Power to the people? IPO for Power Seraya?

Having sold two of its utilities to foreigners, Temasek should consider IPO for Power Seraya:
Conrad Raj, Today Online 15 Sep 08;

The sale of our power stations to foreigners seems to some as the divestment of good assets to purchase, what appears for now at least, more risky investments.

With the recent announcement that Temasek Holdings has agreed to sell the second of its three power companies, Senoko Power, to a consortium led by Japan’s Marubeni Corp for just under$4 billion, the Singapore investment company is now left with only one other major electricity producer, PowerSeraya.

According to Temasek, PowerSeraya too will be disposed off by the end of next year. Temasek had earlier sold Tuas Power to China Huaneng Group for about $4.2 billion.

On the other side of the coin, Temasek together with the Government of Singapore Investment Corp (GIC) have, in the last 12 months or so, sunk billions into buying stakes in banks like Barclays, Merrill Lynch, Citigroup and UBS. Although the value of these investments has fallen sharply since their purchase, we have been told there is no cause for alarm as these are long-term investments, some with a time horizon of 30 or so years.

There’s nothing wrong with selling our assets to foreigners. We have also been buying foreign assets throughout the world, sometimes to the chagrin of the host country.

But what concerns many of us is the feeling that good money is being thrown after bad.

In the case of the power stations, why are we selling these, not only valuable but strategic, assets to foreign investors when there are several companies here like Keppel Corp and SembCorp Industries willing to run them? These two companies were among the bidders for the two power generators, but obviously their bids were not high enough. Should price be the main criterion for strategic assets?

In fact why sell them in the first place? After all, the power stations were making good money.

For instance, Tuas Power, which was established in 1995, owns businesses in electricity generation, trading and retail services as well as the development and provision of multi-utilities and related services.

Its power generating capacity totals 2,670 megawatts, or 25 per cent of the Singapore market. For the financial year ended 31 March 2007, Tuas Power, which has net debts of $71 million, reported revenues of $2.27 billion and Ebitda (earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation) of $331 million. Net profit before tax rose to $218.7 million from $130 million the year before, and it had a healthy ROE (return on equity) of 16.5 per cent.

Senoko, with a combined installed capacity of 3,300 MW, is the country’s largest power generator, providing 30 per cent of its needs. For the financial year ended March 31, 2008, it reported revenues of $2.49 billion, an EBITDA of $245 million and net income of $130 million.

Starting out in 1971 and with an installed capacity of 3,100 MW, Power Seraya has an even better story to tell. For the year ended March 31, 2008, it posted revenues of $2.8 billion, after-tax net profits of $218 million, which was 30 per cent higher than the previous year’s $168 million, and an ROE of 19 per cent. It also reported an economic value added of $103 million and had compounded annual growth rate of 20 per cent over the last five years.

Perhaps the Government feels that the future of our electricity producers is dim and therefore hiving them off to foreigners at a good profit now would protect Singaporeans from any future downside.

Others suggest that selling off the power providers is a way out for the Government from having to explain to the public high tariffs, like at present when fuel is so expensive. It would be harder also for the Government than the private sector to explain away profits from the sale of a necessity.

But why did the Government decide not to take the three companies public by issuing shares that the man in the street could have subscribed to? Or insist on buyers issuing a portion of the companies to the investing public after a certain number of years?

Perhaps it’s not too late to do a public offering of PowerSeraya?


Read more!

Keppel to launch world's first green trust; Senoko Incineration Plant first asset

Straits Times 15 Sep 08;

THE world's first-ever green business trust, comprising solely of assets in the environmental management business, will be listed on the local stock exchange by the middle of next year.

In a statement yesterday, Keppel Corporation said that the trust will be established by its wholly owned subsidiary Keppel Integrated Engineering (KIE). It will be managed by KIE's subsidiary Keppel Infrastructure Fund Management.

One of the trust's first assets will be the Senoko Incineration Plant, which the Government has decided will be divested into KIE's trust for an indicative price of $462 million.

The plant currently treats 2,100 tonnes of waste per day to produce 34 megawatts of environmentally friendly 'green' electrical energy.

The Government announced in January that it was considering selling the Senoko plant either through a newly listed infrastructure business trust or to an existing listed trust.

It said the move was aimed at encouraging competition and improving efficiency in the waste management sector through greater private sector involvement, as well as creating investment opportunities for the public to invest in the infrastructure sector.

Singapore currently has four incineration plants that treat waste to produce electricity.

Keppel added that a fifth waste-to-energy plant its subsidiary is currently building in Tuas and Asia's largest operational Newater plant at Ulu Pandan will also be considered for injection into the trust.

Both plants are built under the private-public partnership initiative and will be owned and operated by Keppel for 25 years and 20 years respectively.

Keppel said yesterday that more details of the trust's IPO and listing on the exchange will be announced in due course.

'We believe this green business trust will offer eco-friendly investors the opportunity to participate in green projects, while at the same time enjoy stable and sustainable returns,' said KIE's chief executive Chua Chee Wui.

Senoko waste plant to be sold to Keppel unit KIE
It'll be injected into infrastructure trust that may include two more plants
Chew Xiang, Business Times 15 Sep 08;

THE Senoko Incineration Plant will be sold to a unit of Keppel Corp for eventual public listing, the Singapore government announced yesterday.

The indicative price is $462 million but the final price will be determined once the plant is listed, likely by mid-2009, according to a joint statement from the Finance and Environment and Water Resources Ministries and the Monetary Authority of Singapore.

