CSR Asia looking for Project Manager & Intern
from the Non-Profit Jobs SG facebook group
Butterflies and Other Critters @ USR
from Beauty of Fauna and Flora in Nature
Pacific Golden Plover catches a worm
from Bird Ecology Study Group
Exploring Ubin's other shores: seagrasses
from wild shores of singapore
Have you seen a sun bear building a tree nest?
from Bornean Sun Bear Conservation
Indonesia: Kalimantan’s Lowland Peat Forests Explained
from Mongabay.com news
The stakes are high but how to strike a balance? As seas rise along with jobless rates, leaders have to consider the future of millions and the present struggles of voters.
Jessica Cheam Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
COME Monday, the countdown to a historic meeting of the world's leaders in Copenhagen ends and negotiations begin to reach a deal that is set to define the 21st century.
The heads of states will descend on the highly anticipated United Nations (UN) climate change conference in the Danish capital for a single purpose: to put the finishing touches on an ambitious international climate change agreement.
If they succeed, COP15, short for the 15th Conference of the Parties, will go down in history as the most important meeting - and the first form of global cooperation of such a scale - since World War II.
Even if they fall short, their efforts in Copenhagen will have a far-reaching impact, one that will pave the way for a revolution in our economies, change the way businesses work and how people live.
But the journey to Copenhagen has been a long and bumpy ride, one that began in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992.
There, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was born at the Earth Summit.
Five years later came the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, the world's first legally binding treaty compelling developed nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
This deal ends in 2012 and COP15 is the deadline for negotiators to devise a successor to the Kyoto treaty.
Yet hopes of success seemed headed for a dead end as recently as two weeks ago.
At that time, leaders at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in Singapore conceded that a binding climate change agreement at Copenhagen was 'out of reach'.
But since then, there has been renewed optimism about COP15. First, United States President Barack Obama announced a US emission reduction target of about 17 per cent below 2005 levels in 2020, breathing life into the talks.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao followed quickly by announcing a cut in the intensity of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions per unit of China's gross domestic product in 2020 by 40 per cent to 45 per cent from 2005 levels.
Commonwealth leaders, at a recent summit, also pledged to support a substantial and operationally binding agreement in Copenhagen leading to a legally binding outcome no later than next year.
Most recently, even Singapore, which contributes only 0.2 per cent to global emissions, has stepped up and offered a 16 per cent cut from 'business as usual' levels by 2020.
There is much hope - and pressure - for a successful conclusion of the summit.
As UNFCCC executive secretary Yvo de Boer put it in a press briefing in Bonn, Germany, last week: 'There is no Plan B for failure at Copenhagen, only Plan A. And 'A' stands for action.'
But to get to Plan A, there will be some very tough bargaining ahead as political leaders seek to resolve the tension between national interests and the common good, between securing the future and protecting present interests.
The science, 'emission impossible' and its battlefields
THERE will be the doubters, but those at COP15 will have seen the warning signs: destructive floods in South-east Asia, droughts in Australia and Africa, wild weather in North America.
Whatever the cause, planet Earth's climate is changing. Scientists on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) note that the average global temperature has risen by 0.7 deg C in the past century, enormous by scientific standards. They say there is a 90 per cent probability that this is due to polluting man-made activities such as power generation, deforestaton, transport, agriculture and industry.
That's why the 192 parties that have ratified the UNFCCC are now in a race against time to broker a deal, dubbed tongue-in-cheek by some as 'emission impossible', that would stop the Earth's temperatures from rising by more than 2 deg C.
It would reduce emissions and help countries at risk from climate change reduce its impact. But as expected, when countries with different national interests are involved, battlegrounds emerge.
A key division has developed between the 189 parties which ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and want an extension of the treaty, and the United States, which did not ratify it and wants a different international framework.
Indeed, two parallel sets of negotiations are taking place. One set focuses on a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol and its parties. The other talks aim to bring the United States in line with the other nations.
This new negotiation track started in 2007 when UNFCCC parties met in Bali at COP13 and agreed to adopt a Bali Action Plan, a two-year process to finalise a binding agreement that included the US by this year in Denmark.
While developed nations like the US and those in the European Union (EU) favour a single agreement to emerge from the two sets of talks (which will see all countries pledging some form of action), developing countries are backing a deal that keeps the Kyoto Protocol going beyond 2012 as this has legally binding commitments.
This is also because under Kyoto, they are not legally bound to any cuts and a new agreement might change that.
The other major battle is between developed countries - collectively known as Annex I - and developing ones (Non-Annex I). The latter argue that Annex I nations should take on steep cuts since they have 'historical responsibility', having rapidly industralised in the last two centuries through unsustainable patterns of production and consumption.
Developing countries such as China and India say they have more immediate problems such as poverty reduction and economic development than committing resources to climate change.
But developed ones such as the US argue that emerging economies have to share the burden because they have rapidly growing emissions that, if left unchecked, would negate all mitigation efforts by developed nations.
Experts have estimated that China's CO2 emissions will rise 5 per cent to 10 per cent annually as its economy grows, and India's emissions are set to double by 2050.
US congressmen, who have to sign off any climate treaty, have baulked in particular at allowing China, an economic rival, to get away with any deal that ties down the US in these recessionary times while allowing the Chinese to fuel their export engines with carbon-belching plants.
The division is also not a simple one between the G-77/China camp of 130 nations, which are in various stages of development, and the world's most industrialised nations.
Small island nations such as Tuvalu also find themselves opposing giants like China over the method of capping emissions. The latter prefers per capita caps to an absolute figure given their large populations, while small nations would be disadvantaged by targets based on head count.
Also, many countries - Singapore included - say there should be 'differentiated responsibility', taking into account their individual circumstances, such as being unable to turn to alternative energy sources such as wind or nuclear power.
Other areas of contention: how technology will be transferred from the richer to poorer nations to cope with climate change and issues of intellectual property rights.
Finance is also a big sticking point. The World Bank says developing nations will need a staggering US$400 billion (S$552 billion) a year for mitigation and up to another US$100 billion for adaptation. Questions of how it will be raised and how it will be managed and used are proving difficult to solve.
Then there is the issue of deforestation and the best way to tackle it. There is the vulnerability of the tiny island nations in the Pacific and Caribbean such as the Maldives, whose governments are calling for much tougher action in the face of the threat of being wiped off the face of the Earth by the rising waters that surround them.
Out of this complex mix of competing interests, COP15 must answer four key questions, notes the International Institute for Environment and Development.
How much will developed countries commit? What are the major developing countries willing to do? Where will the resources for mitigation and adaptation come from? And how will this money be managed?
What lies ahead
ALREADY, there are some solutions being mooted to answer these questions.
Developed countries from the Euro-pean Union, Russia and the US have offered some targets; while developing countries such as China, Indonesia and Brazil have some climate change strategies in place.
A short-term fund of US$10 billion a year from rich countries to kick-start immediate action for developing nations is also gaining traction, with backing from British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
But will it be enough?
The UNFCCC's Mr de Boer says the aggregate pledges do not yet match up to the level of ambition as indicated by science.
The IPCC's findings propose that developed nations cut 45 per cent below their 1990 levels by 2020, but so far proposed targets are hovering in the range of about only 5 per cent to 30 per cent.
'Industrialised nations must give a final push with ambitious leadership,' he adds.
The stakes are high.
Lord Nicholas Stern, British economist and author of the British government's climate change report, underlines this: 'Given what is at stake, essentially the future peace and prosperity of the planet, world leaders must now recognise that Copenhagen is the most important international gathering of our time...There can be no excuses for failure.'
At the end of COP15, negotiators must agree on the text for all parties to adopt. But the jury is still out on what the final words will be.
Will it be binding or non-binding? Will it be a formal statement of political intent or a more substantive Copenhagen Protocol? Will negotiations have to continue in Mexico next year?
Mr de Boer and many observers expect at least two sets of decisions coming out of COP15.
One is a second commitment period for the Kyoto Protocol. The other is a more comprehensive agreement including the US, which makes it clear what developing nations will do to limit their emissions.
Even if no legally binding successor to Kyoto emerges, some have pointed out that this is not the end of the road. Mexico may yet see political intent worked into binding commitments.
Yes, it will be deeply disappointing but it would also add to the momentum for action - which is already growing in big and small ways among policymakers, businesses and individuals around the globe who are doing their part - whether COP15 succeeds or not.
California, for example, has pledged cuts in its carbon emissions ahead of the US Senate and the Maldives is going carbon neutral, while multinationals such as Siemens and Walmart are voluntarily reducing their carbon footprints with targets.
Something historic is already happening. So let the countdown begin.
A country stuck in the in-between
Singapore caught between developed and less developed economies
Rachel Chang, Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
LIKE it or not, Singapore has been portrayed by climate change critics as rich and polluting, but sitting on its hands.
By gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, it ranks among the top five in the world, making it richer than developed countries such as Japan and the United States.
By emissions per capita, Singapore's 9.8 tonnes is on a par with that of developed countries, like Japan's 9.68 tonnes.
But it has no obligations under international treaties on climate change.
It is not an Annex I country under the Kyoto Protocol, which lists industrialised, developed nations which have to commit to reducing their emissions of greenhouse gases.
