Best of our wild blogs: 24 Jan 18

3 Feb (Sat): Learn about Mangrove Restoration from the experts!
Celebrating Singapore Shores!

What do the villagers think of Restoring Ubin’s Mangroves?
Restore Ubin Mangroves (R.U.M.) Initiative

Read more!

Large greenhouse gas emitters voice concerns as Government irons out details of carbon tax

Aqil Haziq Mahmud Channel NewsAsia 23 Jan 18;

SINGAPORE: Instead of being charged a flat rate, large emitters of greenhouse gases have called for the upcoming carbon tax to be based on whether their emissions meet industry-specific benchmarks.

At a consultation session on Tuesday (Jan 23), 40 companies – including those from the power generation and petrochemical industries – voiced concerns about how the carbon tax might be implemented.

Mr Yu Tat Ming, chief executive of PacificLight, a power generation company, said a benchmark system will give companies more incentive to reduce emissions.

“If it is targeted based on a certain benchmark, it can be more differentiating,” he said. “Any marginal carbon will attract heavier tax. That will encourage industries to take action, to meet the target.”

Likewise, another stakeholder said the tax should be charged based on “how far you are away” from the benchmark. “If you charge a flat tax across all carbons, there is very little incentive and margin to improve energy efficiency.”

The carbon tax, which will be implemented next year, is just one in a range of measures aimed at reducing emissions intensity in Singapore by 36 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030 under the Paris Agreement.

It will target large direct emitters, defined as those that emit 25,000 or more tonnes of greenhouse gases annually. This is expected to affect 30 to 40 emitters operating in Singapore.

The Government is also looking at charging a flat rate of between S$10 and S$20 per tonne of greenhouse gas emissions.

But without the “clear visibility” of a benchmark, Mr Yu said, “we don’t know what we are trying to achieve”.

“How much should we improve in order to enable the Government to achieve the target?” he asked. “Because for any improvement, there has to be an investment made. And as a commercial entity, we need to calculate the return on investment.”

If the tax fails to reduce emissions, another stakeholder added, the Government will end up increasing rates across the board, “pushing us down the path of international un-competitiveness”. Others noted that Singapore’s neighbours do not impose carbon tax.

Environment and Water Resources Minister Masagos Zulkifli acknowledged such concerns, noting that companies want the carbon tax to be implemented fairly and simply, without a “cost burden”.

While the Government has studied various systems, the carbon tax has to “finally nudge our companies to transform towards a low-carbon economy”, he said. “This is not an easy thing to design because we must not kill our competitiveness.”

Fixing the tax price is also a challenge, Mr Masagos noted, given the “inevitable” trickle-down effect on consumers.

“If it is too low, people and industries will not transform – behaviour will not change,” he said. “But if it is too high, industries will just relocate, people will suffer too much.”

Nevertheless, the Government will ensure that companies do not pass the “wrong amount of cost to consumers” by encouraging competition and giving consumers a choice, he said.

As for the companies, Mr Masagos said, the Government will make the process of determining the carbon tax price transparent to them.

“Therefore, we’ll try as much as possible to put as much certainty as we can so that we do not price ourselves out,” he said. "But we have to ensure that the right kind of technology and processes are brought to Singapore, so that it doesn’t add up to more emissions.”

Sustainable Energy Association of Singapore chairman Edwin Khew said it is ready to help the Government identify energy efficiency benchmarks for various emission systems.

“We have a good idea of what the different benchmarks are,” he said. “The thing is whether it fits in with what the Government wants.”

With next month’s Budget announcement on the final details of the carbon tax fast approaching, Mr Khew feels the Government would have had enough time to consider the feedback.

“I think they’ve already gone and done a lot of studies and investigations, so when (Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat) announces what level of carbon tax the industry will be facing, he should have enough to decide,” he added.

“It’s not going to be cast in stone, so something that you can introduce and adjust as you go along, as more information will be coming in to help them adapt to the situation in Singapore.”

Source: CNA/hz


Large Singapore emitters call for benchmarks as carbon tax looms
LOUISA TANG Today Online 24 Jan 18;

SINGAPORE — As they steel themselves to pay a carbon tax from next year, major greenhouse-gas emitters called for the Government to set emissions benchmarks for each industry at a pre-Budget consultation session on Tuesday (Jan 23).

Some of the 44 participants at the session, which included representatives of petrochemical and energy giants, said benchmarks would provide clarity on the standards that large emitters should meet.

