Palau creates world's first shark sanctuary

John Heilprin, Associated Press Yahoo News 25 Sep 09;

UNITED NATIONS – The tiny Pacific nation of Palau is creating the world's first shark sanctuary, a biological hotspot to protect great hammerheads, leopard sharks, oceanic whitetip sharks and more than 130 other species fighting extinction in the Pacific Ocean.

But with only one boat to patrol 240,000 square miles (621,600 square kilometers) of Palau's newly protected waters — including its exclusive economic zone, or EEZ, that extends 200 miles (320 kilometers) from its coastline — enforcement of the new measure could be almost like swimming against the tide.

Palau's president, who is to announce the news to the United Nations General Assembly on Friday, acknowledges the difficulty of patrolling ocean waters nearly the size of Texas or France with a single boat. But he hopes others will respect Palauan territorial waters — and that the shark haven inspires more such conservation efforts globally.

"Palau will declare its territorial waters and extended economic zone to be the first officially recognized sanctuary for sharks," Palauan President Johnson Toribiong told the Associated Press in an interview Thursday.

Shark fishing has grown rapidly since the mid-1980s, driven by a rising demand — mainly in China — for shark fin soup, a highly prized symbol of wealth. Because of their long life spans and low fertility rates, sharks are vulnerable to overfishing.

Within its EEZ, a nation may regulate fisheries and scientific research and develop other economic efforts. The U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization estimates more than half of highly migratory sharks are overexploited or depleted.

Toribiong said a recent flyover by Australian aircraft showed more than 70 vessels fishing Palau's waters, many of them illegally.

"We'll do the very best we can, given our resources," he said. "The purpose of this is to call attention to the world to the killing of sharks for commercial purposes, including to get the fins to make shark fin soups, and then they throw the bodies in the water."

Tourists go to Palau for its spectacular diving in the tropical waters, dramatic coral and rich marine life. The remote Pacific nation recently made global headlines when it agreed to President Barack Obama's request to take a group of Uighurs — Turkic Muslims from China's far western Xinjiang region — as part of plans to close the Guantanamo Bay detention center.

Palau is one of the world's smallest countries, with some 20,000 people scattered over 190-square mile (490-square kilometer) archipelago of lush tropical landscapes in the Western Pacific.

Its shark sanctuary will shelter more than 135 Western Pacific species of sharks and rays considered endangered or vulnerable, or for which there is not enough data to determine how the species is faring.

"Palau has basically raised the bar for the rest of the world for shark conservation," said Matt Rand, director for global shark conservation for Washington-based Pew Environment Group, an advocacy organization.

Elsewhere, Europe is trying to crack down on shark fishing in its waters.

In February, the European Commission proposed its first-ever shark conservation rules for European waters. EU countries account for a third of shark meat exports globally, and shark steaks are increasingly served in restaurants, replacing pricier swordfish steaks, and shark products are also finding their way into lotions and leather sports shoes.

Toribiong said he also will call for a global moratorium on "shark finning" — the practice of hacking off shark fins and throwing the body back into the sea — and an end to unregulated and destructive bottom trawling on the high seas.

Palau is among 20 seafaring nations that already have voluntary agreed to end bottom trawling, which involves fishing boats that drag giant nets along the sea floor.

Enormously effective at catching fish, the nets from bottom trawling also wipe out almost everything in their path, smash coral and stir clouds of sediment that smother sea life, marine experts say.

The U.N. has called bottom trawling a danger to unique and unexplored ecological systems and said slightly more than half the underwater mountain and coral ecosystems in the world can be found beyond the protection of national boundaries.

Palau pioneers 'shark sanctuary'
Richard Black, BBC News 25 Sep 09;

Palau is to create the world's first "shark sanctuary", banning all commercial shark fishing in its waters.

The President of the tiny Pacific republic, Johnson Toribiong, announced the sanctuary during Friday's session of the UN General Assembly.

With half of the world's oceanic sharks at risk of extinction, conservationists regard the move as "game-changing".

It will protect about 600,000 sq km (230,000 sq miles) of ocean, an area about the size of France.

President Toribiong also called for a global ban on shark-finning, the practice of removing the fins at sea.

Fins are a lucrative commodity on the international market where they are bought for use in shark fin soup.

As many as 100 million sharks are killed each year around the world.

"These creatures are being slaughtered and are perhaps at the brink of extinction unless we take positive action to protect them," said President Toribiong.

"Their physical beauty and strength, in my opinion, reflects the health of the oceans; they stand out," he told BBC News from UN headquarters in New York.

The president also called for an end to bottom-trawling, a fishing method that can destroy valuable seafloor ecosystems such as coral reefs.

Local benefits

A number of developed nations have implemented catch limits and restrictions on shark finning.

Some developing countries such as The Maldives have also taken measures to protect the creatures; but Palau's initiative takes things to a new level, according to conservationists close to the project.