Some Annex 1 countries also have to commit to transferring wealth to less developed countries in the Group of 77 (G-77) to help them become more energy efficient.
Singapore has developed only in the last 50 years, and so has no 'historical' responsibility for the state of the Earth. But neither can it claim to be a developing country that needs wealth transfers, like many in the region.
It is stuck in the in-between in more ways than one. Along with a few other places like South Korea and Taiwan, Singapore occupies the middle ground between the developed and less developed economies.
In the fierce negotiations leading up to the Copenhagen climate change conference next week, it is caught in a tug-of-war between the various camps.
Some Annex 1 countries like Japan and Australia want Singapore to take on First World obligations, according to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew.
If a rich Asian country like Singapore will not commit, they argue, how can they expect the poor behemoths like China and India to do so?
Both have emissions per capita figures that are much less than Singapore's: China's is five tonnes and India's is 1.18 tonnes.
According to Dr Tilak K. Doshi, the visiting principal fellow at the Energy Studies Institute, although some in this middle group like Singapore, Taiwan and Qatar are not large emitters, people say they should at least agree to some cuts.
'They are capable of doing so, they have the financial and technical means of doing so, so to be fair they should be expected to do something,' he says.
The Singapore Government has made clear its resistance to joining the Annex 1 group of countries, but it has committed to making cuts.
It was announced on Wednesday that the Government will commit to a 16 per cent cut of its Business-as-Usual (BAU) figure - but only if a legally binding global deal is struck at Copenhagen.
The BAU figure is what carbon emissions would be if the country continues to grow without curbing emissions.
This figure is smaller than the ones brandished by other countries. South Korea, a country in that 'middle group' as well, has declared voluntary cuts of 30 per cent below its BAU figure by 2020.
'No ordinary country'
THE Government's line has always been that when it comes to climate change, Singapore is 'no ordinary country', as Mr Lee puts it.
Although it is a little red dot, the city-state's size looms large.
South Korea, for instance, aims to build 10 more domestic nuclear reactors by 2030, on top of the eight now planned, with six under construction.
But safety concerns mean nuclear rectors need to be ringed by a large buffer zone, for which Singapore has no land.
The only option then for Singapore is to enter into a joint project with a neighbouring country, say experts.
But this would put Singapore in an overwhelmingly dependent position. If it seemed hard to negotiate over water supplies, imagine if the object of cooperation is nuclear.
With no spare land, and winds and waters too weak to harness, Singapore is what the jargon terms 'alternative-energy disadvantaged.'
Then, there is the fact that Singapore is a country in a city. Its emissions are actually similar to that of other densely populated cities such as London and New York.
But these cities are fed by power generators located outside their boundaries in other parts of the country. In contrast, power generators are elbow-to-elbow with Singapore's city centre, and account for a big portion of emissions here.
In short: Singapore may be a country, but it is not like other countries.
'There should be a handicap system, like in golf,' says Dr Doshi. 'And we have to be given a handicap.'
Starting from higher base
THE Government is sensitive to charges that it should do more because, it says, it often goes unemphasised how much Singapore has already done.
Singapore has developed over the last five decades in a consistently environmentally conscious way (see report: ''CLEAN & GREEN' SINCE 1963').
Since it is starting from a higher base, say the authorities, it is harder to cut emissions further.
In fact, the standards that have been applied to industries tie its hands in other ways as well.
In a cap-and-trade system, factories that are heavy emitters must buy carbon permits from those that are not. The added costs persuade companies to invest in pollution control and energy efficient measures.
According to Professor Euston Quah, head of economics at Nanyang Technological University, the pace of development in Singapore has meant that factories here are uniformly advanced in these mechanisms: 'There's less opportunity to trade.'
An Asean-wide cap-and-trade system would make more sense. But like a nu-clear power plant shared with a neighbour, the political framework to pursue such cooperation is still a pipe dream.
Doing what it says
THESE daunting challenges, however, do not mean that it is in Singapore's interest to shirk from international negotiations.
As a low-lying island, climate change is an existential threat to the country. If sea levels rise by 2m, the city-state will be swallowed whole.
As Senior Minister S. Jayakumar said in response to climate change scepticism: 'I don't think we've the luxury of waiting for the day, I don't know when it will come, where it will be put beyond doubt which school of thought is right.'
The 16 per cent cut proposed by Singapore will come from a combination of fiscal and regulatory measures, say the authorities.
Experts point out that, as challenged as Singapore may be, where there is a will, there is a way.
Dr Joachim Luther of the Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore says that solar energy can be imported from neighbouring countries if the Government is willing to invest in building the cables needed, which will cost billions.
With the greenery in Singapore, harvesting biowaste to be turned into biodiesel could be a feasible source of alternative energy.
When it comes to global standards on emissions, the Government is anxious to have a level playing field in the sectors most integral to Singapore's economy.
For example, emissions from civil aviation and shipping industries are not counted against Singapore because these planes and freight ships service the world, says Dr Doshi.
Similarly, if regulations are to be levied on an industry like petrochemicals, these must be applied globally. If standards are country-specific, with developing countries exempt, then petrochemical companies will just migrate to the countries where they can escape regulations.
Uniform global rules are of course resisted by developing countries, which say this will impede their development.
This is why some countries want Singapore to be included in the Annex 1 group. If standards on oil refineries are imposed on Australia (as an Annex 1 country), for example, and not on Singapore, then Australia will lose out.
Ultimately, Singapore accounts for little in the global scheme of things - 0.2 per cent of global carbon emissions, to be exact. Even so, there are perhaps two things in particular it can contribute to the global dealings.
The first is in setting an example in the region of how it is possible to develop economically without devastating the environment, and to help neighbouring countries to do so whether through technology and wealth transfers, or otherwise.
The second is to bring its targets into reality. Whatever the shortcomings of the Government's position, one thing is assured: Unlike many other countries, it will do what it says.
Picking the fruits of conservation
Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
FORGET about nuclear plants, giant windmills and other headline-making projects.
For Singapore, the Herculean challenge to reduce carbon emissions lies in the terribly mundane: energy efficiency and conservation.
Experts have been saying this for years, but their voices have been drowned out by the hoopla surrounding clean, alternative sources of energy.
The excitement is understandable: Whether solar, nuclear or wind energy, they are supposed to portend a brave new world where people can save Mother Earth without having to relinquish any creature comforts.
But the truth is that it is much easier, cheaper, and more plausible to use less energy in whatever form, rather than switch out of fossil fuels.
Energy efficiency and conservation attract less buzz because they bring to mind the tedious and unglamorous: saving water, having cold showers, taking the bus.
Such ideas make the eyes glaze over, especially in Singapore, where the right to air-conditioning is fiercely guarded, and a car is the fundamental aspirational good.
So how can the Republic meet the challenge of climate change?
The gritty reality here is that alternative energy sources can play only a minor role.
Take solar power for example. Covering every single rooftop in Singapore with solar panels will yield only enough energy to account for about 22 per cent of the electricity demanded by Singapore households, according to Dr Michael Quah of the Energy Studies Institute (ESL) at the National University of Singapore (NUS).
You might say 22 per cent seems a respectable amount. But electricity generation accounts for only a portion of carbon emissions. The petrol and diesel used for transport is the greater culprit.
Solar, nuclear and hydrothermal energy can only be converted into electricity, which means that a clean alternative to petrol and gas is sorely lacking.
Of course, one holds out for technological breakthroughs that may deliver a way out of these complicated caveats.
But as Dr Joachim Luther of the Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore says: 'Policy matters must be done on solid ground. You can't have a strategy where you do not know the solution.'
FRUIT ON THE GROUND
THE solid ground here is that conservation and energy efficiency can bring carbon emissions down by a lot. Estimates vary, but a high range of up to 70 per cent has been cited.
As overall energy use falls, the share that can be produced by clean energy sources like solar power rises: that 22 per cent doubles to 44 per cent if Singapore can cut its emissions by half through conservation and energy efficiency measures.
This is not as hard as it may seem. Energy is wasted in ways few are even aware of. So reversing this, or harnessing this waste, could also go without note.
Dr Quah cites the example of his brother, an engineer who took things literally into his own hands. After finding out that refrigerator coils emit wasted heat in refrigeration, he plumbed water heated by his refrigerator to his shower unit. His brother does not pay a cent for hot water any more.
This may seem like a facile undertaking. But if someone has done it, then more can do so. The point is that little things like this - or like building bigger windows for more sunlight, or turning up the air-conditioning by 1 deg C - are easy, and collectively worth a lot.
This is why United States Secretary of Energy Steven Chu rejected the old characterisation of energy efficiency as just low-hanging fruit earlier this year. 'It's fruit laying on the ground,' he declared.
The Singapore Government seems cognisant of this. But it is hamstrung to some extent by the high costs of living, and the high expectations of the people. It risks a political backlash if brute measures, like levying a heavy carbon tax, are taken.
STAYING COOL
THIS air-conditioned nation takes staying cool very seriously.
But Singaporeans may need less cool air than they think. A test system of something called demand-based ventilation has already been set up in the Zero Energy building on Braddell Road.