Others felt emitters who met the benchmarks should not have to pay a carbon tax, reiterating concerns that Singapore’s push to go low-carbon could hurt its competitiveness.

The tax, first announced in Budget 2017, is expected to apply to 30 to 40 emitters such as power stations that emit 25,000 or more tonnes of greenhouse gases a year. The Government is expected to table the Carbon Pricing Bill in Parliament in the first quarter of this year, and is looking to charge between S$10 and S$20 per tonne of greenhouse gas under a credit-based system.

The carbon tax is among Singapore’s measures to meet its target of cutting emissions intensity by 36 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030, under the global Paris Agreement.

Standard benchmarks will provide clear targets to different industries, which generate different amounts of greenhouse gases, said power generation company PacificLight Power’s chief executive Yu Tat Ming.

His company currently supplies electricity to industries and commercial buildings.

“At the moment, (the power industry) does not know what to do, how much we should reduce in order to achieve the 36 per cent target. We have no visibility on that. Likewise, probably the petrochemical industry want to have a benchmark so that they know how much investment they need to make, to meet the target,” said Mr Yu.

Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli acknowledged the feedback from companies.

“We understand that it will be a difficult transition and the Government will do as much as it can to transition companies towards the low-carbon economy,” he said. “We do need to be competitive but you have to take in the reality where the world is moving, and we better do it as fast as we can to gain competitive advantage over others.”

On whether the Government would consider only taxing companies that exceed benchmarks, Mr Masagos said the authorities have “studied many systems of carbon tax, including whether we should do a trading system or offset system”, and wanted something “simple” and “fair”.

The National Climate Change Secretariat will be announcing its mechanism, said Mr Masagos, without providing further details.

The carbon tax is likely to be passed on to consumers. It could mean a household living in a four-room flat, which pays S$72 a month in electricity bills, could see an increase of S$1.70 to S$3.30 a month. The carbon tax component should be reflected in consumers’ electricity bills, said Mr Yu.

There is a need for more awareness about climate change, Mr Masagos added.

Daily temperatures in Singapore could increase by 1.4°C to 4.6°C by 2100 due to climate change. Heavy rainfall events will be more intense and frequent, while mean sea levels could increase by up to about 1m.

Asked about recent reports that three local banks – DBS Bank, OCBC Bank and United Overseas Bank – were financing coal projects in the region, Mr Masagos would only say the reports indicated a world more attuned to products and services in keeping with a low-carbon economy.

“And whether you are a bank, (generation company) or refinery, this is going to be the demand by an international market. And therefore it’s important for us to make this transition. I think most of the companies that are here recognise this. In fact, many of them have already gone (on) the journey,” he said.

Coal is a major source of greenhouse-gas emissions.

Involve consumers in conserving energy: Power firms
Upcoming carbon tax targets large emitters but green message must reach end users too
Audrey Tan Straits Times 24 Jann 18;

In 2019, a carbon tax will be implemented to spur large emitters to become greener in their operations.

But industry players say the need to conserve energy has to filter down to consumers too.

Mr Yu Tat Ming, chief executive of power generation company PacificLight Power, said: "The purpose of the carbon tax is to reduce Singapore's overall emissions. It sends a signal to large emitters that they need to become more efficient in their operations, but the green message should be reinforced among the end users too."

Citing the example of how a water conservation tax forms part of a household's water bill, he said there should be a similar tariff to promote energy conservation.

Mr Yu was speaking yesterday at a pre-Budget consultation session on the carbon tax, organised by the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources ahead of the Budget on Feb 19, when details of the carbon tax are expected to be revealed.

Mr Yu was among 44 participants from 40 different organisations, including industry players, non-government groups and academics, who were at the consultation. It was also attended by Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli.

Speaking to the media on the sidelines of the event, Mr Masagos said: "Inevitably, a carbon tax imposed on power generation companies... will somewhat trickle down into the economy."

But he added that the Government will look into implementing mechanisms to ensure costs are not excessively passed on to consumers. One way to do this would be to promote competition in the industry, or encourage companies to look into cleaner alternatives such as solar power, Mr Masagos said.

Plans to impose a carbon tax of between $10 and $20 on each tonne of greenhouse gas emissions were first floated at last year's Budget.

The tax will be applied to power stations and other large direct emitters which produce more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent of greenhouse gases a year. There are currently 30 to 40 such large emitters, mainly from the petroleum refining, chemicals and semiconductor sectors.