"Palau has recognised how important sharks are to healthy marine environments," said Matt Rand, director of global shark conservation at the Pew Environment Group.

"And they've decided to do what no other nation has done and declare their entire Exclusive Economic Zone a shark sanctuary.

"They are leading the world in shark conservation."

Mr Rand said that about 130 threatened species of shark frequented waters close to Palau and would be likely to gain from the initiative.

Although the country has only 20,000 inhabitants, its territory encompasses 200 scattered islands, which means that its territorial waters are much bigger than many nations a thousand times more populous.

Economics is clearly an incentive for the Palau government, which derives most of its income from tourism.

Sharks are themselves a big attraction for scuba-divers, and may also play a role in keeping coral reef ecosystems healthy.

Globally, 21% of shark species whose extinction risk has been assessed fall into the "threatened" categories, and 18% are "near threatened". For a further 35%, there is not enough data to decide.

Over half of the species that spend most of their time in the upper layers of the ocean, exposed to fishing, are on the threatened list.

Illegal shark-finning is the main cause; but there are legal targeted hunts for fins and meat, and sharks are also caught accidentally on longlines set for fish such as marlin and tuna.

Port side catches

Enforcing the ban will be an issue for Palau, which possesses just one patrol boat capable of monitoring its waters.

A recent aerial survey found fishing 70 vessels in the area, most of them illegally.

But Carl-Gustaf Lundin, who heads the marine programme at the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), said there were other ways of tackling the illegal trade.

"For example, the US has been sharing lists of illegal vessels with established fishing companies, so that they can report on their dishonest or non-decent peers," he said.

"We're also exploring what options there are for monitoring remotely at low cost.

"And you don't need to catch people out there in the ocean; everyone needs to land their fish, so as long as you have most nations signed up to oppose illegal fishing, your chances of catching them are pretty decent."

Dr Lundin noted that earlier this week, another Pacific island state, Kiribati, signed off a collaboration with the US that establishes the largest marine reserve on the planet.

"The time for setting aside tiny areas of sea that only protect a few sedentary species is over; and it (the Palau sanctuary) is important because it shows the way in terms of putting large areas aside."

Considered position

In organisations such as the International Whaling Commission and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), Palau has in recent years regularly sided with pro-hunting countries such as Japan.

Mr Toribiong told BBC News that before going to New York for the UN General Assembly, he had planned to "state to the world that Palau will revisit its current position" on whaling.

But following the recent change of government in Japan, and because of the two countries' "close relationship", he said there would now be a bilateral meeting.

"My position is to reconsider our current position in light of the most recent scientific data to ensure that the current position that Palau takes will not lead to the depletion and extinction of whales," he said.

But when it came to sharks, the president said he was sure that the sanctuary is backed by science - sharks are threatened as a group of species, and sanctuaries can help.

"Not all nations consider shark fins as delicacies," he said.

"And we feel that the need to protect the sharks outweighs the need to enjoy a bowl of soup."

Asked what he would be urging other leaders to do, he said simply: "To follow suit."

France-Size Shark Sanctuary Created -- A First
Ker Than, National Geographic News 25 Sep 09;

The world's first shark sanctuary will protect the declining fish in waters off the tiny island republic of Palau, the country's president said today.

Johnson Toriboing announced the creation of a shark haven without commercial fishing during an address before the United Nations General Assembly in New York City.

"I believe the physical well-being and beauty of sharks reflects the well-being of the ocean," Toriboing told reporters at a news conference.

"It is my honor and opportunity to tell the world to join me to protect these species, which are on the brink of extinction."

Sharks are increasingly under threat as the demand for shark-fin soup—a delicacy in many Asian countries—has risen worldwide.

"The need to save the ocean and save sharks far outweighs the need to enjoy bowls of soup," Toriboing said.

An estimated 130 rare shark and stingray species live in or pass through Palau's waters, including great hammerheads, oceanic whitetips, and leopard sharks. (See more shark pictures.)

France-Size Haven

Located roughly 500 miles (805 kilometers) east of the Philippines in the Pacific Ocean, Palau is made up of about 200 small islands and is one of the world's smallest and youngest nations. (See map.)

But what it lacks in land, Palau makes up for in water: Its territorial waters span more than 230,000 square miles (600,000 square kilometers)—an area about the size of France.

All of that water is now safe harbor for sharks.

"Palau has taken the ultimate step toward shark protection. There's no clearer way of protecting sharks," said Matt Rand, director of the global shark conservation campaign at the Washington, D.C.-based Pew Environment Group, which worked with Palau officials to create the sanctuary.

However, enforcement could be a problem for the tiny island republic, Palauian president Toriboing admitted.

Palau will heavily fine boats caught with sharks or shark parts on board, but the country has only one patrol boat to monitor its large expanse of water.

"Pioneering Move"

Still shark conservationists hailed the sanctuary's establishment as an important step in the right direction.

"It's fantastic news," said National Geographic marine ecologist Enric Sala.