This system aims to not waste energy air-conditioning the nooks, crannies and empty rooms of a building. The system monitors the building and senses when a 'zone' is occupied by bodies who need to be cooled. When they leave, it stops too.
In laboratory conditions, such a system could chalk up energy savings of 12 per cent, according to Dr Chandra Sekhar, associate professor and programme director of NUS' Department of Building.
While ventilation on demand is still in the testing stage, its basic principle could be extrapolated to an idea known as 'personalised ventilation' - that is, bringing cool and dry fresh air directly to the person's breathing zone.
If an individual's 'micro-environment', his workspace for example, is comfortable, then 'people don't even realise it's warmer elsewhere,' says Dr Sekhar.
Mini ventilation machines could keep Singaporeans dry while avoiding the waste of central air-conditioning units.
PAY AS YOU GO
ASSISTANT Professor Chang Youngho of Nanyang Technological University has advocated a system of personal carbon allowances.
Each person receives a set amount of carbon credits allocated at regular intervals. If you take a bus or the MRT, you do not spend any carbon credits. If you drive, you do.
So those who accumulate their credits can sell them to those who have spent all of theirs. The revenue from the sale of carbon credits can go to expanding the bus and MRT networks.
This scenario is perhaps not as far-fetched as it seems. For one thing, the logistics are already in place: ez-link cards and CashCards can hold carbon credits too, and ERP gantries are perfectly suited to take credits from drivers.
Of course, there are kinks to be ironed out: How should carbon credits be allocated - should low-income people get more? And do you need carbon credits if you take a cab, or car pool?
He has proposed his idea to the Land Transport Authority. The worry, he says, is how to handle the uproar that will inevitably ensue from motorists.
But 'the main objective is not to penalise drivers', he makes it clear. 'It is how to encourage people to move from private to public transport.'
Driving is much more harmful to the atmosphere. An HDB flat, with all the lights on and appliances running, uses at most 2 kilowatt-hours of energy, says Dr Quah of ESI. In contrast, a car uses 200 kilowatt-hours of energy.
PEDESTRIANS ONLY
DR QUAH envisions an Orchard Road without cars, served instead by a light-train transport system of little modules - mostly to carry the disabled and the elderly up and down the stretch.
For the able-bodied, the area becomes not just a shopper's but a pedestrian's paradise.
Times Square in New York City was barred to cars last year. Gone is the honking mass of cars suffocating the area at all hours of the day. Now workers on their lunch breaks loll on deck chairs arranged on the roads.
Would not such an oasis of calm in a frenzied city help to bring down not only carbon emissions but also blood pressures?
RACHEL CHANG
Mark of a winner
Features such as motion lighting sensors, solar panels and water-efficient loos have helped three new malls bag a green award
tay suan chiang Straits Times Life! 5 Dec 09;
A new breed of malls is more than a stylish place to enjoy endless shops and restaurants - the shopping adventure has been made more earth-friendly, too.
Recently opened malls such as City Square Mall in Kitchener Road as well as 313@Somerset and Ion Orchard, both along Orchard Road, have been given the green thumbs-up by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA).
They are winners of the BCA Green Mark award, which honours developers of buildings that are environment-friendly. The awards were first handed out in 2005.
Eco features that grabbed the eye of judges include the use of an efficient air-conditioning system, waterless urinals and carpark lighting sensors, all of which help the malls save energy.
City Square Mall, which opened in September, is the first mall to win the Platinum award, the highest accolade of the Green Mark award. It won the award in 2007.
How green the buildings are is judged based on their design concepts and energy models to show the estimated energy savings. Buildings need not be completed to be awarded.
The 11-storey mall was developed by City Developments Ltd (CDL) and designed by property group Lend Lease, which is also its leasing agent.
CDL declined to reveal construction costs for the mall but Mr Felix Lim, principal architect at Lend Lease, says by incorporating green features into the mall, 'it costs 5 to 6 per cent more to build, but the mall is expected to save $2million in annual energy bills'.
On the decision to go green, CDL's assistant general manager, projects division, Mr Allen Ang, says: 'We believe that a shopping mall is a strategic platform to reach out to shoppers and the community-at-large to raise their eco-consciousness.
'By offering a positive and vibrant shopping environment, City Square Mall shows that going green can be fun and easily a part of everyday life.'
The mall's green features include a skylight, 'so it will be lit by natural light, rather than depend solely on artificial lighting', says Mr Lim.
At night and on cloudy days, the mall remains bright. There are sensors around the complex that detect the amount of natural light entering and adjust the intensity of the artificial light as needed.
In the basement carparks, the lights darken and brighten automatically.
No, it is not because they are defective nor should shoppers wonder if they are in a horror movie. Rather, there are motion lighting sensors in place to control the lighting.
Mr Lim points out that with the various energy-saving features around the mall, the projected total electricity savings is about 11.4 million kWH a year, or 'the equivalent to the total electrical consumption of 2,380 units of HDB four-room flats'.
It is not only about saving electricity. He designed the mall for water efficiency, too, such as harvesting rainwater to hydrate the plants.
In addition, the men's toilets feature waterless urinals. These use an eco-friendly biotechnology cleansing system - where cultured bacteria eradicates the stench from waste liquids - and do away with the need to use water for flushing.
The estimated cost of savings is another $48,000 annually.
While some of the green features in the mall are not visible to shoppers, it has taken further steps to drive the recycling message home: It has six interactive panels that let shoppers learn about its green features as well as to pick up recycling tips.
Save water, electricity and money
The interactive panels get the nod of approval from housewife Mary Tan, 34, who was out shopping with her son, Bryan, five. 'It is never too early for him to learn about recycling,' she says.
The mall is also playing host to a BCA exhibition next Thursday to Sunday on how homes can be more environmentally friendly.
Over at Orchard Road's newest mall, 313@Somerset, which opened on Thursday, shoppers may be hard-pressed to find its green features, but they are in place. The mall is a Platinum Green Mark award winner last year.
Among its environment-friendly features are solar panels to power the mall, Newater for its sprinklers, a system that collects and channels rainwater to flush toilets and water the plants as well as lighting sensors in the atrium and upper-level carparks to help save energy during the day.
Putting in these green features allows the mall to enjoy energy savings of 6.3 million kWh a year and water savings of 22,500 cubic metres annually, says the mall's developer, who is also Lend Lease.
This is equivalent to the total electrical consumption of 1,277 HDB four-room flats, and water usage for 96 HDB four-room flats respectively.
It is also encouraging its tenants to go green. It has worked out the power and lighting requirements of the tenants, and should the energy consumption be high, recommendations to reduce the energy usage will be provided.
Shoppers headed to Ion Orchard will notice a green wall at the mall on the side facing Wheelock Place. This one-storey-high vertical wall that has been covered with plants is one of the green features that helped the mall win a BCA Green Mark Gold award in 2007.
The shopping centre also has photocell sensors around the building which reduce lighting levels by dimmers in response to the amount of available daylight. The mall is expected to save $470,000 annually in its energy bill.
Shopper Tan Jin Jin, 28, who practises recycling at home, says: 'Even though the energy savings are not passed on to shoppers, it's heartening to know malls are also becoming eco-conscious.'
'CLEAN & GREEN' SINCE 1963
Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
LONG before climate change became the hottest issue on Earth, Singapore has been on a never-ending drive to keep the environment clean and green and to curb pollution.
All these measures undertaken by the Government may not fit in with the lofty notions of environmentalists, but they do help to lower carbon emissions.
In 2006, carbon intensity - the amount of carbon emitted per unit of energy consumed - was 30 per cent below 1990 levels.
Here's what has been done over the decades.
GREENING THE CITY
# Since Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew initiated the annual tree-planting day in 1963, about 2 million trees have been planted all over the island.
# Every tree is recorded in the National Parks database, which tracks its planting and pruning.
# Greenery now covers 46 per cent of the city, even though the population has increased by 68 per cent in the last two decades.
# Compared with Jakarta or Bangkok, cities with the same climate as Singapore, the environs here feel considerably cooler thanks to the green cover.
INDUSTRIES
# The industrial sector accounts for 60 per cent of Singapore's energy consumption.
# Multinational companies (MNCs) setting up factories and businesses here are subject to strict regulations.
# The authorities approve proposals for factories based on environmental concerns. Factories that use industrial instead of good water or install systems to reduce pollutive gases are given the green light.
# In the early 1990s, MNCs were already responding to pressure from the authorities by building oil refineries that recovered up to 99 per cent of sulphur emitted.
# These early policies mean that the air quality in Singapore has consistently surpassed the 85 per cent 'good' range under the international pollutant standards index despite the presence of heavy-emitting industries like petrochemicals.
# Developers wanting to build major projects have to carry out an assessment on the environmental impact of their projects.
# From 2001, power generators started to switch from fuel oil to natural gas, which is the cleanest form of fossil fuel.
# Power generation accounts for about half of total emissions. The switch to natural gas has reduced the sector's emissions by a quarter, according to official figures.
TRANSPORT
# Singapore is one of the few countries to cap vehicle growth. The number of cars on the road was allowed to grow only 3 per cent annually; from this year, this figure became 1.5 per cent. This policy has reduced emissions by about 5 per cent, say the authorities.