Keppel Integrated Engineering (KIE), the environmental technology and engineering unit of Keppel Corp, was selected for the tender out of five bids received. A KIE unit, Keppel Seghers Engineering Singapore, will operate and maintain the plant under a long-term contract from the government.

KIE will inject the Senoko plant into a newly set-up infrastructure trust, which will subsequently be listed on the Singapore Exchange. KIE will act as sponsor and remain an investor in the trust, according to a statement from Keppel Corp, which also said that a waste-to-energy plant at Tuas being built, as well as a NEWater plant at Ulu Pandan, may also be injected into the trust in future.

Both plants are being built under public-private partnership initiatives and will be owned and operated by Keppel for 25 and 20 years respectively.

KIE chief executive officer Chua Chee Wui said: 'KIE intends to establish the trust as a listed green business trust, which will be the first of its kind in the world. It will have a global portfolio comprising primarily environmental management assets.'

The Senoko Incineration Plant, built in 1992, treats 2,100 tonnes of waste a day to produce 34 megawatts of electrical energy. It is one of four waste-to-energy incineration plants in Singapore, where all incinerable refuse is burnt.

According to its joint statement, this is the first time that a divestment exercise by the Singapore government has stipulated that the purchaser be an infrastructure business trust. 'This divestment exercise is expected to further improve efficiency in the waste management sector through greater private sector involvement. It also represents a new alternative mode that the government may choose for the divestment of its assets,' said the statement.

The government had issued a request for proposals in January this year and said then that the project was to improve efficiency through private sector involvement, as well as to allow the public to invest in the infrastructure sector.

Keppel said the tender award will have no material impact on its net tangible assets and earnings per share for the year ending Dec 31, 2008.

Keppel's proposal for divestment of Senoko Incineration Plant selected
Imelda Saad/S Ramesh, Channel NewsAsia 14 Sep 08;

SINGAPORE: Operations at the Senoko Incineration Plant are to be divested. For this, the government has selected the proposal from Keppel Integrated Engineering and Keppel Infrastructure Fund Management Private Limited.

The tender is worth an estimated price of S$462 million.

A joint statement from the Finance and Environment & Water Resources Ministries and the Monetary Authority of Singapore said the final price will be determined at the completion of the divestment, expected by the middle next year.

The Senoko Incineration Plant is one of four waste-to-energy incineration plants in Singapore.

It currently treats 2,100 tonnes of waste per day to produce 34 megawatts of green electrical energy.

The government issued a request for proposal in January this year to divest the Senoko plant.

The aim is improve efficiency in the waste management sector through greater private sector involvement and create opportunities for the public to invest in the infrastructure sector. A total of five bids was received for the project.

Under the new entity, the Singapore government will procure incineration services from the infrastructure trust, with operations conducted by Keppel Seghers Engineering - the environmental engineering arm of Keppel Integrated Engineering.

Keppel said it will inject the plant into a green business trust and list it, making it the first such listing in the world.

Chua Chee Wui, CEO, Keppel Integrated Engineering, said: "It will have a global portfolio comprising primarily environmental management assets.

"We believe this green business trust will offer eco-friendly investors the opportunity to participate in green projects, while at the same time enjoy stable and sustainable returns." - CNA/vm/ms


Read more!

The money's in green energy

Kicking our oil addiction & using alternative power will spur growth
Zhen Ming, The New Paper 15 Sep 08;

SOMETIME in the not-too-distant future, petrol at the pump could cost Americans a whopping US$40 a gallon (roughly, $15 a litre) - 10 times what it is today.

But that's not my real concern. What's troubling me is the imminent threat of global Armageddon.

You see, the Western Coalition (the US and Europe) are at war. Not with each other, mind you, but with the so-called Red Star Alliance (Russia and China).

Singapore and the rest of the world, meanwhile, can only watch.

This time, though, the two warring sides are not fighting over tiny Georgia - that trans-continental country in the Caucasus.

This time, the stakes are much higher as the two sides square off over the world's last oil reserves - in a country called Turkmenistan, bordered by Afghanistan and Iran, located somewhere in Central Asia.

Amid hunger, water scarcity and power outages in this oil-rich desert country, soldiers from both sides descend upon bombed-out cities and abandoned villages to fight it out.

Thankfully, this 'dystopian' vision, set in the year 2024, is only speculative fiction.

It is presented in Frontlines: Fuel of War - a new video game, released earlier this year, inspired in part by contemporary fears about war over oil.

Before you say 'nah', consider what Mr Luis Cataldi, one of the game's developers, has to say: 'It's a global issue that everyone's very much aware of, but it's also fascinating.'

Fast forward to the year 2050 and what we will have is a more plausible, but truly scary, scenario in which the world will have used up its last drop of oil.

You see, as at the end of last year, the world was still sitting pretty atop a huge mountain of 1.3 trillion barrels of oil in proved reserves.

But the world has also been guzzling this oil at a breakneck speed of about 83.6 million barrels a day, which translates into some 30.5 billion barrels a year.

Assuming the world hasn't found new oil since 2007, and assuming also the world will stick to its current pattern of oil consumption, then what we'll see is a world that will run out of oil on Thursday, 21 July 2050 - less than 42 years away.

It's a doomsday date I don't wish to keep - one that's only as good as whether the world is able to find new oil, and whether it will also cut back. But all these moves will only delay, but not prevent, the inevitable.

And just in case you think I'm being a teeth-gnashing pessimist - that our way of life could disappear 42 years from now - wait till you hear what one Big Oil company itself has to say about this problem.

In a recent advertisement, Chevron made this telling point: 'It took us 125 years to use the first trillion barrels of oil. We'll use the next trillion in 30.'