"This is a pioneering move by Palau that shows how well they understand the role of every species in the marine ecosystem."

(The National Geographic Society owns National Geographic News.)

Jill Hepp, a marine conservationist at the nonprofit WWF, hopes other countries will follow Palau's lead.

"There's a pretty dismal lack of protection for sharks, even though they're a key species in the oceans' waters," Hepp said.

"This could really help raise the profile of the issue."

Read more!

Immigrant species aren't all bad

Mark Davis, New Scientist 25 Sep 09;

HUMANS have been transporting species around the world, intentionally and unintentionally, for centuries. Many of the species we think of as a natural part of our landscape are, in fact, non-native. For example, the honeybee, which nearly a third of US states have named as their state insect, was introduced into North America from Europe in the 1600s.

Naturalists have long been aware of this bio-globalisation, but widespread research on introduced species did not begin until the early 1980s. In those days, the message from invasion biologists was clear and simple: introduced species were bad news. They were referred to as invaders, aliens, exotics or even "biological pollution". A common refrain was that invasive species were one of the greatest extinction threats for native species, second only to habitat destruction.

Make no mistake, some introduced species have caused great harm. For example, the brown tree snake, introduced into Guam in the mid-20th century, caused the extinction of most of the island's native birds. Many other island and lake species have been driven extinct by introduced predators. The global cost of damage by non-native species to farming, timber, fisheries and waterways is estimated at well over $100 billion annually. Many of the human diseases of greatest concern are viruses that have been transported to new regions, such as SARS, West Nile virus, Ebola, H1N1 flu and HIV.

However, you may be surprised to learn that only a few per cent of introduced species are harmful. Most are relatively benign; some, such as the honeybee, can even have beneficial effects.

Despite this, many people cling to the idea that non-native species are uniformly undesirable. In my discussions with people involved in conservation and restoration programmes, for example, I find that many view native species as inherently more desirable than non-native ones. Many land managers and ecologists also hold this view.

If most non-native species are not harmful, why have so many people adopted this "nativism paradigm"? I believe there are two explanations. The first is the message sent by invasion biologists to the public over the past three decades. The second involves some general predispositions that we seem to share as humans.

Some anthropologists argue that the desire to classify is inherent in humans, as we crave a sense of order. Similarly, recent evolutionary research suggests that humans are predisposed to impose group boundaries and to see outsiders as a threat. We seek every opportunity to identify with a home land, a home tribe, a home religion, a home team, and to declare everybody else the enemy. This declaration of identity extends to the natural world. Most countries, states and provinces have designated a species of animal or plant as "theirs", declaring it the national bird or the state flower. Given this powerful predisposition, it is not surprising that people, including ecologists, show favouritism toward native organisms.

We need to move on. Scientific disciplines are often guided at their outset by a few simple ideas. However, as the field matures, participants typically recognise the complexity of their subject and the need for a more nuanced approach. This is what is happening in invasion biology.

Philosophers, social scientists and some invasion biologists have challenged the choice of language used to describe non-native species and have argued that conclusions about them sometimes rest more on prejudice than science. Others have criticised the preference for native species as scientifically unsound, arguing that invasive species do not represent a separate category, evolutionarily, biogeographically or ecologically. Others have pointed out flaws in the claim that non-native species are the second-greatest extinction threat after habitiat destruction. In fact, with the exception of insular environments such as islands and lakes, there are very few examples of extinctions being caused by non-native species.

Despite this more nuanced approach, many of my invasion biologist colleagues are reluctant to discard the nativism paradigm. Some have told me that "message enhancement" is a necessary strategy when dealing with the public and policy-makers, in order to get their attention.

I believe this strategy carries serious risks. If messages are enhanced to the point of exaggeration, they can end up eliciting well-intentioned but misguided responses, such as spending scarce resources on projects that should not be a priority. The harm being caused by introduced species is well documented. We do not need to enhance the message.

Whether we like it or not, the world's biodiversity is becoming globalised. We can call them aliens, exotics or biological pollution, but the fact is that introduced species are our new residents. It is common for humans to resist change, particularly when change is rapid and profound, as is the case with globalisation of cultures and biota. In some cases, real economic, social or ecological harm is caused. When the harm is great, society needs to mobilise its human and financial resources and respond quickly and effectively.

But resources are finite. It is crucial that we distinguish harm from mere change so that we can spend scarce human and economic capital wisely. We scientists can best assist by making sure that our messages are accessible, interesting and meaningful without compromising the science. As long as the harm is real, it should not be necessary for us to overgeneralise, exaggerate, use incendiary language or misrepresent data in order to attract attention.

Read more!

Cayman coral reefs bleached

caycompass.com 25 Sep 09;

The Cayman Islands Department of Environment has confirmed significant amounts of coral bleaching on local reefs.

Following up on reports from the diving community as well as a ‘bleaching potential’ alert from the recently installed ICON weather monitoring station in Little Cayman, DoE staff conducted a rapid assessment of reefs on the north, west and south coasts of Grand Cayman.