# In 2006, the Euro 4 standard for new diesel vehicles was introduced, the same as in Europe. This means that heavy-polluting vehicles are barred from the roads.
# Since 2005, it has been compulsory for diesel vehicles to use only ultra- low sulphur diesel, which releases 10 times less pollutants into the atmosphere than normal diesel.
# A 40 per cent green vehicle tax cut has been accorded to cars running on compressed natural gas (CNG) until 2012. CNG cuts emissions by 20 per cent compared with petrol.
# There are now 4,200 CNG vehicles out of over 700,000 vehicles in Singapore. About a third of these are taxis.
# The world's largest CNG-refuelling station is located in Singapore, on Old Toh Tuck Road.
HOUSEHOLDS AND BUILDINGS
# Singaporeans have been encouraged to recycle more and waste less through neighbourhood schemes.
# About 750,000 water-saving kits have been distributed so far, and one in three households has installed water-saving devices.
# The recycling rate was 56 per cent last year. The Government has set a target of 65 per cent in 2020, and 70 per cent in 2030.
# Minimum energy performance standards for household air-conditioners and refrigerators will come into place by 2011.
# Energy consumption in the common areas of housing estates are to be reduced by 20 per cent to 30 per cent.
# A large-scale solar testbed for public housing spanning 30 precincts will be set up.
# About 80 per cent of buildings are to achieve Green Mark certification (meeting a minimum energy efficient standard) by 2030.
# A Green Mark incentive fund of $100 million will be set up to pay for energy efficiency retrofitting in buildings.
CARBON JARGON: A LAYMAN'S GUIDE
Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
Annex I countries
Industrialised countries and those in transition to a market economy that are pledged to greenhouse gas emission cuts under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol.
Annex II
Industrialised countries specially obliged under Kyoto to provide money and technology to help developing ones reduce emissions and adapt to climate change.
Non-annex I countries
Developing countries that have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol. They do not have binding emission reduction targets.
Aosis
Alliance of Small Island States. Comprises 42 island and coastal states mostly in the Pacific and Caribbean. Members likely to be hit hardest by global warming as sea water rises.
Baseline for cuts
The year against which countries measure their target decrease of emissions. The Kyoto Protocol uses 1990. China's is 2005.
Business as usual (BAU)
A scenario used for projections of future emissions assuming no action, or no new action, is taken to mitigate the problem. Some countries are pledging not to reduce their emissions but to make reductions compared to a business-as-usual scenario. Their emissions, therefore, would increase but less than they would have done.
Cap and trade
A scheme whereby businesses or countries can buy or sell allowances to emit greenhouse gases up to the limit, or cap, imposed by the authorities. Also known as emissions trading, the best-developed example of which is the European Union's scheme launched in 2005.
Carbon dioxide (CO2)
A gas in the Earth's atmosphere which occurs naturally and is also a by-product of human activities such as burning fossil fuels. It is the principal global warming gas produced by human activity.
Carbon intensity
A unit of measure. The amount of carbon emitted by a country per unit of gross domestic product.
Carbon neutral
A process whereby the amount of CO2 taken out of the atmosphere, such as through reforestation, and the amount released are identical.
Carbon offsetting
A way of compensating for emissions of CO2 by participating in, or funding, efforts to take it out of the atmosphere.
Clean Development Mechanism
A United Nations programme that enables developed countries or companies to earn credits by investing in greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal projects in developing countries. Each Certified Emission Reduction credit is equivalent to 1 tonne of CO2 and can be used to offset emissions and bring its holder below its mandatory target.
Climate change
A pattern of change affecting global or regional climate, as measured by yardsticks such as average temperature and rainfall, or an alteration in frequency of extreme weather conditions. One aspect is global warming, reflected in steady rise in global average temperature in recent decades.
COP15
Official title of the Copenhagen conference from Dec 7 to 18. Longer version is the 15th Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Fossil fuels
Refers to coal, oil and natural gas which are formed in the Earth over millions of years and produce CO2 when burnt.
Greenhouse effect
The insulating effect of certain gases in the atmosphere which allows solar radiation to warm the earth and then prevent some of the heat from escaping. The Kyoto Protocol restricts emissions of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, perfluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride.
Hockey stick
Name given to a 1998 graph plotting the average temperature in the Northern hemisphere over the last 1,000 years. The line is roughly flat until the last 100 years, when it bends sharply upwards. It is used to support the idea that global warming is a man-made phenomenon.
IPCC
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A scientific body set up by the UN and the World Meteorological Organisation in 1988. It reviews and assesses studies relevant to climate change. It won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
Kyoto Protocol
An agreement which sets legally binding commitments on greenhouse gas emissions. It was agreed by governments at a 1997 UN conference in Kyoto, Japan, but did not come into force until 2005. Industrialised countries which signed on agreed to reduce emission cuts to 5.2 per cent below 1990 levels during the five-year period from 2008 to 2012.
Parts per million (ppm)
A unit of measure reflecting the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Last year, the amount of CO2 rose by 2ppm to 385.2ppm, or molecules per million molecules of dry air. Some say the world has already passed the danger point, at 350ppm.
REDD
Short for Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation. Aimed at providing developing countries with a financial incentive to preserve forests. COP15 is expected to finalise an international mechanism for this.
Stern review
A 2006 report on the economics of climate change led by Lord Nicholas Stern. It argued that the cost of dealing with the consequences of climate change in the future would be higher than taking action to mitigate the problem now.
UNFCCC
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. One of a series of international agreements on global environmental issues adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. The UNFCCC aims to prevent 'dangerous' human interference with the climate system. It is ratified by 192 countries.
SOURCE: BBC
going green: tale of two cities - DEZHOU (CHINA)
Solar city shows how to develop the green way
Sim Chi Yin, China Correspondent Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
A GIANT metal arch studded with solar panels sweeps across the sky, looming over a building that rises above bare fields like the sun.
Inside the all-white, 11-storey office block - dubbed the 'solar Bird's Nest' after Beijing's iconic Olympics stadium - a gentle warmth radiates from a sun-powered heating system in the ceiling, warding off the wintry cold.
Energy-efficient vacuum glass windows shut out the chill.
Next door, a 700-room, five-star hotel is being built with similar environmentally friendly features, to also live up to its 'five green-star' billing.
On the streets and in parks, traffic lights and decorative lamps are powered by the sun.
Welcome to China's 'solar city', a living example of the country's push towards renewable energy - a key plank of its strategy to combat climate change.
Dezhou, a city of 5.6 million people in Shandong, two hours by fast train south of Beijing, is home to the world's largest manufacturing base of solar water heaters, producing 12 per cent of such devices installed across the planet.
The city also practises what it preaches.
While about one in 10 families across China uses a solar water heater - with government plans for three in 10 to use one by 2020 - Dezhou is streets ahead.
About half of all households here already rely on solar water heaters, with up to 90 per cent of homes in the newer parts of town using one, said local government officials.
Local residents may not really be clued into ways of saving the planet, but they know there is practical benefit in being green: savings on their utilities bills.
Mr Liu Shien, 57, a hotel technician who earns 1,500 yuan (S$305) a month, says the solar water heater he installed three years ago saves his family 700 yuan a year.
That means the 3,300-yuan device, which does not require much maintenance, will pay for itself in about five years.
Mr Liu lives in a draughty two-bedroom flat with his wife, Yang Laner, 55, and two grandchildren.
His wife is pleased with more than just the cost-saving. 'Apart from very cloudy or foggy days when the solar heater does not work so well, we use hot water for everything now, including washing the children's feet before they go to bed. Previously, we used an electric water heater which could store enough water for only one or two showers and it was too expensive to keep it running,' a beaming Mrs Liu explains.
Even in villages around the city, solar water heaters have sprouted atop bare brick houses this year through a scheme in which the central government and heater manufacturers subsidises more than half of the 2,600-yuan price tag for the device.
Mr Qi Fenghua, 37, head of Yan Wang Zhang village about 30 minutes' drive from downtown Dezhou, says some 230 out of 300 households in his village opted to buy solar water heaters this year.
With solar water heaters as common as they are in Dezhou, it is little wonder that 'when you say 'save energy', local people think immediately of their water heaters', says Mr Chen Tailie, a city government official in a department set up to promote the use of solar energy.
The local government's 'green energy' drive is also rooted in pragmatism.
In the past decade, the solar industry has been a lease of life for this mid-sized city which, like many others in China, needed to find ways to industrialise its way out of rural poverty.
The 100-plus solar water heater-makers based here provide work for one-third of the city's workforce - 100,000 jobs.
The largest company, home-grown brand Himin Group - headquartered in the 'solar Bird's Nest' - alone hires 7,000 workers locally and more than 60,000 across China.
Dezhou - which pledged this year to become a 'low carbon city'- is riding a wave of interest and investment in renewable energy in China.
The country still relies on coal for up to 80 per cent of its energy and is the world's largest emitter of the greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
But even as Beijing comes under fire for not doing more to cut carbon emissions, it has in recent years pumped money into renewable energy such as hydropower and wind and solar power. China invested US$12 billion (S$20 billion) in 2007 in renewable energy, making it the country that spent the second-largest amount that year, behind Germany's US$14 billion, according to the non-profit Climate Group.