Thankfully, the world is determined to kick its oil addiction and to go green.

Black gold has been good, but green gold is even better. Here's why.

Every nation that has taken serious steps to adopt 'a greener energy future' has reaped economic growth.

Take Sweden, which announced in 2006 the phase-out of all fossil fuels (and nuclear energy) by 2020. Thousands of entrepreneurs there have rushed to develop new ways of generating energy from wind, the sun and the tides, from wood chips, agricultural waste and garbage.

Rich returns

And guess what? Sweden is now the world's eighth most-affluent nation (on a per capita GDP basis).

The same goes for Iceland. It was once 80 per cent dependent on imported coal and oil in the 1970s and was among the poorest economies in Europe.

Today, Iceland is 100 per cent energy independent, and according to the International Monetary Fund, it is now the world's fourth-richest nation.

And did you know that Brazil's recent move to 'de-carbonise' its transport system has resulted in the most robust economic expansion in its history?

But how about the US - the world's most profligate user of energy?

As I see it, the US could soon lead the way by developing more efficient vehicles and by expanding carbon-free energy sources like wind and solar power.

Asserts Robert F Kennedy Jr, a senior attorney for America's Natural Resources Defense Council:

'The US has far greater domestic energy resources than Iceland or Sweden. We sit atop the second-largest geothermal resources in the world. The American Midwest is the Saudi Arabia of wind.

'Solar installations across just 19 per cent of the most barren desert land in the South-west could supply nearly all of our nation's electricity needs even if every American owned an electric car.'

By kicking its oil addiction, America will again increase its national wealth. Everyone else will then profit from this green gold rush.

Concurs Timothy Lutts, president of Cabot Heritage Corp: 'Today, though it's not widely acknowledged yet, what's being destroyed is our petroleum-based economy. That it's an entrenched part of our global economy is obvious. But it's been entrenched for less than a century - oil replaced coal, remember - and it's time for something better.'

As I see it, expect the providers of this 'something better' - clean green energy - to thrive beyond your wildest dream. Expect also individuals, companies and institutions with stakes in the old petroleum economy to fight back against this inevitable transition.

It is something unfortunate. But it is also something unavoidable.

# Zhen Ming, a Harvard-trained economist based in Singapore, is a freelance contributor.


Read more!

Green model helps carpet king stay on top

Jessica Cheam, Straits Times 15 Sep 08;

SOME 14 years ago - long before 'sustainability' became a buzz-word in the corporate world - one entrepreneur had an epiphany which he described as a 'spear in the chest'.

He decided that his fossil fuel-intensive business will become the world's greenest company. He was told by his peers then that he was 'crazy and had 'gone round the bend'.

But today, Mr Ray Anderson's firm Interface Inc has silenced its sceptics.

The Atlanta-based company, one of the world's largest carpet manufacturers, was listed as world No. 1 for corporate sustainability by polling firm GlobeScan in 2006. Interface also generates annual revenues of US$1 billion (S$1.4 billion), thanks to its green business model, said Mr Anderson.

By pumping money into research and development, Interface pioneered technologies that enabled it to recycle material and manufacture carpets efficiently. In that period, it has avoided cumulative waste costs amounting to some US$353 million.

And from 1996, its greenhouse gas emissions went down a staggering 82 per cent while total energy intensity fell 45 per cent. All the while, total global sales of Interface's products jumped 49 per cent.

For his drive and vision, Mr Anderson was voted as one of Time Magazine's Heroes of the Environment last year. He shared his experience with local business leaders last Monday at an event by Singapore's American Chamber of Commerce.

The firm has had a Singapore office for 30 years, and its customers here include HSBC Bank and and Singapore Management University.

'In the 21st century, the most resource-efficient firms will win,' he told a 190-strong audience.

He sticks by the philosophy of 'doing well by doing good' - Interface's success was built on its sustainability journey, he said.

The Nasdaq-listed firm has a target which he calls 'Mission Zero' - to have a zero carbon footprint by 2020. He said Interface is 'more than halfway there now'.

Mr Anderson spoke of how his life changed when he was given a copy of US environmentalist and author's Paul Hawken's Ecology of Commerce.

'Suddenly, I began realising what we were doing to the earth,' he said. The book talked about the 'death of birth' - how species were becoming extinct, never to be born again. And that was when he decided to revolutionise his fossil fuel-reliant carpet business.

Mr Anderson instructed his managers to find out what impact Interface's business had on the environment.

'What I saw made me want to throw up,' he said. And that was the beginning of his climb on 'Mount Sustainability' as he calls it.

Interface started revamping its operations by eliminating waste, enhancing energy efficiency and offsetting transport emissions.

It also began tracking energy and water intake, waste streams, greenhouse gas emissions and raw materials streams, to evaluate its progress towards sustainability.

Today, up to 25 per cent of raw materials used is recycled. Last year, Interface sold a record 22 million sq m of third-party verified 'climate neutral' carpet.

The carpet was made climate neutral through the purchase of 390,000 tonnes of verified carbon credits to offset the entire life cycle of the products sold. It also offsets its land and air transport costs by planting trees and using carbon credits. His advice to firms in Singapore: The first step is find out what impact your business has on the environment.

'Then try to minimise this. You'll find that costs of your business will go down.'

He draws the line, however, at sharing his technology with competitors.

'Our sustainability is our advantage... If we can do it, anybody can. And if anybody can, then everybody can.'


Read more!

Grasshoppers are recruited as climate change scouts in the UK

Lewis Smith, The Times 15 Sep 08;

The rasping summer sound of grasshoppers chirping in fields and meadows is to be used to help to track climate changes.

