKE CITY – Seven Western states will face more water shortages in the years ahead as climate change exacerbates the strains drought and a growing population have put on the Colorado River, scientists say.
"Clearly we're on a collision course between supply and demand," said Brad Udall, director of the Western Water Assessment at the University of Colorado.
Although there is some disagreement about when the most dire conditions will materialize, scientists at a conference in Salt Lake City said Thursday they expect less water to be available in the coming decades.
Without fundamental shifts in water management, the result will be shortages and difficult decisions about who in the seven states the river serves will get water and who will go without, said Dave Wegner, science director for the Glen Canyon Institute, which organized the one-day conference at the University of Utah.
"To me, it's not going to be a pretty debate," Wegner said.
The changes are already being seen in reduced water flows, higher air temperatures and an unrelenting demand on the Colorado, which snakes across more than 1,400 miles and provides water for farms, businesses, cities and homes. The river serves Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Wyoming and Utah, an area where 30 million people live.
Last year, officials from the seven states and Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne signed a far-reaching agreement aimed at conserving and sharing scarce Colorado River water. The 20-year plan formalized rules for cooperating during the ongoing drought.
A study released in February by the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego said there's a 50 percent chance that Lake Mead, which straddles the Arizona-Nevada state line, could run dry by 2021.
Several models by different scientists have made predictions about the future flow of the Colorado, all of which forecast less water, said Tim Barnett, one of the Scripps study's authors. The prospect of warming temperatures only increases the strain on an already strained system, he said.
"The current usage is simply not sustainable," Barnett said.
Udall quibbled with Barnett's prediction about 2021 but not the overall speculation that water in the Colorado River basin will become more scarce.
"It's a question of when," he said.
Even if the West's climate doesn't get as warm as predicted, the river system will likely be faced with shortages, said Gregory McCabe, a project chief at the U.S. Geological Survey's water resources division in Denver.
Building more reservoirs to store water probably won't be enough to mitigate the effects of changes to the system — especially warming temperatures, he said.
One of the best approaches will be to drive down demand by finding better and more ways to conserve water, McCabe said.
The Colorado has long been the source of controversy as thirsty states fight for their share to quench growing economies.
The 20th century was one of the wettest going back several centuries. But it shouldn't be assumed that water levels will remain as plentiful in the future, researchers said.
Connie Woodhouse, a University of Arizona scientist, said tree rings in the basin indicate that the amount of moisture has fluctuated widely over hundreds of years, but has tended to be drier than was seen in the last 100 years.
It's time to consider a "new normal" for shrinking water supplies in the Colorado River basin, Wegner said. That will require a sweeping re-evaluation of allocations, use, conservation, dams and legal obligations, he said.
Chilean glaciers retreating due to global warming: report
Natalia Ramos Yahoo News 8 Dec 08;
SANTIAGO (AFP) – Chile's glaciers are on the retreat, a sign of global warming but also a threat to fresh water reserves at the southern end of South America, a report has found.
In a November report, the Chilean water utility -- Direccion General de Aguas de Chile (DGA) -- said the Echaurren ice fields, which supply the capital with 70 percent of its water needs, are receding up to 12 meters (39.37 feet) per year.
Twenty of the glaciers studied receded between 1986 and 2007 in Campos de Hielo Sur, the third largest ice reserve in the world after Antarctica and Greenland. At the current rate of decline, Echaurren and other small glaciers close to Santiago could vanish over the next half century.
"The results indicate that the Campos de Hielo Sur glaciers generally tend to recede, which could be due to climate change in the region," the study said.
"The glaciers have receded up to 580 meters (1,900 feet) due to reduced rainfall recorded by weather stations in Patagonia and temperatures rising by about one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) in the region over the last century."
The Chilean glaciers, located mostly in the remote flatlands of Patagonia, have receded by about 67 meters per year between 1986 and 2001 and by about 45 meters between 2001 and 2007, according to DGA.
The Jorge Montt receded the most of all glaciers studied, by 11 kilometers (6.8 miles) in 21 years, a loss of 40 square kilometers (25 square miles). The San Rafael glacier in southern Chile lost 12 kilometers (7.45 miles) over 136 years.