Beijing has also pledged to increase the use of renewable sources from the current 7 per cent of its energy mix to 15 per cent by 2020.
China's solar industry alone is growing at 20 per cent to 30 per cent a year, according to the official Xinhua news agency. By next year, China is projected to rely on solar power for 1 per cent of its energy consumption.
Beijing's rapid race ahead in the field of renewables is both 'strategic' and because it has 'no choice', notes Mr Julian Wong, a senior policy analyst at the Centre for American Progress in Washington DC and an expert on China's green technology sector.
Beijing is spurred by the severe threat climate change poses to its water, food and energy security. China became a net importer of coal for the first time in 2007 despite having one of the largest coal reserves in the world.
Says Mr Wong: 'The Chinese are literally choking on growth. With 80 per cent of China's power needs fuelled by coal, air pollution is rampant and exerting a real cost to public health. Pollution woes are also inciting public uprisings, posting a threat to social stability.'
On the upside, clean energy is a new economic sector, which creates export opportunities and jobs and allows China to develop its innovation capacity, he adds.
But, he says, how this push pans out depends on one key factor: how local governments respond to Beijing's call for sustainable development, a move away from its obsession with GDP growth - at all costs - for most of the past 30 years.
In Dezhou, at least, those goals seem to have become aligned because of the cash cow it has found in the solar industry.
But even here, the 'greening' of the city is far from complete.
A microcosm of China, the city still relies on coal power plants for 80 per cent of its energy needs, and has reported problems of water pollution caused by paper mills. Local officials interviewed declined to give details of the pollution problem.
Instead, in an interview last month, Mr Chen said repeatedly: 'We're a developing city in a developing country. You should not compare us with developed countries.'
On his own steam, Mr Huang Ming, a former state-employed oil researcher who founded Himin 14 years ago after years of underground research on solar energy, has ambitious plans to do more.
He is constructing a 'Solar Valley' of 330ha around the impressive 'green' office block and five-star hotel he built. When completed in 2014, the valley will house solar research institutes, a spa, conference centre and a solar energy theme park.
Fifteen minutes' drive away, he is building his vision of a 'low carbon' residential estate. The 1,600-unit Utopia Gardens will use solar and geothermal heat to power its air-conditioning and recycle rainwater. It will use energy-efficient insulation and glass.
A leading advocate for solar energy in China, Mr Huang will be heading to Copenhagen this weekend for global climate talks as a non-governmental representative.
On what more China can do to help the global fight against climate change, he says: 'China's high-speed development is a reality. Nobody can tell a peasant that he should always remain a peasant...
'I want to tell governments of developed countries: Do not force China to slow down its speed of development to solve the problem of carbon emissions. That's stupid. But don't worry that China's government and people won't bear their responsibility for global warming.
'To developing countries, I want to say although we are poor and need to develop, we must do it the green way. It's the only way.'
going green: tale of two cities - SAN FRANCISCO
Where going green is part of life and business
Bhagyashree Garekar, US Correspondent Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
IN POSSIBLY the easiest place on Earth to be green, Ms Gay Browne's quibble is that an organic business suit is tough to find.
Ms Browne can say so with a note of authority: She is the publisher of a popular guide to green living in San Francisco, a city many call the green capital of the United States.
With listings of thousands of businesses - from native plant nurseries and hawkers of low-impact hiking tours to solar-powered hotels and housekeeping agencies that dispatch maids in hybrid cars loaded with non-toxic cleaning aids - the guide is a prop for the growing numbers who feel the urge to make sustainable choices every day.
It is also testimony to the growing green power in the state. The heady feeling of being at the centre of efforts to avert the carbon crisis wells up strong in San Francisco and surrounding cities, popularly known as the Bay Area.
As was the case during the 1990s' dotcom boom, venture capitalists are on the patrol for promising ideas. There is the sense of a great prize waiting to be won, not to mention the lurking suspicion of a con.
Mr Bob Walsh who leads Aurora Biofuels, a start-up in the city of Alameda, describes the atmosphere thus: 'These days, any guy walking out of an aquarium claims to be an algae specialist.'
Algae, of course, is the big hope of the biofuels industry trying to develop alternatives to fossil fuels that cause global warming.
Aurora is one of hundreds of firms in a race to discover and commercialise ways to make fuel from customised algae that can be grown cheap in small areas and do not compete with crops.
At the Centre for the Continuing Study of the California Economy in Palo Alto, economist Stephen Levy says that much about the green industry - whether it will drive growth and create jobs - is 'unknown'.
'But so was the potential of the computer industry in 1978 when Apple started the revolution,' he adds.
What is well documented is that California chose to go green long before the rest of the world, mainly because something had to be done about the unbearable smog in parts of the state.
So back in 1978, the state established energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances such as refrigerators and dishwashers. That alone saved Californians and their businesses US$56 billion (S$77 billion) in the next 25 years.
More tellingly, the per capita energy use in the state has stayed flat for nearly three decades while the national figure has jumped by 50 per cent.
While the average American consumes 12,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity a year, the average Californian uses fewer than 7,000. Carbon dioxide emissions per capita in California have fallen by 30 per cent since 1975 while US per capita figures are unchanged.
Conservative economists have pointed out that the stiff regulations and high taxes have led to firms and jobs fleeing the state.
Mr Levy says his research proves that the regulations over the last three decades have been jobs- and growth-neutral. 'And that's great because it means we have enjoyed a better environment and health benefits at no cost.'
The state has not rested on its green laurels. The California Air Resources Board issued a blueprint for a cap-and-trade programme last week. It was the first state to do so.
Another law requires all new cars sold in the state to zap emissions by 30 per cent by 2016.
San Francisco has gone far past the point of banishing plastic bags to mandating composting under new regulations in October.
The city scores in other ways too. For instance, it has the most 'walkable' neighbourhoods in the country, thereby reducing transportation-related emissions.
Says Ms Taja di Leonardi of Berkeley: 'It takes work to live a 100 per cent green life but you can live a largely green life fairly effortlessly here. My diesel car runs on recycled vegetable oil. All my shopping is at locally owned businesses, I go only to organic food stores, I have a solar water heater, I collect my rainwater, recycle the waste, compost the scraps. Outside the Bay Area it takes much effort to be even lightly green.'
Ms di Leonardi has had something of a headstart. In 2005, she was among the first batch of 'green MBAs' graduating from the San Francisco-based Presidio School of Management, one of the first graduate schools to focus on sustainable management.
In the same year, she set up a store selling eco-friendly flooring, paints and other home improvement merchandise. The business was profitable from year one.
Still, the recession has been a challenge. 'That we are still in business in this rough economy proved to me the value in being a green business,' she says.
Businesses like hers tap into the growing numbers of the well-heeled and environmentally conscious consumers who have adapted to the lifestyle of health and sustainability.
The Lohas, as this consumer species is termed, tend to be 'locavores' patronising restaurants and grocery stores which stock local and seasonal foods.
The idea is to save on the emissions that result if the food had to be transported, processed, refri-gerated, stored and so on.
Mr Frank Klein, a restaurateur who gained fame for introducing the concept of wine bars to San Francisco, now co-owns the well-regarded Fish & Farm restaurant. Items on its menu - the fish, meat, produce and wines - are sourced from within 161km.
Says Mr Klein: 'Of course, it can be expensive. A case of ordinary potatoes costs US$18, an organic case costs US$80. Still, it's easy to do it here. The best beef, pork, poultry, vegetable and fruits are cultivated at our doorstep. We have a government that believes in green practices and a media that is supportive.'
The cost factor is undeniably an issue, especially in a slow economy.
San Jose-based SunPower Corporation, a leading supplier of solar energy systems, launched an aggressive marketing campaign in the Bay area this year to tackle that head-on.
'Our campaign conveyed the economics and the benefits of putting solar on your roof, we highlighted the government incentives and how it can be affordable like financing a car,' says the firm's vice-president for public policy, Ms Julie Blunden.
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is trying to push the state to have 33 per cent renewable power by 2020.
SunPower, which claims 30 per cent of the solar market, has grown by leaps and bounds. 'We had fewer than 50 people and US$11 million in revenue in 2004 and we now have 5,000 employees around the world and US$1.4 billion in revenue.'
One of its customers is Agilent Technologies, a Fortune 500 firm that makes machines to analyse DNA, chemicals, sound waves and so on.
Earlier last month, it installed solar panels at its headquarters in Santa Clara. The 1MW system will deliver 7 per cent of the site's po-wer needs each year and up to 30 per cent during peak sunny hours.
'Do we consider it profitable to have gone green? Well, that can be tricky to answer,' says Mr Shawn De Angelo, Agilent's energy conservation programme ma-nager. 'But if you ask whether a profitable company can be green? Absolutely.'
Green gives a certain cred, he adds, especially with the younger generation. 'Soon after we put solar on the carpark roof in our Santa Rosa campus, we found ourselves on the list of best employers in the region.'
California has seen its public finances come under heavy strain. But its green streak is irrepressible. Nearly 40 per cent of the solar energy patents were registered in California. It is home to the nation's leading electric carmakers.
Venture capitalist Vinod Khosla has marshalled a US$1.1 billion kitty for clean energy start-ups.