During yesterday's session, industry players acknowledged that while a carbon tax is necessary to help Singapore meet its climate targets under the Paris Agreement, it should be implemented in a way that will not erode competition.

Among the suggestions given was to channel revenue raised from the carbon tax into a kitty that could be used to fund energy efficiency initiatives or research into green technologies, or used for incentives to companies that do well.

Mr Edwin Khew, chairman of the Sustainable Energy Association of Singapore, said revenue collected by the Government from the carbon tax could be from $300 million to $600 million a year. "This money can be used to incentivise those that need to improve in terms of energy efficiency, or help them invest in new equipment and new processes."

Asked if this would be fair to companies comparatively more energy-efficient, he said the focus should be at the national level, instead of individual companies: "Ultimately, this would make less energy-efficient companies more competitive and help keep jobs in Singapore."

Under the Paris Agreement, Singapore has pledged to reduce its emissions intensity by 36 per cent from the 2005 levels, come 2030.

Emissions intensity is the amount of greenhouse gases emitted to achieve each dollar of gross domestic product. Singapore has also pledged to stop any increase to its greenhouse gas emissions by around 2030.

Conserving energy is down to consumers too, say power firms
Audrey Tan Straits Times 23 Jan 18;

SINGAPORE - A carbon tax will soon be implemented to spur large emitters to become greener in their operations. But industry players say the need to conserve energy has to filter down to consumers too.

This was the view of Mr Yu Tat Ming, chief executive of power generation company PacificLight Power, who said: "The purpose of the carbon tax is to reduce Singapore's overall emissions. It sends a signal to large emitters that they need to become more efficient in their operations, but the green message should be reinforced among end users too."

Citing the example of how a water conservation tariff forms part of a household's water bill, he said there should be a similar tariff to promote energy conservation.

Mr Yu was speaking on Tuesday (Jan 23) at a pre-Budget consultation session on the carbon tax, organised by the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (Mewr) ahead of the Budget on Feb 19, when details of the carbon tax are expected to be revealed.

Mr Yu was among 44 participants from 40 different organisations, including industry players, non-government groups and academics, who were at the consultation. It was also attended by Minister for the Environment and Water Resources Masagos Zulkifli.

Speaking to the media on the sidelines of the event, Mr Masagos said: "Inevitably, a carbon tax imposed on power generation companies, which generate electricity, will somewhat trickle down into the economy."

But he added that the Government will look into implementing mechanisms to ensure that costs are not excessively passed on to consumers. One way to do this would be to promote competition in the industry, or encourage companies to look into cleaner alternatives such as solar power, Mr Masagos said.

Masagos Zulkifli speaking about the carbon tax

Plans to impose a carbon tax of between $10 and $20 on each tonne of greenhouse gas emission was first floated at last year's Budget. The tax will be applied on power stations and other large direct emitters which produce more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent of greenhouse gases a year. There are currently 30 to 40 of such large emitters, mainly from the petroleum refining, chemicals and semiconductor sectors.

During Tuesday's session, industry players acknowledged that while a carbon tax is necessary to help Singapore meet its climate targets under the Paris Agreement, it should be implemented in a way that will not erode competition.

Among the suggestions given was the channelling of revenue raised from the carbon tax into a kitty that could be used to fund energy-efficiency initiatives or research into green technologies, or given as incentives to companies that do well.

Mr Edwin Khew, chairman of the Sustainable Energy Association of Singapore, said revenue collected by the Government from the carbon tax could be in the range of $300 million to $600 million a year. "This money can be used to incentivise those that need to improve in terms of energy efficiency, or help them invest in new equipment and new processes."

Asked if this would be fair to companies that are comparatively more energy efficient, Mr Khew said the focus should be at the national level, instead of individual companies. "Ultimately, this would make companies with less efficient plans more competitive, and help keep jobs in Singapore."

Another suggestion was for industry-specific benchmarks to be set for the large emitters, which span a range of industries, including petrochemical, pharmaceutical and generation companies. This would give each company greater clarity on how much to reduce their emissions by, instead of relying on national level projections.

Under the Paris Agreement, Singapore has pledged to reduce its emissions intensity by 36 per cent from 2005 levels, come 2030. Emissions intensity is the amount of greenhouse gases emitted to achieve each dollar of gross domestic product. Singapore has also pledged to stop any increase to its greenhouse gas emissions by around 2030.