Grasshoppers, along with bush crickets, have been identified as the ideal insects for a public monitoring system. There is a now a scheme to record sightings of all 27 native species of grasshoppers and crickets in Britain based on the system that enabled scientists to follow the spread of harlequin ladybirds.

The harlequin, an invasive species that competes with and often eats native ladybirds, arrived from the Continent in 2004 and has spread rapidly.

The public reporting system that was introduced to monitor the ladybird is regarded by researchers as an outstanding success and they now intend to use it to find out how climate change is affecting other insects.

Climate change is driving insects and other creatures to find new places to live as temperatures rise too high for their comfort or make it possible for them to move into a previously unfavoured area. Grasshoppers and crickets are regarded as ideal for the project because they are easily picked out by the public from the huge array of other insects and are among the “most charismatic” of the nation’s creepy-crawlies.

Researchers are convinced that once members of the public “get their eye in” they will be able to spot all 27 species, along with a handful of foreign visitors.

Even if telling the difference between a wart-biter bush cricket and the large marsh grasshopper proves too much to manage on a stroll in the countryside, enthusiasts taking part can send photographs for experts to identify.

Butterflies have until now been used as the primary insect indicators of climate change in Britain because they are among the most visible and well-known.

Grasshoppers and crickets are regarded as valuable indicators of climate change because in many ways they are more sensitive to it than other insects. Researchers hope to harness public enthusiasm for them to provide a new source of data.

More than 60,000 records of ladybirds were generated by the Harlequin Ladybird Survey, 20,000 of the invasive species and a further 40,000 of native ladybirds.

Helen Roy, of the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, said of the harlequin reporting scheme: “It’s been such a great way to get people involved and we got high-quality data.

“We now want to expand the system and we’ve chosen grasshoppers and crickets because they are charismatic and they are showing range expansion already. We want to use them in the same way the butterflies have been used to show expansion.”

Long-winged coneheads, a type of cricket species, have been expanding into new territories as temperatures have risen under climate change. Until the 1980s they were confined to the South Coast, but they can now be found north of Leicester.

Similarly Roesel’s bush cricket was largely restricted to the Thames and Solent Estuaries in the mid-20th century, but is now seen across Britain.

Other species may be declining and the project should also help to identify where a species is in trouble. The common grasshopper is among those giving concern and it is thought that higher temperatures are a factor.

Peter Sutton, a science teacher and an authority on grasshoppers and crickets, has been closely involved in the scheme, which is expected to begin in November.

“These insects are the foremost indicators of climate change and are responding dramatically to global warming,” he said.

“Temperature increases have allowed them to expand their habitat.”


Read more!

Products derived from natural, nontoxic ingredients -- once seen as fringe -- are now mainstream

Innovations in designing green chemicals are emerging in nearly every U.S. industry, from plastics and pesticides to toys and nail polish.
Marla Cone, Los Angeles Times 14 Sep 08;

First of two parts

At first, the experimental shampoo looked like a putrid salad dressing. Its oil and its water just couldn't get along. They separated in the bottle and, over time, the shampoo took on an ugly brown hue.

The team at Avalon Organics, based in Petaluma, was trying to make a line of hair, skin and bath products without toxic chemicals, using ingredients derived from plants, such as lavender and coconut.

"It was a disaster," said Morris Shriftman, the company's vice president at the time. "We thought we had failed."

In any recipe, whether for cake or shower gel, swapping out one ingredient for another can result in a complete flop. But the chemists working for Avalon Organics refused to give up. After years of tweaking recipes, at a cost exceeding $1 million, the company reinvented more than 150 products and came to lead a growing movement dubbed "consciousness in cosmetics."

"We accepted this stuff blindly for so long. Now we're asking questions, seeking information. The awareness that we're living in a chemical environment is finally taking hold," Shriftman said.

Innovations in designing green chemicals are emerging in nearly every U.S. industry, from plastics and pesticides to toys and nail polish. Some manufacturers of cosmetics, household cleaners and other consumer products are leading the charge, while others are lagging behind.

For decades, many manufacturers used the most powerful weapons in their chemical arsenals, with scant attention to where they wound up or what they might have been doing to people or the planet.

Now, in a fresh take on the pre-World War II slogan, "Better Living Through Chemistry," small chemical companies and giant corporations, including BASF and Rohm and Haas, are implementing the tenets of green chemistry, creating safer substances that won't seep into our bloodstream, endanger wildlife or pollute resources.

Once viewed as part of a fringe lifestyle, rooted in the hippie movement, natural and nontoxic are going mainstream. Driven by regulations, consumer demand, an eco-friendly business philosophy and fear of future lawsuits, large corporations, retailers and manufacturers are eliminating some chemicals, pulling products off shelves and redesigning others. The names are familiar: Wal-Mart, the Walt Disney Co., Ikea, Home Depot, Nalgene, Kaiser Permanente, Baxter HealthCare, Gerber, Clorox and Origins.

Yale University chemistry professor Paul Anastas, known as the father of green chemistry, said the movement is "not simply choosing the next, less-bad thing off the shelf. It's about designing something that is genuinely good.

"Green chemistry is not a theory," he said. "It's being demonstrated by companies over and over again."

With a little ingenuity, every substance in the world "can be reinvented and made safe," said John Warner, former director of University of Massachusetts' green chemistry doctorate program and now president of a research company creating sustainable chemicals.