ExxonMobil and La Jolla-based Synthetic Genomics are pooling US$600 million to develop fuel from algae.
Mr Levy sees California as both technology leader and policy leader. 'By showing how to make appliances or buildings more efficient or how to clean up refine-ries, we make it easier to pass fe-deral legislation and develop a market for national or worldwide products.'
Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
I REFER to the report, ''VIP trees' symbols of commitment to Garden City' (Nov 26), on the tradition of tree planting dating back to 1963 started by then Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.
Over the years, political leaders have exhorted us to develop a sense of belonging and pride in the community and care for the environment.
Residents in Marsiling Rise have taken this advice to heart and spent a great deal of time nurturing the trees that grow in our locality. For more than a decade, these residents have nurtured these trees, including starfruit, stunted mango, soursop, chicku, jackfruit, rambutan, moringa, sugarcane and banana. They are home to munias, bulbuls, golden orioles, swifts, sunbirds, koels, jambu parrots, and even woodpeckers.
Many residents, including me, were greatly distressed by Sembawang Town Council's decision to cordon off a large number of these beautiful trees and plants, designated for removal because of 'unauthorised planting on turf'. These mature trees, which are around 10 to 15 years old and include the evergreen neem tree - like the one planted recently by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong - have been targeted to be cut down by the town council.
About a month ago, 20 of us residents appealed for only selective culling of those trees that pose a threat to health or property, as an alternative solution to cutting down all the trees.
The town council responded in a generic e-mail inviting us to use the communal garden, allocated to residents 'for in-ground planting' and 'community bonding and for maintaining the aesthetics of the estate'.
This official gardening spot is completely fenced off and under lock and key.
Since then, our repeated appeals have been met with stony silence, despite several attempts to invite the town council to engage with us in person and to understand the personal stories behind the Marsiling Rise trees and why they are of great importance to residents.
How can Singaporeans and residents develop a sense of responsibility and belonging to the nation when our efforts are discouraged in this manner?
More important, the removal of these trees - a rare and educational thicket in the urban jungle - will result in a loss to Singapore's garden city. Every tree plays a valuable role in helping us reduce our energy needs, offsetting our carbon footprint and slowing down global warming.
Do trees have to be planted by VIPs to be sacred?
Dr Praema Raghavan-Gilbert
Straits Times Forum 5 Dec 09;
WE THANK Mr Narayana Narayana ('Floods a freak event, or could we have tracked it?', last Saturday) and Mr Thomas Lee ('Floods - I would have thought such events were well within our ability to prevent or minimise', Tuesday) for their letters on the Bukit Timah flood.
The heavy rain in the Bukit Timah area on Nov19 was exceptionally intense. In just two hours, 110mm of rain fell, of which 92mm fell from 1.20pm to 1.50pm. This was equivalent to about 40 per cent of the rainfall for the entire month of November falling within the half an hour.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) issued a warning at 12.45pm that day to alert the public to expect heavy rain in the afternoon over many areas of Singapore. However, the exact locations where exceptional rainfall is expected are difficult to predict in any weather forecast. PUB also issued flash-flood advisories to residents and shop owners in low-lying areas in October and to the media on Nov 16 as part of its monsoon preparations.
The huge amount of rain within such a short time that day caused Bukit Timah Phase 1 Diversion Canal to fill up and overflow. However, Bukit Timah Phase 2 Diversion Canal which channels stormwater from the middle part of Bukit Timah to Marina Reservoir via Kallang River did not overflow.
PUB had already initiated plans to deepen and widen Bukit Timah Phase 1 Diversion Canal before this incident. While this upgrading work was intended primarily to cater to increased stormwater runoff from new developments in the next 10 years, it will also help to mitigate the extent and severity of flooding of other intense storms. Works on the first stage are slated for completion by 2012.
Ten fast-track projects were also recently completed to alleviate flooding in flood-prone areas, and five major flood-alleviation projects are ongoing. Flood-prone areas in Singapore have been reduced from 3,200ha in the 1970s to about 79ha today.
In land-scarce Singapore, it will not be cost- effective to build a large and extensive drainage system that caters to all extremities. A balance is needed between setting aside more land for such infrastructure and other requirements for Singapore's development.
PUB will regularly review and improve drainage infrastructure across Singapore to ensure an effective drainage network. Such continuous efforts will help further mitigate the risk of floods.
Tan Nguan Sen
Director (Catchment and Waterways)
PUB
Ms Wong Chin Ling
Head (Operational Services Department)
Meteorological Services
National Environment Agency
Floods
Straits Times Forum 1 Dec 09;
'I would have thought such events were well within our ability to prevent or minimise.'
MR THOMAS LEE: 'I refer to last Saturday's letter, 'Floods a freak event, or could we have tracked it?' I would have thought such events were well within our ability to prevent or minimise. In this age of computer simulation, areas likely to be affected could easily be mapped out. When heavy rain occurs, with input from meteorological experts, such spots should be identified quickly and warnings sent out via telcos, TV and radio. That is total defence.'
Channel NewsAsia 4 Dec 09;
SINGAPORE: The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers thwarted an attempt to bring in 60 live birds without a permit at the Woodlands Checkpoint on Thursday night.
The birds were packed in plastic containers and paper boxes, and hidden under the floor mats and seats of a Singapore-registered car.
The officers sensed something amiss when they heard flapping sounds from under the floor mats.
A total of 40 live red-whiskered bulbul birds, also known as Jambul birds and 20 live Magpies were discovered.
The 40-year-old Singaporean driver, claimed ownership of the birds. He said he had bought the birds for himself from a pet shop in Johor.
The case was referred to the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) for further investigations.
The import of live birds without an AVA permit is a violation of the Animals and Birds Act. It carries a maximum penalty of S$10,000 and imprisonment of up to one year.
- CNA/sc
The Star 5 Dec 09;
KUCHING: A 50-man expedition will set off for the Pulong Tau National Park in northern Sarawak on Monday to survey whether the rare Sumatran rhinoceros still roam the area.
State Forest Department director Datuk Len Talif Salleh said the Sumatran rhinoceros, a species under Sarawak’s Wildlife Protection Ordinance, was last reported to have been seen in the upper Limbang area such as Sungai Adang, Long Seridan and Batu Lawi in the 1950s.
However, he said a grainy image captured by a camera trap near Batu Lawi recently, seemed to be that of the rhinoceros.“It will be like searching for a needle in a haystack,” said Len Talif.
“Ten cameras have been set up in the area to try to capture images of the rhinoceros and we will be going to verify its presence,” he said when launching the expedition at the Samajaya Park in Stutong here yesterday.
The 10-day expedition, organised by the Forest Department, will comprise members from the department, WWF Malaysia and timber company Samling.
Len Talif said the Sumatran rhinoceros was currently known to roam Sabah, although a few were believed to still be surviving in Sarawak and Kalimantan, Indonesia.
“Its actual status is yet to be known and the animals may keep crossing the borders between the states.
“It is hoped that this wildlife expedition will be able to find out more about its actual population, home range and habitat,” he said. “It will also enable us to gather more information on other mammal species in the area.”
Expedition organising chairman Sapuan Ahmad said the team would assess the status of the rhinoceros at the Batu Lawi area within the park and to study the distribution of salt licks and food sources for the species. “However, we cannot guarantee that the team will bring good news.”
Expedition to track down rhinos
Sulok Tawie, New Straits Times 5 Dec 09;
KUCHING: A 50-member expedition will comb the Pulong Tau national park in northern Sarawak for the Sumatran rhinoceros, last seen over 50 years ago.
The team comprising personnel from the Sarawak Forest Department, WWF Malaysia and timber company Samling Sdn Bhd will begin the 10-day search on Monday.
"The last reported sightings of the animal were at Sungai Adang, Long Seridan and Batu Lawi in the Upper Limbang area in the 1950s," state Forest Deparment director Datuk Len Talif Salleh told reporters after the launch of the expedition at the Samajaya Forest Park yesterday.
"We are not sure whether there are any rhinos still roaming in Pulong Tau, though footprints were found near the foot of Gunong Batu Lawi in 1996," he said.
But since then, he said, no follow-up studies have been done.
A recent picture thought to be of a rhinoceros taken by a camera trap near Batu Lawi last year was too grainy because of the poor quality of the camera to make a proper identification.
With the help of the Sarawak Timber Association, the Forest Department now has 10 quality cameras that have already been set up near the foot of Batu Lawi.
He said there is no historical record of a rhino population in Sarawak.
The animal was only known to roam in Sabah.
The Pulong Tau national park was gazetted in 2005 to protect 59,817 hectares of pristine rain forest.
Nelson Benjamina and K.C. Chan, The Star 5 Dec 09;
JOHOR BARU: About 3,000 licensed gun owners in the state have been reminded not to misuse their weapons including using them to hunt for animals in estates in Johor.
Deputy police chief Senior Asst Comm I Datuk Jalaluddin Abdul Rahman said it was an offence to hunt without a valid permit.
“We were told that the Wildlife and National Parks Department (Perhilitan) had not issued permits since Feb 14 last year,” he said, adding that, as such, all hunting in the state was deemed to be illegal.
SAC I Jalaluddin said that police had so far arrested two people in Kota Tinggi this year for illegal hunting.