"The fact that the glaciers are receding is one of the most dramatic consequences of global warming, because that's where climate change is most obvious," glaciologist Andres Rivera of the Valdivia scientific studies institute (CECS) told AFP.
The melting or collapse of the ice wall formed at a glacier's extremity is not due solely to global warming, according to the scientists who wrote the DGA study. The depth of the lakes or fjords into which they fall also causes the glaciers to crumble.
Loss of glaciers along Chile's Andes mountain range, home to 76 percent of South America's glaciers over a surface of 20,000 square kilometers (12,400 square miles), is threatening the water supply for people and agriculture.
"The glaciers will continue to provide fresh water for at least a hundred years. The cities and crops will expand and a time will come where the glaciers will be the population's water source," the study warned.
But two glaciers bucked the trend. Pie XI, the biggest glacier in Hielo Sur, is also the only one that continues to expand in Chile. Perito Moreno in neighboring Argentina is its only glacier that is still spreading.
"These two examples are anomalies, exceptions in this region where the glaciers are receding and losing mass."
SANTIAGO (AFP) – Chile's glaciers are on the retreat, a sign of global warming but also a threat to fresh water reserves at the southern end of South America, a report has found.
In a November report, the Chilean water utility -- Direccion General de Aguas de Chile (DGA) -- said the Echaurren ice fields, which supply the capital with 70 percent of its water needs, are receding up to 12 meters (39.37 feet) per year.
Twenty of the glaciers studied receded between 1986 and 2007 in Campos de Hielo Sur, the third largest ice reserve in the world after Antarctica and Greenland. At the current rate of decline, Echaurren and other small glaciers close to Santiago could vanish over the next half century.
"The results indicate that the Campos de Hielo Sur glaciers generally tend to recede, which could be due to climate change in the region," the study said.
"The glaciers have receded up to 580 meters (1,900 feet) due to reduced rainfall recorded by weather stations in Patagonia and temperatures rising by about one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) in the region over the last century."
The Chilean glaciers, located mostly in the remote flatlands of Patagonia, have receded by about 67 meters per year between 1986 and 2001 and by about 45 meters between 2001 and 2007, according to DGA.
The Jorge Montt receded the most of all glaciers studied, by 11 kilometers (6.8 miles) in 21 years, a loss of 40 square kilometers (25 square miles). The San Rafael glacier in southern Chile lost 12 kilometers (7.45 miles) over 136 years.
"The fact that the glaciers are receding is one of the most dramatic consequences of global warming, because that's where climate change is most obvious," glaciologist Andres Rivera of the Valdivia scientific studies institute (CECS) told AFP.
The melting or collapse of the ice wall formed at a glacier's extremity is not due solely to global warming, according to the scientists who wrote the DGA study. The depth of the lakes or fjords into which they fall also causes the glaciers to crumble.
Loss of glaciers along Chile's Andes mountain range, home to 76 percent of South America's glaciers over a surface of 20,000 square kilometers (12,400 square miles), is threatening the water supply for people and agriculture.
"The glaciers will continue to provide fresh water for at least a hundred years. The cities and crops will expand and a time will come where the glaciers will be the population's water source," the study warned.
But two glaciers bucked the trend. Pie XI, the biggest glacier in Hielo Sur, is also the only one that continues to expand in Chile. Perito Moreno in neighboring Argentina is its only glacier that is still spreading.
"These two examples are anomalies, exceptions in this region where the glaciers are receding and losing mass."
Native hunters: Climate is thinning caribou herds
Arthur Max, Associated Press Yahoo News 7 Dec 08;
POZNAN, Poland – Chief Bill Erasmus of the Dene nation in northern Canada brought a stark warning about the climate crisis: The once abundant herds of caribou are dwindling, rivers are running lower and the ice is too thin to hunt on.
Erasmus raised his concerns in recent days on the sidelines of a U.N. climate conference, seeking to ensure that North America's indigenous peoples are not left out in the cold when it comes to any global warming negotiations.
Erasmus, the 54-year-old elected leader of 30,000 native Americans in Canada, and representatives of other indigenous peoples met with the U.N.'s top climate official, Yvo de Boer, and have lobbied national delegations to recognize them as an "expert group" that can participate in the talks like other nongovernment organizations.