The scientific diving team found that nearly all corals in the shallow reefs to about 30 ft showed signs of moderate to severe bleaching, while approximately 80% of corals in the deeper reefs to 120 ft exhibited the early signs of coral bleaching.

Bleaching appeared more intense on the north coast although the reasons for this are not fully understood at this stage.

Coral bleaching is a stress related reaction whereby the coral colonies lose their colour and ‘bleach’ white either due to the loss of pigments by microscopic algae living in symbiosis with their coral hosts, or because the algae have been totally expelled. Bleaching is closely associated with sustained elevated water temperatures and UV light and has been linked to global climate change as the world’s oceans heat up.

Corals can recover from less severe bleaching episodes although recovery is variable and in some instances entire reefs have been lost to single bleaching events. The last major bout of bleaching to impact the Cayman’s reefs occurred in 1998 with significant mortality following. Minor bleaching events have been recorded in the warmer summer months with increasing frequency during the last decade.

The DOE has a Long Term Coral Reef Monitoring Programme, in place since 1997, to the track the health of Cayman’s reefs and is well placed to monitor the current extent and severity of impact associated with the recent bleaching having only just completed an extensive video survey at 55 reef sites around all three islands. Monitoring efforts will be increased over the next few weeks to better quantify and assess the impact of this bleaching event and to determine levels of recovery.

The DOE expects this current bleaching episode to increase significantly in severity in the following weeks as water temperatures remain above the threshold 29.5 degrees Celsius.

However, past water temperature data collected since 1996 suggest that local waters start cooling down from mid–October, which hopefully may bring some relief for the heat stressed corals.

Read more!

Iceland plans big whalemeat trade

Richard Black, BBC News 25 Sep 09;

The company behind Iceland's fin whaling industry is planning a huge export of whalemeat to Japan.

This summer, Hvalur hf caught 125 fins - a huge expansion on previous years.

The company's owner says he will export as much as 1,500 tonnes to Japan. This would substantially increase the amount of whalemeat in the Japanese market.

The export would be legal because these nations are exempt from the global ban on trading whalemeat, but conservation groups doubt its commercial viability.

Last year, Hvalur hf exported about 65 tonnes of whalemeat to Japan, a consignment that owner Kristjan Loftsson described as a "loss-leader".

But following this year's huge catch, he believes the next one can make money.

"We'll get a good price - we're intending to make a profit, that's for sure," he told BBC News.

Mr Loftsson said he had now suspended fin whaling for this season, having caught 125 from a quota of 150.

The remaining 25 can be carried over into next year's hunting season.

This compares with a total of seven caught in the previous three years.

The fin is globally listed as an endangered species, though Icelandic marine scientists maintain stocks are big enough locally to sustain a hunt of this size.

EU centre

New quotas were controversially set by the government of Geir Haarde just before it left office in January.

The new left-green coalition government has promised to review the situation, but has so far chosen not to revoke the five-year quotas set by its predecessor.

The government has formally applied to join the EU, and it is entirely possible that the EU would demand an end to whaling as a condition of Iceland's entry.

The application still has to be endorsed in a referendum - and some conservationists believe Mr Loftsson is using whaling as a way to lobby against EU membership.

"I think he is holding Icelandic politicians hostages to fortune," said Arni Finnsson of the Iceland Nature Conservation Association (INCA).

"He's saying that 'unless I can do this, you would be denying Iceland $40m in export income' - and how can you argue against that if you're a politician?"

The $40m figure was cited by the Fisheries Ministry under Mr Haarde's government, said Mr Finnsson, as being the size of the potential annual export market.

Election issue?

Along with other conservation organisations, INCA is adamantly opposed to trading in whalemeat, which they see as something with the potential to increase hunting in various parts of the world.

The trade is generally banned under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

But Iceland and Japan - along with a handful of other countries - lodged reservations, as the treaty permits, and so are exempt.

Conservation groups doubt that such a huge export of meat to Japan can be profitable.

A consignment of anything approaching 1,500 tonnes would mark a major expansion of the amount of meat available on the Japanese market each year.

The exact tonnage caught by Japan's whale and dolphin hunts varies each year, but 4,000 tonnes would be a reasonable ballpark figure.

Conservationists have raised the possibility that Japan's new government will re-address its whaling policies.

But Yukio Hatoyama's pre-election position appears close to that of his predecessor, holding scientific whaling to be a sovereign right and promoting the resumption of commercial whaling on abundant stocks.

Fresh supplies

Hunting for the much smaller minke whales in Icelandic waters, meanwhile, will probably end next week, with 80 caught so far.

"This is our best year yet - we're very happy about that," said Gunnar Bergmann Jonsson, head of the minke whalers' association.

"We didn't start freezing any meat before around 15th/20th August - we sold it all fresh - now we're just freezing so we have something for restaurants and stores over the winter."