The latest arrest was made on Nov 19 when a 70-year-old man was held in Kluang for hunting wild boars at a Felda estate in Mersing in October with three other men, he said.
He said that police began investigations following a report from Felda settlers who alleged that four men had gone into the estate and hunted 13 wild boars over two days.
The men allegedly left the carcasses behind and this caused a stench.
The villagers then complained to the Tengku Mahkota of Johor, Tengku Ibrahim Ismail Sultan Iskandar, he said, adding that police then began their investigations which led to the arrest of the man in Kluang.
SAC I Jalaluddin said that police seized the man’s gun under the Firearms Act.
He said that police were still looking for the three other men to assist in investigations.
“The Tengku Mahkota is very concerned about such activities and wants them to stop,” he added.
Daily Express 4 Dec 09;
Kota Kinabalu: Bird-watching has the potential to be a money making activity as well as a major tourist attraction in Sabah, said Tourism, Culture and Environment Minister Datuk Masidi Manjun here on Thursday.
He said bird watching has been a popular activity in the West where the turnover from this field alone reaches US$2 billion a year.
"Over there (in the US) this activity is considered an industry. People would flock and stand in line for hours, just to get a glimpse of birds which actually are a common specie over here in Sabah," he said.
He said that currently there are 850,000 members of a bird watching group in the UK, making it among the most profitable business there, where a bird lovers guide earns a steady income of US$100 per day.
Resorts and other tourism operators in the State should seriously look into bird watching as Sabah is one of the few places that is rich with diverse species of birds that are not found anywhere else in the world, he said.
Approximately, 300 species of birds have been documented within the Kinabalu National Park, which is more than half the total bird species in Sabah (514) and roughly half the entire number of bird species present in the island of Borneo, he said.
"Operators should take this opportunity as it doesn't involve a high budget to run a bird watching activity. All you need is a few tents and a guide who knows a lot about birds," he said.
Apart from giving more profit to the operators, the bird watching business would also boost tourism in the State, as well as in Malaysia as a whole, said Masidi.
He was speaking at the closing of a 'Hotel Management, Hotel Operation and Internet Marketing' course organised by the Malaysian Budget Hotel Association (MBHA) here.
He urged the operators of budget hotels, which are rated as 2 star and below, to buff up on certain aspects of their services and facilities.
Masidi said the number one complaint of foreign guests who stayed at budget hotels here in Sabah is that the toilets and bathrooms are filthy.
"Foreigners are very particular about toilets. Unlike the locals, foreigners prefer to have a sitting toilet and dry washing area. That is why the operators should identify which type of guests they have the most and build facilities that suit their majority guests.
"People staying in a one or two star hotels are usually those travelling light and mostly backpackers. Make all the facilities simple, to be enjoyed by simple people," he said.
According to Masidi, another aspect that should be improved on is the cleanliness of towels and bed sheets in the rooms.
"There is no excuse for operators not to wash the towels and bedsheets once they have been used," he said, adding that another complaint he gets is that towels and sheets provided by budget hotels are smelly and stained.
Apart from this, he said the management of the hotel should remind their staff to be passionate about their jobs, and to achieve this, the workers should be paid a salary worthy of their services to the company.
"It is sad to know that there are hotels in the State that pay their staff only RM180 per month. This is against humanitarian values.
"If you pay your employees well, they will take care of your business well and give you twice the level of service you require of them. This is a simple arithmetic," he said.
He told the operators to employ people who are friendly and chatty as front office personnel and not to employ those who are not well versed in Bahasa Malaysia and English, as this could convey a negative perception on the whole hotel organisation.
He also told the operators to train their staff to multi-task as this step could reduce the cost of operation for hotels that have one staff performing only one job.
"Multi-tasking should not be too complicated. A simple task like changing the light bulb or making a cup of coffee could be considered as a multi-task skill for a hotel employee," he said.
Apart from this, Masidi urged the hotel operators to start setting up web sites to promote their hotels as what has long been practised in the developed countries.
"Foreign tourists prefer to book online rather than walk in, as online bookings are commonly cheaper and involves discounts and rebates which are not offered off the reception counter," he said.
Masidi also encouraged the MBHA to liaise with the Minister of Tourism to provide for certification for all its members in order to give more confidence for tourists to patronise their hotels.
"In the future, the Sabah Tourism Board would only promote those hotels under the membership, and those who refuse to join and comply to the standard and regulations of the certification would walk on their own," he said. Also present at the ceremony were the President of MBHA, Datuk Dr Hj Muhamad Nasir Hj Hamzah, Vice Presidents of MBHA, Datuk Verus Aman and Mohd Hasan Hamzah, and Chairman of MBHA Sabah Chapter, Albert Shim.
Matt Walker, BBC News 4 Dec 09;
The Galapagos archipelago has already been transformed by global climate changes and human activity, a report has concluded.
A series of events, including the 1982 El Nino, overfishing and the appearance of urchins that destroy coral, has altered the islands' marine ecosystems.
At least 45 Galapagos species have now disappeared or are facing extinction.
That suggests future climate change driven by human activity will have an major impact on the islands' wildlife.
The report, published in the journal Global Change Biology, details the conclusions of a scientific meeting convened by the Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment, the Galapagos National Park Service and environmental and wildlife groups including Conservation International and WWF, to assess the vulnerability of the islands to climate change.
It found that the islands have yet to recover from the intense El Nino climate event of 1982 to 1982, which triggered abnormal weather conditions.
That event destroyed coral reefs in the archipelago, many of which had persisted for at least 400 years.
However, overfishing significantly weakened the marine ecosystem's ability to recover from the devastation caused by the El Nino.
In particular, fishermen removed so many large predatory fishes and lobsters from the islands' seas, that huge numbers of sea urchins were able to colonise the area.
They then overgrazed the coral, damaging it further and preventing it re-establishing.
As a result, 45 species are now globally threatened.
All live on the Galapagos, and most are found nowhere else.
These 45 species include five mammals, six birds, five reptiles, six fishes, one echinoderm, seven corals, six brown algae and nine red algae.
Among those is the coastal-living Mangrove finch, a species once studied by Charles Darwin.
Fewer than 200 remain, all of which are dependant on mangroves that are susceptible to further climate change.
Other threatened species include the Galapagos sea lion, marine iguana, Galapagos penguin and pink cup coral ( Tubastraea floreana ), which only survives in a few colonies.
Two species have not been formally evaluated, but are thought to have already gone extinct.
The Galapagos damsel ( Azurina eupalama ), which only lived in the archipelago's waters, eating plankton, was once common.
But after 1983 it has not been sighted.
As yet, no marine fish has formally been determined to be extinct, highlighting the impact that climate changes and overfishing have had on the region.
"The Galapagos, the Rosetta Stone of evolution, is now teaching us about the far-reaching impacts of climate change on ocean ecosystems," says report co-author Professor Les Kaufmann from Boston University, US.
"Nowhere on Earth are the combined impacts of climate change and overfishing more clearly defined than in the Galapagos Islands," says co-author Sylvia Earle of the US National Geographic Society.
"Decades of data link recent fishing pressures to disruption of the islands' fine-tuned systems, making them more vulnerable to natural, and anthropogenic changes in climate."
Audrey Mcavoy, Associated Press Yahoo News 4 Dec 09;
HONOLULU – Marine sanctuary officials planned to return to Hawaii waters with modified equipment Friday to try to cut loose a young humpback whale entangled in several hundred yards of heavy plastic rope.
The rope runs through the animal's mouth, around its head and behind its blowhole, and is twisted in a knot.
It could kill the yearling humpback if it stays in too long, said Ed Lyman, marine mammal response manager with the Hawaiian Islands Humpback Whale National Marine Sanctuary. Right now, however, the animal appears healthy.
A whale-watching cruise spotted the entangled animal Tuesday in waters off Maui. The next day, about a hundred yards of the yellow, polypropylene line came free, but several hundred yards are still attached.
Lyman's crew used a knife attached to a pole stretching out about 10 to 15 feet to try to cut the rope Wednesday, but couldn't reach it. Officials stayed out of the water Thursday because of windy weather and because the whale was farther offshore.
The crew planned to return Friday with a pole specially fashioned by Lyman that's more than 24 feet long. They're able to follow the whale's whereabouts using a tracking device that they attached to the rope Tuesday.
"If we can cut one side of the knot, then we can pull hard on the other side and try to pull it out of the whale's mouth," Lyman said Thursday.
Complicating the task is the fact that two adult whales are traveling with the juvenile. The adult whales — believed to be the juvenile's mother and the mother's escort — have been sandwiching the young whale by almost constantly swimming on either side of it.
Another difficulty is that the whale's mouth is normally submerged unless it's coming up for air.
"They come up from the nose, take that breath, clear that blowhole, and basically there's only a second or two there," Lyman said.
It's not clear where the rope came from. Lyman's guess is that it got caught in the whale's mouth when the animal was feeding in Alaskan or other northern waters. Judging by the wounds on the whale's body, it appears the rope got stuck in its mouth a month or two ago.
The whale could probably eat if it needed to, but the animals tend to fast for long periods this time of year.