"We bring our traditional knowledge to the table that other people don't have," he said.
Nearly 11,000 national and environmental delegates from 190 countries are negotiating a treaty to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which regulates emissions of carbon dioxide that scientists blame for global warming. The protocol expires in 2012.
The alliance of native peoples include groups from the forests of Borneo to the depths of the Amazon.
De Boer said he advised the alliance to draw up a proposal and muster support among the national delegations to have their group approved by the countries involved in the talks.
"To give indigenous people and local communities a voice in these discussions is very important," said Kim Carstensen, the climate change director for WWF International.
Erasmus, from Yellow Knife in Canada's Northwest Territories about 300 miles (480 kilometers) south of the Arctic Circle, brings firsthand experience of climate change.
The caribou, or reindeer, herds are declining across North America and northern Europe, he said.
"We can't hunt because the ice is not frozen yet. Our hunters are falling through the ice, and lives are being lost," Erasmus told The Associated Press. This winter the normally dry area has been covered by thick, wet snow, further hampering hunting, he said.
Petroleum extraction from the Canadian tar sands is draining the underground water table and reducing the flow of the rivers northward, and the effects are felt hundreds of miles away, he said.
He is concerned that warmer winters will mean less luxurious fur on the muskrat and beaver that his people sell.
Nearly 40 years ago, he said, tribal elders noticed changes in the annual migrations of animals. The weather, which they could forecast three weeks in advance from animal behavior and the appearance of the sunsets, is now unpredictable.
Scientists have warned that conditions in the Arctic are a barometer of climate change. The region is warming faster than more temperate zones, and the seas are ice-free for longer periods. The melting of the permafrost threatens to release stored methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, U.N. scientists have reported.
POZNAN, Poland – Chief Bill Erasmus of the Dene nation in northern Canada brought a stark warning about the climate crisis: The once abundant herds of caribou are dwindling, rivers are running lower and the ice is too thin to hunt on.
Erasmus raised his concerns in recent days on the sidelines of a U.N. climate conference, seeking to ensure that North America's indigenous peoples are not left out in the cold when it comes to any global warming negotiations.
Erasmus, the 54-year-old elected leader of 30,000 native Americans in Canada, and representatives of other indigenous peoples met with the U.N.'s top climate official, Yvo de Boer, and have lobbied national delegations to recognize them as an "expert group" that can participate in the talks like other nongovernment organizations.
"We bring our traditional knowledge to the table that other people don't have," he said.
Nearly 11,000 national and environmental delegates from 190 countries are negotiating a treaty to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which regulates emissions of carbon dioxide that scientists blame for global warming. The protocol expires in 2012.
The alliance of native peoples include groups from the forests of Borneo to the depths of the Amazon.
De Boer said he advised the alliance to draw up a proposal and muster support among the national delegations to have their group approved by the countries involved in the talks.
"To give indigenous people and local communities a voice in these discussions is very important," said Kim Carstensen, the climate change director for WWF International.
Erasmus, from Yellow Knife in Canada's Northwest Territories about 300 miles (480 kilometers) south of the Arctic Circle, brings firsthand experience of climate change.
The caribou, or reindeer, herds are declining across North America and northern Europe, he said.
"We can't hunt because the ice is not frozen yet. Our hunters are falling through the ice, and lives are being lost," Erasmus told The Associated Press. This winter the normally dry area has been covered by thick, wet snow, further hampering hunting, he said.
Petroleum extraction from the Canadian tar sands is draining the underground water table and reducing the flow of the rivers northward, and the effects are felt hundreds of miles away, he said.
He is concerned that warmer winters will mean less luxurious fur on the muskrat and beaver that his people sell.
Nearly 40 years ago, he said, tribal elders noticed changes in the annual migrations of animals. The weather, which they could forecast three weeks in advance from animal behavior and the appearance of the sunsets, is now unpredictable.
Scientists have warned that conditions in the Arctic are a barometer of climate change. The region is warming faster than more temperate zones, and the seas are ice-free for longer periods. The melting of the permafrost threatens to release stored methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, U.N. scientists have reported.