Mr Jonsson said the minke whalers were also interested in exporting if the fin whale consignment proved successful.

THE LEGALITIES OF WHALING
# Objection - A country formally objects to the IWC moratorium, declaring itself exempt. Example: Norway
# Scientific - A nation issues unilateral 'scientific permits'; any IWC member can do this. Example: Japan
# Aboriginal - IWC grants permits to indigenous groups for subsistence food. Example: Alaskan Inupiat

Read more!

Africa's burning charcoal problem

Anthea Rowan, BBC News 25 Sep 09;

At a road block in western Tanzania, miles from anywhere, a uniformed official raises a flagged barrier. Nearby is a spill of black, like an oil slick.

This is one of several checkpoints which have been set up around the country in a half-hearted attempt to curtail the largely unregulated trade of charcoal, widely used across the continent as a fuel for cooking.

The guard on duty has confiscated six sacks. They lean against one another and bleed black dust into the sand.

Over the next 50 miles there are dozens of sacks propped up under trees. These will be loaded up by truck drivers who pay around $4 a bag to sell for up to six times the price in the city.

The guard at the roadblock has clearly opened his hand for "kitu kidogo" - a pay-off from coal traders in search of a quick buck.

The numbers tell the story - according to the Tanzania Association of Oil Marketing Companies, 20,000 bags of charcoal enter the capital Dar es Salaam every 24 hours.

Millions at risk

But the impact of this unregulated coal trade is chilling.

Aid agency Christian Aid estimates that 182 million people in Africa are at risk of dying as a consequence of climate change by the end of the century.

Meanwhile, Oxfam believes climate change is frustrating the efforts of millions on the continent to escape poverty.

Nobel laureate Professor Wangari Maathai offers a solution.

Why is climate change such a harbinger of doom? Andrew Simms from the New Economics Foundation explains: "Global warming means that many dry areas are going to get drier and wet areas are going to get wetter."

This imbalance will make subsistence farming, upon which millions of Africans depend, even more precarious. It will also exacerbate famine and disease.

"One adaptation option for Africa is to keep her forests standing so that they provide essential environmental services such as carbon sinks," she said.

It is estimated that carbon is accumulating in the atmosphere at an annual rate of 3.5 billion metric tonnes.

A 40-year-study by the University of Leeds of African forests - which account for a third of the world's total tropical forest - demonstrates that Africa is, indeed, a significant carbon sink.

Lee White, a climate change expert, concurs: "To get an idea of the value of the sink, the removal of nearly 5 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by intact tropical forests should be valued at around $25 billion a year. This is a compelling argument for conserving tropical forests."

But Africa has not been very good at this.

According to the UN the continent is losing forest twice as fast as the rest of the world.

"Once upon a time, Africa boasted seven million square kilometres of forest but a third of that has been lost - most of it to charcoal."

Lucrative business

The reality, however, is that in sub-Saharan Africa only 7.5% of the rural population has access to electricity.

Wood and its by-product charcoal are, unless radical steps are taken, likely to remain the primary energy source for decades.

Additionally, charcoal is a lucrative business - not only for those collecting wood to burn.

In the Kenyan capital, Nairobi, over 70 tonnes of charcoal dust is discarded daily. Some 10% of that waste is absorbed by a company called Chardust, which salvages it from charcoal traders across the city and processes it with binders as a charcoal alternative.

The company manufactures 250 tonnes of saleable product a month.

Some though are trying to look beyond the finite resource. To the west of Nairobi, Cheryl Mvula of the Tribal Voice consultancy has introduced the extraordinary Cow Dung Fuel Initiative to counter deforestation in the Mara Triangle of Kenya's Masai Mara.

Here dung is mixed with waste paper and water, fashioned into briquettes and sundried for use.

Since the project's inception in March 2009, firewood collection has reduced by 75% in the five villages where the scheme has been piloted.

Organic alternative

Back in Tanzania, where the charcoal market remains largely backstreet, the industry is valued at upwards of $150 million a year.

This figure encouraged Briton Nicholas Harrison to get involved. His company, the East Africa Briquette Company, is the only producer of an organic alternative in a region where 90% of people use charcoal.

The company's product, Mkaa Bora, is prepared from waste and post-harvest products - sawdust, charcoal dust, maize cobs and even banana skins.

Effectively, local "recipes" are designed according to a given area's crop predominance.

The waste burns more slowly and is 30% hotter than traditional charcoal.

The production is also much leaner than traditional charcoal-making, where just 40% of the wood felled is converted into a useable fuel.

But how to balance job creation with the need to protect the environment?

In Uganda, for example, which has lost half of its forest cover in the past 30 years, charcoal production yields 20,000 jobs and generates more than $20 million in income every year. In Kenya it is 10 times that figure.

Clearly any future charcoal alternative has to fill the gap.

Whether any African governments are keen to break away from the convenient job-creator - particularly during a challenging economic climate - to invest in alternatives will be a true test of their commitment to the environment.