But the greening of chemistry is a slow shift, not a revolution. Most chemists lack basic training in understanding environmental hazards and seeking safer solutions, and many businesses resist changing familiar chemicals and manufacturing techniques.

Even companies like Avalon Organics are learning that manufacturing a shampoo or shower gel without toxic substances isn't easy. Synthetic chemicals called phthalates add fragrance, parabens kill germs, and sulfuric acid and petrochemicals create a thick lather. Such substances have long been considered key ingredients in cosmetics and bath products. But they have been linked with cancer, skewed hormones and other threats to people and the environment.

"We heard from everyone that what we were doing was risky, that it was unnecessary, that all the major cosmetics companies use these chemicals so they couldn't be dangerous," Avalon's Shriftman said. "But we decided to subscribe to the precautionary principle. We wanted to do the right thing. We rebuilt our products from scratch. It took a long time. It took a lot of experimentation. And it took a lot of money."

Though toilet bowl cleaners and body lotions may not save the planet, they are the first step toward weaning its human inhabitants from their toxic chemical dependency.

"We believe that the small act of scouring the sink," said Shaklee Corp. Chief Executive Roger Barnett, "can be part of the giant act of changing the world."

Early exposure

Chemical contamination starts in the womb. Even before a baby takes a breath, her body contains chemicals passed on by her mother.

Tests of umbilical cords show that a newborn's body contains nearly 300 compounds -- among them mercury from fish, flame retardants from household dust, pesticides from backyards, hydrocarbons from fossil fuels.

Virtually everything we buy, breathe, drink and eat contains traces of toxic substances. The names are confusing; the list, mind-boggling: Bisphenol A in plastic baby bottles and food cans. Phthalates in vinyl toys. Polybrominated flame retardants in furniture cushions. Formaldehyde in kitchen cabinets. Radon in granite countertops. Lead in lipstick. 1,4-Dioxane in shampoo. Volatile organic compounds in hair spray.

Every day, about half a dozen chemicals are added to the estimated 83,000 already in commerce. In the United States alone, about 42 billion pounds of chemicals are produced or imported daily. Although California has no major chemical manufacturing plants, it is a large user: About 644 million pounds are sold daily in the state, according to a University of California report on green chemistry published in January.

Many chemicals are probably benign, but basic health and safety data are lacking for about 80%. Some, such as chlorine gas, are so highly poisonous that a minuscule amount can kill. Others can raise the risk of cancer and other diseases. Animal tests show that some suppress the immune system, obstruct brain development, deplete testosterone, mutate cells, turn genes on and off or alter reproductive organs.

Since the 1960s, when the pesticide DDT nearly wiped out the bald eagle, public policy has dealt with the risks on a chemical-by-chemical basis: Ban a few, restrict others and clean up the mess left behind.

Meanwhile, nearly half of the nation's waterways are classified as impaired by pollutants, the air of most cities is shrouded with soot and smog, and the multibillion-dollar bill to clean up the Superfund list of hazardous waste sites keeps growing. Chemicals have moved pole-to-pole via oceans and winds, turning animals and humans around the globe into unwitting lab rats.

Scientists and regulators continually try to figure out whether various chemicals pose a threat, and to what degree, yet they rarely come up with definitive answers. Even when a proven hazard is banned, it can take decades, perhaps centuries, for it to dissipate. Sometimes, its replacement is just as risky.

"California's hazardous waste sites are still growing. And they're still leaking," said Maureen Gorsen, who directs the state Department of Toxic Substances Control, which is spearheading a Green Chemistry Initiative launched by Gov. Schwarzenegger. "We need a massive chemical shift. We need to move to the beginning, to the design part, what goes into the products we use rather than what comes out the end."

A simple formula

The laboratory inside Shaklee's corporate headquarters in Pleasanton, Calif., looks like any other. But it's missing a lot: chlorine, formaldehyde, glycol ethers, solvents.

Wearing a white lab coat, senior scientist Arshad Malik starts with a beaker of water. He mixes in a vegetable-based thickener, then pours in a blend of coconut oil and sugar extracted from corn. Finally, he adds a drop of a preservative.

Malik is demonstrating the deceptively simple formula for Shaklee Corp.'s household cleaner, the workhorse of its "Get Clean" line.

Gone are the petrochemicals and formaldehyde. Although cheap and effective, they emit toxic vapors.

When Shaklee began searching for a green surfactant, the ingredient that dissolves dirt and grease, no chemical company seemed interested in inventing one made from vegetables. Not until Shaklee called Germany and talked to chemists at Cognis, a specialty manufacturer.

The result: a biodegradable mix of coconut oil and sugar.

Josef Koester, marketing director for Cognis' Care Chemicals North America, said his company created the coconut-and-corn surfactant by incorporating a simple concept: "Using less chemistry."

Over the past few years, this less-is-more approach has become big business for companies going green. Even Clorox, which got its name from chlorine, launched Green Works, a nontoxic line of cleaners, this year.

Two of the biggest innovators in household products are California companies: Shaklee, which is sold person-to-person, and San Francisco-based Method Products, which sells through Target, Costco and other large retailers.

"What is driving this market now is concern over bioaccumulation of chemicals in the body," said Jim Greene, Shaklee's vice president of product development.

"The public is now reading labels and they're very concerned about what they're putting not only in the environment, but onto their skin and into their bodies."

Some green chemistry products are trying to grab a market share from the big brand names by offering something beyond environmentally friendly ingredients. Method's kitchen and bathroom cleaners, which cost roughly 10% more than traditional ones, are scented with lavender and other essential oils and packaged in hip, colorful containers.