About 10,000 humpback whales come to Hawaii every winter to breed and calve after spending the summer feeding in northern waters. The whales are an endangered species, though their numbers have grown in recent years.
A five-point plan to turn back the tide and save the seas from death
Frank Pope Times Online 3 Dec 09;
High-tech geoengineering might one day just be able to return atmospheric carbon dioxide to below 350 parts per million, at which level coral reefs can persist. But long before then the multiplying effects of changing climate and human pressure will have crippled marine ecosystems. For the ocean to survive, we need to throw it five lifelines by doing the following:
1: Establishing marine reserves
Less than 0.01 per cent of the ocean lies within reserves, but reserves do work: they boost biomass and biodiversity and allow ecosystems to grow resilient. Around the British-controlled Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean, for example, the seas are not part of a formal reserve but have effectively been protected since 1965 by the presence of the US base at Diego Garcia; reefs here have been able to recover quickly from bleaching events.
2: Ending the freedom of the seas
Only by zoning and controlling access to the ocean can it be rescued. The present situation has led to a depletion of the ocean’s biomass, something which is as important as biodiversity for the resilience of ecosystems. For instance, 95 per cent of filter-feeders have been removed from the ocean. The North Sea and our estuaries once had clear waters full of oyster beds; restoring even a fraction of these will lead to cleaner water and an increase in sunlight for seabed organisms.
3: Controlling fishing fleets
The fishing industry is destroying essential biodiversity and biomass because of huge subsidies and overcapacity. Ending both will mean more fish in the sea as well as on the plate, while cutting the amount of fuel used to catch them.
4: Banning bottom trawling
A widespread ban would allow seabed habitats to recover. The hidden complexity of seabed life is a key component of the ocean’s ability to recycle nutrients.
5: Controlling pollution
Agricultural fertilisers being washed into rivers are a major cause of the growth in deoxygenated dead zones in coastal waters worldwide, and plastics are pulling poisons into food webs.
www.honoluluadvertiser.com 3 Dec 09;
The Department of Land and Natural Resources has suspended the installation of concrete artificial reef forms while it investigates the extent of damage that may have been caused to live coral while crews were working to expand an artificial reef off Maui.
Yesterday, DLNR started submerging 1,400 concrete "Z" module forms to add to the artificial reef located a half mile off Maui at depths of 77 to 120 feet.
State biologists have determined that 2 to 3 percent of the submerged forms may have landed on live coral.
DLNR has begun an investigation into the extent of possible damage, and the factors leading to this incident.
WWF 4 Dec 09;
Tul̩ar, Madagascar РAn unprecedented combination of climate change and increasing human pressures could have a devastating effect on coral reefs in the near shore areas of Southern Madagascar.
A study commissioned by WWF modeled current threats to the coral reef system to determine its future vulnerability to climate change.
The Tuléar reef is the third largest in the world, and one of only five large continuous reef systems in the world.
The reef ecosystem houses an extreme abundance of different marine species including nearly 400 fish species and over 300 coral species. Whales and dolphins pass through the reef system and marine turtles graze on the reefs and nest on the surrounding beaches. The blue spotted bamboo shark, which is endemic to Madagascar, is another species that might suffer when temperatures rise and fish stock dwindles.
People who depend on fishery on their livelihood, the majority of the region’s population, would also suffer severely.
“A destruction of the reef would leave tens of thousands of people in jeopardy, with severe impact on their main source of income or adequate food supplies,” said Gaëtan Tovondrainy, head of the marine project with WWF Tuléar.
“With increasing global temperatures, the corals within Tuléar reef could succumb to massive bleaching events and become infested with green algae. The latter would smother the coral and therefore reduce feeding opportunities for fish. “
According to the study the Tuléar reef ecosystem is one of the most vulnerable sites in the western Indian Ocean. While some of the reefs around the smaller islands are in good conditions, others near estuaries are degraded from the sediments caused by deforestation upstream. These human pressures act to make the reefs more vulnerable to the threats of climate change.
The global phenomenon of coral bleaching in 1998 primarily affected the reefs in the northern part of the region such as the Seychelles and Comoros. But nowadays climate change affects other reefs as well.
“Increased bleaching of corals and green algae invasions are two direct effects of climate change on these important ecosystems and they can be seen clearly around Tuléar” Tovondrainy said.
The reef system is vital for the community’s survival. This region is home to people from the group who traditionally migrate up and down the coast in line with seasonal changes. Nearly 20,000 traditional fishermen and 15,000 canoes operate on the Tulear reef system.
This traditional form of resource use is being threatened and migrants from inland areas affected by drought and deforestation increase competition for resources.
“It is poor countries like Madagascar that have contributed the least to the problem but will suffer the worst consequences. If we can’t stop climate change, the collapse of the Tuléar reef system is just one of many severe consequences for the local population” says Tiana Ramahaleo, head of the WWF Conservation Science and Species Programme in Madagascar. “That’s why we desperately hope for a good deal in Copenhagen”
Food manufacturers in Europe called for greener palm oil. The growers supplied it. So why aren't supermarkets buying it?
Fred Pearce, guardian.co.uk 4 Dec 09;
Deep in the rainforest, a squawk fills the air, discordant but strangely familiar. It is the sound of sanctimonious humbug from Europe's food industry.
For European food retailers stand accused of hypocrisy over buying palm oil from tropical countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia, where the widely used edible oil is often grown on land that once was rainforest. Many of them promised to buy sustainable palm oil if it became available.
Now, though, their bluff has been called – by the growers themselves.
For six years, many of Europe's leading food manufacturers and retailers have been members of an association called the Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO).
They wanted, they said, to ensure that they could buy palm oil – and the huge number of products containing it – which had been produced without destroying rainforests.
The food manufacturing giant, Unilever, started the RSPO in 2003, and dozens of food manufacturers and retailers, particularly in Europe, joined. So, less visibly, did some palm oil producers.
As demand for the oil rose for everything from margarine and shampoo to biscuits and ice-cream, the pressure grew to turn this well-meaning talking shop into a real force for change: to end forest destruction.
Ministers in Copenhagen next week will hear that deforestation is responsible for up to a fifth of CO2 emissions – and palm oil production, especially in Indonesia, is a leading incentive to tear down the remaining forests.
In response to that pressure, the food industry said it wanted very badly to use sustainable palm and would do so – just as soon as it was available. Their allies, including the environmental group WWF, which first set up the round table with Unilever, gratefully backed them. The problem, it seemed, was south-east Asian palm-oil growers.
Then just a year ago, something remarkable happened. The first boatloads of "sustainable" palm oil, certified as coming from land not recently deforested, arrived at Rotterdam. The growers were doing what their purchasers had been demanding.
But there have been very few takers. Six months ago I reported that sales were just 15,000 tonnes.
When I checked the latest stats with WWF this week, sales had risen – to somewhere between 175,000 and 250,000 tonnes. But that is a tiny fraction of what is available. Producers have the capacity to ship 1.75m tonnes of sustainable palm oil a year – getting on for 10% of total global palm oil production. But only 14% of that 1.75m tonnes was bought in the first year.
Why? "Sustainable" palm oil commands, as you would expect, a premium price. Food manufacturers know all about how to sell us green products at a premium price. But will they pay more themselves? It seems not.
And now the producers are getting wise to the reluctance of their customers to stick to their pledges. According to Adam Harrison of WWF Scotland, who sits on the RSPO board, producers are cutting production and mothballing mills that are certified for sustainable production.
This is a tragedy. Rich western corporations demand the sustainability stuff and flaunt their green credentials to customers in the process. Developing world producers, though suspicious, start producing. Rich westerners check the price tag and walk away. Meanwhile, the rainforests continue to disappear.
Who, specifically, should we blame? I asked WWF, which just produced its first "scorecard" (pdf) of sustainability for the 59 leading European retailers and manufacturers buying palm oil.
The scorecard is generous. Companies get marks just for being a member of RSPO, and for paperwork activity, like having plans to go sustainable one day.
Even so, the scores make depressing reading. Top marks would be 29. Sainsbury's and Marks & Spencer get quite close, partly through stipulating sustainable palm oil in some of their own-brand goods. They scored 26 and 25.5 respectively. Unilever, Cadbury, Asda and the Body Shop also get more than 20 marks. But even for the top scorers, "in most cases certified sustainable palm oil is still being used in only very small quantities," the WWF says.
Even on this indulgent scoring system, more than half the companies get below 10 marks. These include Waitrose, Lidl, Boots, Danone ("sustainability is part of our DNA") and Associated British Foods (makers of Kingsmill and Allinson bread).
None of these poor scorers are buying any sustainably produced palm oil, according to WWF, which has given all the listed companies a chance to correct the findings.
Waitrose's derisory 8.5 marks came as a surprise. It is part of the John Lewis Partnership, which promotes its support for the Prince's Rainforest Project, set up by the Prince of Wales to "make rainforests worth more alive than dead".
I asked them what had gone wrong. Nothing, it said. "We have committed to using only certified sustainable palm oil in our own-label products by the end of 2012. We will achieve a quarter of the conversion within the next year."
Maybe the lumbering beasts of the jungle are just slow to get moving. But, by the time they get their act together, will there be any rainforest left to protect?
This column will be watching their progress.
Posts
visitors since Nov 07