POWER IN AFRICA
# Only 4% of electricity generated worldwide is produced in Africa
# Sub-Saharan Africa has the world's lowest electrification rate at 25.9%
# Rural electrification rates in sub-Saharan Africa are only 8%
# 70% of household income in Africa is spent on energy (diesel, kerosene, charcoal)
# 80% of Africans rely on biomass for energy (wood or charcoal fuel)
# 4 million hectares of forest are felled each year in Africa, twice the world average

Source: The World Future Council

Read more!

How safe are incinerators?

Kieran Cooke, The Times Online 21 Sep 09;

Q: I was persuaded to sign a petition as part of a successful campaign preventing the building of a local incinerator. Now I’m wondering if I was too hasty: I know that we can’t continue just dumping waste in the ground — is incineration safe?

A: A petition is thrust at you. An incinerator will be harmful to health — think of your children. It will emit a serious pong. It will be unsightly and, the final weapon in the anti-incinerator armoury, having one nearby is sure to bring down the value of your house.

Amid all the emotion and Nimbyism about waste disposal, the facts tend to go up in smoke. Modern incinerators are far more efficient and well-designed than those of only 15 years ago.

According to a recent report by the Health Protection Agency (HPA), air pollution — expressed in volumes of what’s called particulate matter — is a tiny fraction of that caused by the exhaust fumes from cars and lorries.

“The evidence suggests that any potential damage to the health of those living close to incinerators is likely to be very small, if detectable,” the HPA says.

The Germans, Swedes and Danes have been happily incinerating on a big scale for years. The UK at present has 23 incinerators in operation, with another 70-80 planned. Burn it, don’t bury it is the new catchphrase: as you say, we can’t go on shoving our refuse into holes in the ground. Landfill creates large amounts of methane, one of the most potent of greenhouse gases. If we don’t find alternative ways of dealing with waste, the EU will clobber us with ever-bigger fines.

While the health issue might not be so important, incineration does give rise to other problems. A modern incinerator, capable of not only burning enormous amounts of rubbish but also of generating energy to be fed into the grid, is an extremely expensive piece of kit. Waste companies want to be sure that they will have enough waste in the future to justify their investment.

The trouble is that it’s very difficult to forecast just how much waste will be generated in the years ahead. After all, we’re all being told to recycle as much as possible: in some areas waste volumes are already falling.

What’s needed are smaller high-tech incinerators on the edge of most big towns and cities. But the waste business talks of “economies of scale” — the bigger the plant, the more cost-effective it is.

It’s a real conundrum, so don’t worry too much about being confused. We all are.

Kieran Cooke

Read more!

Population: Enough of us now

Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich, New Scientist 25 Sep 09;

GLOBAL population growth has slowed significantly, but it hasn't stopped. By 2050 there may be about 35 per cent more people on Earth than there are today. We are already seeing increasing shortages of food, water and other resources and growing numbers of hungry people.

Yet to embark on any discussion about limiting our numbers is to enter sensitive and controversial territory. Perhaps this is not surprising, as in the 1960s, when population growth became an issue of widespread concern, the discussions often had a racist undertone, in which the "well-off" focused on the exploding populations of "underdeveloped nations".

Nowadays it is understood that the key population-related issue is the destructive pressure human activity is exerting on our life-support systems, posing a growing threat to the sustainability of civilisation. Of course, this is not all because of human numbers; it also has to do with how much each of us consumes. That's why, in our view, the US with its population of over 300 million and high per capita consumption should be seen as Earth's most overpopulated nation. It is also why the emergence of "new consumers" constitutes a major additional assault on global life-support systems. Moreover, the 2.3 billion people likely to be added to the human population by 2050 will undermine those systems much more seriously than did the previous 2.3 billion, as each additional person will, on average, have to be supported by scarcer, lower-quality resources imposing ever greater environmental costs.

Yet many people still assume that humanity will easily manage to support more than 9 billion people in 2050 and beyond. Such confidence ignores some grim possibilities. There are only two ways by which population can stop increasing: a falling birth rate or rising death rates. We have already seen a rise in death rates in southern Africa and Russia, and there may well be further increases in death rate ahead, especially as disruption to the global climate increasingly destabilises agricultural systems. Even today, more than a billion people are going hungry.

The environmental deterioration resulting from ever more people consuming ever more resources will place the heaviest burdens on those least able to cope, as the great majority of those additional billions of people will be in the poorest nations, where poverty and high birth rates are inextricably linked. Uganda's population, for example, is predicted to almost treble by 2050, growing from around 33 million today to 91 million in the next 40 years. Rapid population growth undermines development efforts. The resulting poor education, lack of public health facilities, and inadequate infrastructure in turn foster high birth rates.

Yet the priority given to population issues has diminished compared with concerns about development. If population growth continues unabated, we fear the problems of development will be "solved" by rises in death rates. For this reason, efforts to slow population growth should be treated as a human rights issue.