"If it needs to be ugly to be green, it won't ever be mainstream," said Adam Lowry, a Stanford University chemical engineering graduate and co-founder of Method. "We show consumers that buying green is not only more healthful but also more pleasurable, and it's almost cost-neutral."

Sales at Method, one of the fastest-growing private companies in 2006, have reached $77 million a year. Avalon Organics' market also soared; it was sold last year for $120 million to Hain Celestial, known for producing organic foods.

"We've built in green chemistry from the very beginning. It was at the core of our business philosophy," Lowry said. "The companies that don't do it will become the dinosaurs."

Formaldehyde-free

Johns manville co. may have learned the hard way. It was bankrupted by one of the deadliest and most expensive toxic episodes in history: asbestos.

The building materials company, now under new ownership, wanted its new fiberglass insulation to be as environmentally safe as possible. So it turned to Rohm and Haas, a $9-billion-a-year chemical company that invented a new glue with no formaldehyde, a carcinogen that has been the binder of choice for fiberglass.

Johns Manville is now the only manufacturer offering a complete line of formaldehyde-free insulation, and because its factories emit no formaldehyde, it is the only one exempt from federal hazardous air pollutant standards.

The new adhesives cost more per pound. But Mike Lawrence, Johns Manville's vice president and general manager for insulations systems, said the manufacturing process was tightened to bring costs in line. He said their products are priced in the same range as competitors' and meet the same industry standards.

"It was the right thing to do for our employees, our customers, for our shareholders," Lawrence said.

Peggy Jenkins, the California Air Resources Board's indoor air quality specialist, advises consumers to buy formaldehyde-free insulation to reduce their exposure to the carcinogen.

Still, such products comprise only about 20% of the insulation market. Owens Corning, the largest manufacturer, uses formaldehyde, saying there is no evidence that trace amounts pose a health threat.

Colin Gouveia, a global marketing director at Rohm and Haas, said most consumers are unaware that building materials contain formaldehyde.

"Sometimes green products," he said, "need a little kick from a regulation to overcome the barrier to change."

That is what stoked the market for another green chemistry product, an industrial paint. In 2006, the South Coast Air Quality Management District set limits on smog-causing petroleum-based solvents in industrial coatings used in the Los Angeles region.

Caltrans had to find new paint for the state's 850 steel bridges that was not only low-polluting, but could withstand the elements. Rohm and Haas' biggest challenge was the perception that a water-based paint couldn't be durable.

Barry Marcks, Caltrans' associate chemical testing engineer, said the new low-emission paint has been used for two years on the state's bridges -- 86 million square feet of surface area. It's as rust-resistant as the old paints, and has an added benefit: It retains its glossy colors better, he said.

The cost per gallon is in the same range, but the state saves on disposal and cleanup. Caltrans workers like it too.

"Now the workers don't have to be around all those high-solvent-borne paints. The waterborne ones are a lot less toxic," Marcks said.

Making sacrifices

Even green chemistry products have shades of brown.

No regulations or industry standards govern use of the words "natural" or "organic" in cleaning products, cosmetics or bath products. Many contain traces of toxic substances.

The Shaklee cleaner contains a small amount of a germ-killing biocide used as a preservative. Avalon got rid of parabens but uses glycol ethers as preservatives.

Sometimes consumers have to make sacrifices in the pursuit of green. Method and Shaklee products, for example, are not disinfectants, because antibacterial substances are toxic and not naturally derived.

The greenest products are 100% vegetable, made entirely of renewable, natural feedstocks that are not chemically modified. Less green are those that include minerals or inorganic materials.

Shaklee Corp.'s dish-washing detergent, for example, contains sodium carbonate. The least green of the products use petrochemicals or animal substances.

"You can always say, I can do this greener," said Koester, Cognis' marketing director. "But you don't want to go back to washing your hair with soap, do you? That would be the consequence of going too green."

But more and more, the world's largest chemical companies are looking for substitutes for some of the old petrochemicals that made them global powerhouses.

BASF, which has $90 billion in annual sales, invented a plasticizer with no phthalates, which are estrogen-mimicking compounds used to make vinyl. It is marketed in China, where 80% of toys are produced.

DuPont is using cornstarch as a key building block to make polyester. Dow Chemical Co. is turning soybeans into a compound for polyurethane foam and building a plant in Brazil that will use sugar cane to make plastic for use in grocery bags and other products.

Green chemistry is "not just a niche anymore," said Neil Hawkins, Dow's vice president of sustainability.

"When you have retailers like Wal-Mart setting environmental goals," he said, "it creates a demand and a ripple effect for new, innovative products. I see some real changes right now, driven by the market."


Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 14 Sep 08


Ready for action!
Gearing up for Pandan cleanup (loads of trash and snakes) and update on Kranji site and Kallang Basin site and more briefings on the News from the International Coastal Cleanup blog

Blog about our natural heritage
for a blogging contest, more details on the Singapore's Heritage, Museums & Nostalgia Blog. See comments for links to eligible museums which includes our only natural history museum, the Raffles Museum of Biodiversity Research. Although there is this comment about the contest Do not make me uglify my blog on Tym Blogs Too!

Nesting of the Olive-winged Bulbul
from Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Book Review - The Book of Indian Butterflies by Isaac Kehimkar
on the Butterflies of Singapore blog


Read more!

Almost 2 billion people at risk from dengue in Asia

Today Online 24 Sep 08;

MANILA — Nearly two billion people in the Asia-Pacific region will be at risk from dengue fever unless governments do more to fight the disease, the World Health Organisation (WHO) said yesterday.