The industrial sector produces about 60 per cent of Singapore's total greenhouse gas emissions, which is why the Government has rolled out a raft of measures - including the imposition of a carbon tax - to force large emitters to go green.

Read more!

Singapore’s rising natural gas ambitions face big challenges

Singapore’s central role in global LNG markets is unquestionable but the country’s long-term prospects faces huge challenges, says one oil and gas expert.
Abache Abreu Channel NewsAsia 24 Jan 18;

SINGAPORE: About 95 per cent of Singapore’s electricity is generated using natural gas.

Before the completion of Singapore’s first liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal in 2013, the city’s only option was to import natural gas via pipelines from Malaysia and Indonesia.

Singapore’s LNG industry has boomed since then, powering gas cookers and water heaters in most households and fueling industries including refineries and petrochemicals.

Its LNG ambitions are massive, involving markets further afield. Singapore’s strategic location and reputation as a global trading hub for other commodities place it at the forefront of becoming Asia’s LNG trading hub.

But the city state faces several challenges as it persists tirelessly towards this goal.

EXPANDING LNG INDUSTRY

Singapore’s central role in LNG trading is unquestionable and is supported by an expanding LNG infrastructure, business-friendly regulation, and a strong and growing pool of industry talent.

And as the global supply expansion drives LNG towards becoming a global commodity in its own right, Singapore’s position as an LNG trading centre will grow too.

Nearly 40 companies have opened offices in Singapore – from traders, buyers and sellers looking to enhance optimisation capabilities, to companies offering supporting services such as lawyers, consultants and shipping firms – according to the Singapore Department of Statistics.

The country’s move to expand its LNG capacity to 11 million metric tonnes a year (mt/year) by 2018 and give international players access to storage and reload services demonstrates its commitment to become a regional facilitator of LNG trading.

Unlike other Asian buyers, Singapore has taken bold steps to develop a competitive and liberalised gas market, has access to international pipeline connections, and already allows third-party access to its gas and LNG infrastructure.

It has the support of its regulatory authorities and first-mover advantage relative to similar efforts by Japan and Shanghai to build their own LNG hubs.

Concerted efforts to create a Singapore-based pricing point for spot cargoes have also been made, in a bid to boost regional pricing transparency, and capitalise on the LNG industry’s departure from its traditional oil-indexed pricing model.

As LNG trading becomes more liquid in the physical and financial markets, industry participants feel more comfortable with pricing and hedging LNG cargoes not against an associated commodity like crude oil, but LNG itself.

LOW LIQUIDITY AND STORAGE BIGGEST CHALLENGES

Low liquidity will continue to be the biggest challenge to Singapore’s hub ambitions, as the limited size of its domestic gas market relative to the volume of LNG traded in Asia (which accounts for three quarters of global demand), makes it difficult for the country to replicate the balancing role the bigger and interconnected European hubs play in the global LNG markets.

The prospects of its storage and reload initiative may also be limited by the inefficient nature of LNG re-exports. Unlike oil, the cost of transporting and handling LNG relative to its market price is significant.

Storage costs at the Singapore LNG terminal on Jurong Island have been estimated within a range of US$2.5 million (S$3.3 million) to US$6 million British Thermal Units per year (or US$0.21 to US$0.50/MMBtu per month) depending on the source, plus unspecified reloading costs to re-export the volumes.

This means the cost of storing an LNG cargo for a year in Singapore can be as high the price of the cargo itself – the January to October 2017 average of the S&P Global Platts JKM benchmark daily spot price for physical deliveries to northeast Asia was at US$6.54/MMBtu.

Unlike oil, arbitrage decisions have to be made knowing that LNG cannot be stored for long periods because it loses volume due to boil-off.

Meanwhile, increasing flexible supplies from North America, Middle East and Asia-Pacific are reducing regional and seasonal price differentials in the global LNG markets, leading to fewer and shorter arbitrage opportunities, and less appetite for LNG reloads.

Singapore is seizing a huge part of the global LNG pie. It has reloaded six cargoes, of slightly less than 400,000 mt of LNG, from January to November 2017, up from five cargoes in 2016, according to S&P Global Platts Analytics.

Meanwhile, the global market has reloaded just over 2 million mt of LNG this year, down from a peak of nearly 6 million mt in 2014, when the JKM averaged US$13.86/MMBtu.