The way to reduce fertility rates is well known. It involves a cultural shift towards improving the education and status of women, making family planning and safe abortion more widely available, and moving towards a world where every child is a wanted child.

Nearly all developing countries have family planning programmes, but they are badly in need of renewed support. There has to be a recognition, at the highest political level, of the importance of reducing birth rates both as a pressing human rights issue and as a proven contributor to successful development.

This has to be linked to family health and welfare programmes, to education (especially for girls) and to the opening up of opportunities for women to participate in their nations' economies. An example of what can be achieved is provided by the Grameen bank, which offers credit to the poor people of Bangladesh, especially women, and has no doubt helped reduce birth rates there simply by boosting grassroots economic development.

Somehow, cultural attitudes toward large families everywhere need to be changed. It should be considered immoral to have excessive numbers of children - an attitude that already exists in most industrialised nations with low birth rates. Nothing is more clearly a governmental responsibility than keeping a nation's population size sustainable by benevolent measures.

As well as curbing population growth, we shouldn't forget the pressing issue of excessive consumption by the rich. Humanity needs to get behind a global discussion of these issues, perhaps through a framework we have devised called the Millennium Assessment of Human Behavior (http://mahb.stanford.edu). This is a forum for global discussion of key ethical and cultural issues related to the human predicament. A major element of that discussion must be how to end the growth of the total human population humanely and begin a slow decline similar to the one that has so fortunately started in Europe and Japan. If that can be done, then a sustainable future for civilisation might be possible.

Days when the world has shrunk

The inexorable rise of the human population has been the dominant theme of our planet for centuries. In recent history, days that we know to have ended with fewer people than they started with are extremely rare.

The most recent was 26 December 2004, when the Indian Ocean tsunami killed nearly 250,000 people. Another 160,000 died that day of other causes, and the day's 370,000 births couldn't compensate, according to environmentalist Robert Engelman in his book More.

You have to go back to the 1970s to find other days of world population shrinkage, such as the Tangshan earthquake in China on 28 July 1976 and the devastating cyclone that hit Bangladesh on 12 November 1970, both of which killed at least 250,000 people. Even China's great famine of 1958 to 1961, which caused around 15 million deaths, dented rather than stalled world population growth.

Further back in time, the 70,000 deaths caused by the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, on 6 August 1945 outweighed the population growth of around 60,000 people that would otherwise have taken place that day. With a lower death toll, the same probably isn't true of the bombing of Nagasaki three days later. Even a particularly bad day during the first world war, such as 1 July 1916 when the British alone lost around 20,000 men at the battle of the Somme, probably didn't stall the world's upward population trend. However, the flu pandemic of 1918 to 1920, which killed about 50 million people, almost certainly did.

The biggest hit to world population in (relatively) recent times is the Black Death of the 14th century, which killed perhaps 75 million people and reduced Europe's population by 30 per cent.

Things will be very different in the future. There will still be disasters and wars, of course, but some time after 2050 the world will enter a new era when the population will shrink on many days. We will simply be having fewer children.

Alison George

Paul Ehrlich is an ecologist and evolutionary biologist who became a best-selling author with his 1968 book The Population Bomb. He is now professor of population studies at Stanford University, California.

Anne Ehrlich has co-authored several books with Paul, and is a director at the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford

Read more!

Good news on environment, but can it last?

Russell Blinch, Reuters 25 Sep 09;

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - There's nothing like a recession to help clear the air of toxins and drive down pump prices -- but we all know it can't last. Or can it?

Even some of the gloomier environmental prognosticators see the world's steep recession possibly prompting a lasting shift in consumer behavior that could form the basis of a more sustainable environment.

As nations haggle about how to battle climate change, global greenhouse gas emissions are in sharp retreat despite an ample supply of fossil-based fuels.

"The United States has entered a new energy era, ending a century of rising carbon emissions," said activist Lester Brown in a recent article.

As president of the Earth Policy Institute, Brown is known for bleak forecasts but now sees the world on a better course.

"Even though part of this decline in carbon emissions was caused by the recession and higher gasoline prices, part of it came from gains in energy efficiency and shifts to carbon-free sources of energy, including record amounts of new wind-generating capacity," he wrote on his website.

While the U.S. Congress is deadlocked and hope is fading for an international deal to combat global warming at a December meeting in Copenhagen, carbon dioxide emissions are shrinking around the world.

Greenhouse gas emissions are expected to fall by about 2.6 percent this year, the steepest fall in more than 40 years, the International Energy Agency predicted this week.

Even more startling, U.S. emissions are expected to drop 6 percent, to their lowest level since 1999, according to the World Resources Institute.

A fall in industrial production and sharp decline by the world's top gas-guzzler, the United States, is a big part of the improving outlook for emissions, which scientists say need to be controlled to prevent global warming.

NEVER SCALE THAT PEAK AGAIN?