According to the United Nations agency, of the 2.5 billion people at risk globally, some 1.8 billion live in the Western Pacific.

Ninety-eight per cent of all dengue cases — and 99 per cent of all dengue deaths — in the region between 2001 and 2004 occured in Vietnam, Malaysia, the Philippines, Cambodia, Laos, Singapore, French Polynesia, Fiji, New Caledonia and China.

WHO intends to ask the 37 countries and territories that make up its Western Pacific section to endorse a regional strategy for dealing with the mosquito-borne virus, which it deems among 40 emerging diseases of global importance.

A dengue pandemic swept across the region between 1991 and 2004, peaking at 350,000 cases in 1998, WHO said.

It said: “Many Asia-Pacific countries lack adequate resources and have limited response capacities” against the virus.

The WHO said in discussion papers at a regional committee meeting in Manila that dengue “has greatly expanded over the last three decades” owing to changes in weather patterns that expanded the habitat of the Aedes aegypti mosquito which carries the virus.

Other key factors were migration, demographic changes, and rapid growth in urban areas. AFP


Read more!

No mall in Singapore 'sleepy village', please

Wong Sook-yee (Ms), Straits Times Forum 14 Sep 08;

I read with great consternation last Sunday's article, 'Where 5,000 expats call home', which reported that the Serangoon Gardens Village complex would be torn down to 'make way for a big mall'.

We have malls everywhere, surely we do not need one in Serangoon Gardens?

I live in the estate and I love its 'sleepy village' atmosphere. It was even better before, when we knew the owners of the provision shops and would drop by just to chat without buying anything.

It is still not too bad now, even though 'modernity' has arrived in the form of Prima Deli, Bengawan Solo, and Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, among others.

But we have to stop somewhere. The enclave is steadily losing its cosiness and character, and I say, enough is enough.

There are malls aplenty in the nearby AMK Hub, Heartland Mall and Hougang Point.

We do not need one right in the heart of Serangoon Gardens.


Read more!

What next for Costa Rica's frogs?

BBC News 13 Sep 08;

BBC News has been following a team from Manchester University and Chester Zoo as they trek deep into Costa Rica's rainforest to work on conservation programmes for critically endangered amphibians.

Here the biologists explain why they believe that safeguarding the future of amphibians is key.

Of course, rediscovering the golden toad was always going to be a remote possibility - it has been gone so long

But just to visit the place where they were last seen - the unique elfin forests of Monteverde where they used to appear like ghosts from nowhere at the first sign of rain, reproduce hurriedly in an explosion of colour, and then disappear as quickly as they had arrived - well, it is little short of a religious experience for a frog biologist.

So we followed the trail, we saw the moss and lichen encrusted network of roots that Bufo periglenes used to call home - but did not see a thing.

But that was not the main reason why we were here.

Costa Rica, like many parts of the world, has suffered devastating losses of amphibian species in recent decades.

Understanding why is crucial both to preventing, or at least stemming, similar losses elsewhere and perhaps to helping the recovery process right here.

Rediscoveries

Over the last few years, a number of "extinct" species have reappeared in one or two remote locations, their rediscovery largely a result of the efforts of a handful of dedicated frog enthusiasts.

Take Isthmohyla rivularis , for example.

Until a single male was spotted last year, this species was thought to have been extinct. This week, another male has been seen, but far more importantly a female, full of eggs.

This means the species is still out there with the capacity to reproduce, though extensive surveys along the streams they inhabit suggest that they are still desperately rare.

Now we know they are here, the next challenge is to learn all we can about them so we are better able to conserve them.

Another sensational rediscovery in the recent past was the aptly named green-eyed frog ( Lithobates vibicaria ).

This spectacular frog was once widespread in the high-altitude forests of the Monteverde region and having also been thought extinct, it is now known to be hanging on in just one or two isolated and inaccessible areas.

Though part of the strategy for assuring this species' continued existence has been to establish a conservation breeding programme at the University of Manchester and Chester Zoo, the focus is now upon monitoring these precious wild sites for any sign of change - good or bad - and surveying other similar areas for more frogs.

Studying the populations of both of these rare frogs, and others like them, is critical if we hope to conserve them in the long term.

In doing this, collaboration is key.

Just as important as finding the frogs has been meeting with our Costa Rican colleagues from the Monteverde Rainforest League and the Tropical Science Center.

These two organisations are jointly responsible for establishing the forest reserves and for their continuing protection.

Both are passionate about biodiversity, and are eager to develop a collaborative amphibian conservation and research strategy.

So, we leave Costa Rica elated by our finds and excited by the prospects for the future of this country's amphibians.


Read more!

Curbing Coal Emissions Alone Might Avert Climate Danger, Say Researchers

ScienceDaily 13 Sep 08;

An ongoing rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels might be kept below harmful levels if emissions from coal are phased out within the next few decades, say researchers. They say that less plentiful oil and gas should be used sparingly as well, but that far greater supplies of coal mean that it must be the main target of reductions.

The burning of fossil fuels accounts for about 80 percent of the rise of atmospheric CO2 since the pre-industrial era, to its current level of 385 parts per million. However, while there are huge amounts of coal left, predictions about when and how oil and gas production might start running out have proved controversial, and this has made it difficult to anticipate future emissions.

To better understand how the emissions might change in the future, climatologist Pushker Kharecha and director James Hansen of NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies—a member of Columbia University's Earth Institute--considered a wide range of scenarios.

"This is the first paper that explicitly melds the two vital issues of global peak oil production and human-induced climate change," Kharecha said. "We found that because coal is much more plentiful than oil or gas, reducing coal emissions is absolutely essential to avoid dangerous climate change."