Storage and reload costs on a US$/MMBtu basis are even higher for medium and small-size LNG cargoes, one of the potential growth areas for Singapore.

Meanwhile, the ability of domestic end users in the potential break-bulk markets of Indonesia and the Philippines to pay a premium is particularly uncertain given downstream gas prices in those markets are heavily regulated.

Lastly, the future of Singapore’s further plans to develop the LNG sector, including LNG bunkering plans and leveraging LNG as a marine fuel – an alternative to the currently used marine diesel oil – are dependent on several factors including the areas where the vessel operates, the life of the ship, and most importantly, its relative price to other fuels.

To boost LNG bunkering in Singapore, the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore has announced in December 2017 that it has pumped another S$12 million into the industry. The funds will be used to build new LNG bunker vessels to allow ship-to-ship LNG bunkering and to build LNG-fuelled vessels.

LNG is seen as a substitute as Asian LNG spot prices have only been marginally lower than that of marine diesel oil. In fact, LNG spot prices have risen and hit its highest since 2015, with January deliveries assessed at US$9.90/MMBtu in November according to the Platts JKM benchmark price assessment.

The long-term prospects of Singapore’s LNG hub ambitions are therefore still uncertain.

But there is room for optimism as the country is well on track to becoming a global reference for LNG trading, and a key facilitator of regional market liquidity, flexibility and transparency.

Abache Abreu is senior editor, LNG News and Analysis (Asia-Pacific and Middle East), at S&P Global Platts.

Read more!

First Zika case of 2018 reported in Singapore

Channel NewsAsia 23 Jan 18;

SINGAPORE: After nearly four months without a reported case of Zika virus infection, the first case of 2018 was confirmed last Thursday (Jan 18).

It is also the first case since Sep 29, 2017, according to the Ministry of Health.

The ministry said on Tuesday that the patient sought outpatient treatment and is recovering well.

The first case of locally transmitted Zika in Singapore was reported in August 2016 and by the end of that year, about 450 people here were confirmed to have been infected.

The virus, spread by the aedes aegypti mosquito, has been associated with neurological diseases such as microcephaly, which causes babies to be born with a smaller head due to abnormalities in the development of the brain.

The Health Ministry told Channel NewsAsia last year that of the 17 women who were diagnosed with Zika during their pregnancies in 2016, two had their pregnancies terminated while one had a miscarriage.

The reasons behind this were not linked to Zika. It added the other 14 women gave birth to babies with no signs of microcephaly.

According to the National Environment Agency website, there are currently no Zika clusters in Singapore. The Jan 18 case appears to be an isolated one and it is unclear where the patient caught the virus from.

Source: CNA/mz

Read more!

Thai seafood: are the prawns on your plate still fished by slaves?

Report finds trafficking persists on Thai fishing boats, as campaigners challenge supermarkets to guarantee products are free of rights abuses
Annie Kelly The Guardian 23 Jan 18;

Thailand’s billion-dollar seafood export industry remains infested with human rights abuses despite government pledges to stamp out slavery in its fishing industry, according to research by Human Rights Watch.

Four years after damning revelations of chattel slavery aboard Thai fishing boats linked to seafood exported and sold by major retailers around the world, a report says that rights violations in one of Thailand’s major export industries continue unabated, including forced labour and widespread human trafficking.

For the report HRW conducted interviews with 248 current and former Burmese and Cambodian fishermen as well as Thai officials, boat owners, local activists and United Nations agency staff over a two-year period in all of Thailand’s major fishing ports.

It documented how migrant fishermen from south-east Asia continue to be routinely trafficked on to fishing boats, prevented from leaving or changing employers, and are often not paid for their work or paid less than the minimum wage.

“What the report found was that although this military government has taken more positive steps forward than the last, the reforms that have been put in place are still largely cosmetic,” said Brad Adams, director of Human Rights Watch in Asia.

“Forced labour is routine. The workers we interviewed described being trafficked on to ships, trapped in jobs they couldn’t leave, physical abuse, lack of food, long hours and awful working conditions. The worst thing for many of them was not being paid – the psychological harm and final indignity was the hardest to bear.”

Steve Trent, chief executive of the Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF), who has been working with the Thai government on its reforms, said the focus should also be on ensuring that those selling seafood to consumers take responsibility for ensuring supply chains are free from rights abuses.

“There is no shadow of a doubt that widespread and very serious labour violations are continuing throughout the industry,” said Trent. “Buyers and retailers have failed comprehensively to play their part in finding a real solution.”