CO2, which accounts for about half of the human-caused greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, concerns scientists because it can remain for centuries. Hansen's previous research suggests that a dangerous level of global warming may occur if CO2 exceeds a concentration of about 450 parts per million. That is a 61 percent increase from the pre-industrial level of 280 parts per million, but only 17 percent more than the current level. Hansen says the danger level would bring a rise of about 1.8°F above the 2000 global temperature. At or beyond this point, disintegration of the West Antarctic ice sheet and Arctic sea ice could reach tipping points, and set in motion feedback mechanisms that would lead to further, accelerated melting.
Satellite imagery shows where carbon dioxide is being emitted or absorbed, measured here in 2003. Reds show sources; blues, absorption. (Credit: NASA)

To better understand the possible trajectory of future CO2, Kharecha and Hansen devised five emissions scenarios spanning the years 1850 to 2100. Each reflects a different estimate for the global production peak of fossil fuels, the timing of which depends on reserve size, recoverability and available technology. "Even if we assume high-end estimates and unconstrained emissions from conventional oil and gas, we find that these fuels alone are not abundant enough to take carbon dioxide above 450 parts per million," Kharecha said.

The first scenario estimates CO2 levels if emissions from fossil fuels follow "business as usual," growing 2 percent annually until half of each reservoir has been recovered. After this, emissions begin to decline by 2 percent annually. In the second scenario, emissions from coal are reduced, first by developed countries starting in 2013, and then by developing countries a decade later, leading to a global phaseout of emissions by 2050. The phaseout could come either from reducing coal consumption or by capturing and trapping CO2 from coal burning before it reaches the air.

The remaining three scenarios include the phaseout of coal, but consider different scenarios for oil use and supply. One case considers a delay in the oil peak by about 21 years to 2037. Another considers fewer-than-expected additions to currently proven reserves, or taxes on emissions that makes fuels too expensive to extract. The final scenario looks at emissions from oil fields that peak at different times, extending the peak into a plateau that lasts from 2020-2040.

The team used a mathematical model to convert CO2 emissions from each scenario into estimates of future concentrations in the atmosphere. The "business as usual" scenario resulted in CO2 that would exceed 450 parts per million from by 2035, and climb to more than double the pre-industrial level. Even when low-end estimates of reserves were assumed, the threshold was exceeded from about 2050 onwards. However, the other four scenarios resulted in CO2 levels that peaked in various years, but all fell below the prescribed cap of 450 parts per million by about 2080 at the latest. Levels in two of the scenarios always stayed below the threshold.

The researchers say that the results clearly imply that emissions from coal should be reduced. This would apply also, they say, to "unconventional" fuels not yet in mainstream use, such as methane hydrates and tar sands. These also contain far more fossil carbon than conventional oil and gas, and thus could potentially be major contributors to emissions.

"We're illustrating the types of action needed to get to target carbon dioxide levels," Kharecha said. "The most important mitigation strategy we recommend—a phase-out of carbon dioxide emissions from coal within the next few decades—is feasible using current or near-term technologies."


Read more!

Phase out coal and burn trees instead, urges leading scientist

Current targets on emissions are 'a recipe for global disaster, not salvation'
Geoffrey Lean, The Telegraph 14 Sep 08;

Humanity must urgently embark on a massive programme to power civilisation from wood to stave off catastrophic climate change, one of the world's top scientists has told The Independent on Sunday.

Twenty years ago, Professor James Hansen was the first leading scientist to announce that global warming was taking place. Now he has issued a warning that a back-to-the-future return to one of the oldest fuels is imperative because the world has exceeded the danger level for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Growing trees, which absorb the gas from the air as they grow, burning them instead of fossil fuels to generate electricity, and capturing and storing the carbon produced in the process is needed to get the greenhouse effect down to safe levels, he says.

Professor Hansen's assertion that there is too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will alarm governments and environmentalists, who are concentrating on the already daunting task of limiting its build-up, while allowing it to rise well above present levels. However, his views will command respect because, as director of Nasa's Goddard Institute for Space Studies for the past 27 years, he has been one of the few climate scientists ready to risk his reputation by openly stating what many suspect to be true.

In 1988 Professor Hansen put global warming on the political agenda by telling the US Congress that he was "99 per cent certain" that human activities were warming up the planet. It took the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change until last year to catch up, by which time nearly two vital decades had been lost.

In the UK last week, his evidence helped to secure the acquittal of six Greenpeace activists charged with causing criminal damage to the Kingsnorth power station in Kent.

The level of carbon dioxide stands at 385 parts per million (ppm), about 100ppm above what it was at the start of the Industrial Revolution. It is rising by about 2ppm a year. The most ambitious international efforts focus on stabilising it at 450 ppm, though few see this as achievable.

But Professor Hansen says this goal "is a recipe for global disaster, not salvation" and that present levels have already "brought us to the precipice of a planetary tipping point". He adds: "If we go over the edge we will transition to an environment far outside the range that has been experienced by humanity, and there will be no return within any foreseeable future generation."

He is convinced that 350 ppm is the absolute maximum that will avoid the loss of the polar ice sheets and other disasters. He says that all coal power stations must be phased out by 2030, unless they are equipped with special "carbon capture and storage" equipment that stops the gas escaping into the atmosphere. If that was done, the level could be stabilised at 400 ppm. After that, a vigorous programme of planting trees to suck up carbon dioxide – coupled with the use of carbon capture equipment when the trees are burnt, and improvements in agricultural practices – could get levels down to 350 ppm "within a century".


Read more!