He said the creation of the Sustainable Seafood Taskforce had failed to live up to its promises: the industry body, made up of supermarkets, buyers and retailers sourcing seafood from Thailand, was set up in 2015 to bring transparency and accountability to their supply chains.

“Never in my career have I seen a process more focused on talking in hotel rooms in Bangkok rather than actually committing to using their influence to create real change,” he said.

“I challenge any of the retailers selling Thai seafood to consumers to guarantee that products from Thailand are free from human rights abuses and illegal fishing. They have arguably more power than anyone else and they are failing to use it.”

The Sustainable Seafood Taskforce did not respond to a request for comment.

A major investigation by the Guardian in 2014 exposed brutal cases of slavery aboard Thai fishing boats feeding trash fish – inedible or infant species of fish to be ground into fishmeal – into the supply chain of prawns sold by supermarkets in the UK, Europe and United States.

In 2015 the European Union imposed a “yellow card” on Thailand under its illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing framework, threatening to ban Thai fisheries imports if the government failed to clean up its fishing industry, including labour rights violations.

The Thai government responded with a broad programme of reforms including new laws to regulate and improve working conditions, documentation and wages for migrant fishermen. A “port-in, port-out” (Pipo) system was also created to require boats to report for inspections, as well as limiting time at sea to 30 days.

However, HRW said that although some progress had been made, the persistence of trafficking and forced labour on fishing boats illustrated that many of the reforms were cosmetic.

The report said that the labour inspection regime was largely a “theatrical exercise for international consumption” and that in 2015 Thailand failed to find a single case of forced labour in inspections of 474,334 fishing crew.

The group is now urging the European Union to continue using the IUU framework to keep the pressure on the Thai government to address trafficking and slavery at sea.

“Although we understand that the IUU is designed to focus on fishing stocks and environmental issues, we’re really concerned that a move to address human rights concerns outside the IUU framework means that we will lose the only real effective tool that the EU had to address trafficking and forced labour in the Thai seafood industry,” said Adams.

Luisa Ragher, deputy of the delegation of the European Union in Thailand, said that the EU is committed to working alongside the Thai government to tackle labour rights violations.

“The government of Thailand has given high priority to this and put significant effort into addressing these problems. There are still shortcomings but progress has been made and we are confident of their commitment to improving things,” she said. “We are working intensively at opening up a broader discussion on labour rights that extends past fishing into other sectors.”

Read more!

New global registry of invasive species is 'milestone' in protecting biodiversity

New catalogue expected to stand alongside red list as an international means to fight extinction, by helping to stop biological invasions
Jonathan Watts The Guardian 23 Jan 18;

A world registry of invasive species has been launched amid concerns that governments are not doing enough to tackle the rising threat of globalisation to biodiversity.

The new catalogue – unveiled in the journal Scientific Data on Tuesday – is expected to become a pillar of international efforts to fight extinction alongside the “red list” of endangered species.

From yellow crazy ants on Christmas Island to little fire worms in the Galapagos, the deliberate or accidental introduction of non-native species is the biggest driver of biodiversity loss on islands and world heritage sites, according to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.

It can also cause huge economic and health impacts, as has been the case with the arrival in Europe of tropical mosquitos, which are vectors for malaria, or the spread of Latin American water hyacinths in Africa, which started off as cheap ornamental plants but now cause billions of dollars of losses because they clog up rivers, block ships, prevent fishing and create breeding grounds for mosquitos.

The Global Registry of Introduced and Invasive Species catalogues these and thousands of other cases in a key step towards identifying and tackling the biggest risks.

Based on an international collaboration by hundreds of scientists over eight years, the registry is seen as a tool – like the red list – that will allow countries to set up early warning and rapid response systems to prevent “door-knocking” species from entering in destructively large numbers.

This week’s data release, which covers 20 countries, reveals that 25% of the 6,400 identified invasive species have a negative impact on biodiversity and ecosystems. Information for the remaining 180 nations will be available by the middle of the year.

“This is a milestone,” said Piero Genovesi, the chair of the Rome-based Invasive Species Special Group, which led the compilation of the registry. “With this paper we want to show the rigour of our approach because this information will affect trade relations and other government policies.”

He said biological invasions are increasing in all regions and taxonomic groups and are likely to accelerate as a result of climate change, which is altering the ranges of habitats.

Read more!