Some changes of the past two years seem set to continue, even after the U.S. economy recovers.

Record energy prices in 2008 prompted many consumers to switch to smaller cars and even to public transit. Even though prices later retreated, analysts increasingly see the classic American gas guzzler as an artifact of the past.

"The general trend for improved energy efficiency is likely to continue and has been going on for a long time. I don't see a groundswell of people buying Hummers," said John Felmy, chief economist with the American Petroleum Institute, referring to oversized cars that symbolized U.S. excess.

Even after more autos return to the roads, tough new fuel economy standards will soon begin kicking in.

Average fuel standards for new cars and light trucks will rise by 10 miles a gallon to 35.5 miles per gallon between 2012 and 2016. Carbon emissions should fall by 900 million metric tons, or more than 30 percent, over the life of the program.

When gas prices soared in 2007 and 2008, Americans still drove over 3 trillion miles (4.8 trillion km) a year.

Last year, miles driven fell by 3.6 percent and the figure stayed just as low during the first seven months of this year.

"It's going to be a long time before we get back to that '07 peak," said Jim Ritterbusch, president of Illinois-based Ritterbusch & Associates, an oil trading advisory firm.

Renewable energies are expanding their role. China is promising big strides while the Obama administration is lavishing $90 billion dollars to boost solar and wind power.

Some environmentalists worry that progress on emissions could backfire if politicians use the improvement to argue that there's no need to pass laws controlling emissions.

Gernot Wagner, economist at the Environmental Defense Fund, believes the United States and other countries still need to cement progress with legislation to cap emissions.

"Key is to set an absolute cap on emissions to reorient the U.S. and global economy toward a low-carbon, high-efficiency development path and climate safety," he said.

Said Dan Weiss, who directs climate strategy at the Center for American Progress think-tank, reflected the cautious optimism among activists: "It's definitely too soon to break out the champagne but it's definitely cause to think about where the champagne is," he said.

(Additional reporting by Tom Doggett and Timothy Gardner; Editing by Alan Elsner and Simon Denyer)

Read more!

FACTBOX: Climate negotiating positions of top five emitters

Reuters 25 Sep 09;

(Reuters) - Following are the negotiating positions of the top five greenhouse gas emitters in the run-up to a new U.N. pact for combating climate change to be agreed in Copenhagen in December:

1) CHINA (annual emissions of greenhouse gases: 6.8 billion metric tons, 5.5 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - President Hu Jingtao promised on September 22 that China would cut its carbon dioxide emissions per dollar of economic output by a "notable margin" by 2020 compared to 2005. The "carbon intensity" goal is the first measurable curb on national emissions for China. Hu reiterated a promise that China would try to raise the share of non-fossil fuels in primary energy consumption to 15 percent by 2020.

* Demands - China wants developed nations to cut their greenhouse gas emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and to give far more aid and green technologies to developing nations.

2) UNITED STATES (6.4 billion metric tons, 21.2 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - President Barack Obama wants to cut U.S. emissions back to 1990 levels by 2020 and by 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. For 2020, that means a 14 percent cut from 2007 levels.

"We will press ahead with deep cuts in emissions to reach the goals that we set for 2020, and eventually 2050," he told the United Nations on September 23, adding that the days when the United States "dragged its feet" were over.

A bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in June would require large companies, including utilities, oil refiners and others, to cut emissions by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels. Senate Democrats plan to unveil a bill on September 30.

* Finance - The United States says a "dramatic increase" is needed in funds to help developing nations.

* Demands - "We cannot meet this challenge unless all the largest emitters of greenhouse gas pollution act together," Obama said.

3) EUROPEAN UNION (5.03 billion metric tons, 10.2 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - EU leaders agreed in December 2008 to cut emissions by 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and by 30 percent if other developed nations follow suit.

* Finance - EU leaders have agreed that developing nations will need about 100 billion euros ($146.8 billion) a year by 2020 to help them curb emissions and adapt to changes such as floods or heatwaves. As an advance payment, they suggest 5-7 billion a year between 2010 and 2012.

* Demands - The EU wants developing nations to curb the rise of their emissions by 15 to 30 percent below a trajectory of "business as usual" by 2020.

5) RUSSIA (1.7 billion metric tons, 11.9 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in June that Russia's emissions would be around 10 to 15 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. That means a rise from now -- emissions were 34 percent below 1990 levels in 2007.

* Demands - Putin said on September 11 that Russia would reject any new climate pact that imposed restrictions on Russia but did not bind other big polluters such as the United States or China.

4) INDIA (1.4 billion metric tons, 1.2 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - India is prepared to quantify the amount of greenhouse gas emissions it could cut with domestic actions to fight climate change, but will not accept internationally binding targets, Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said on September 17. India has said its per capita emissions will never rise to match those of developed nations.

* Demands - Like China, India wants developed nations to cut emissions by at least 40 percent by 2020, saying they are most responsible for emissions since the Industrial Revolution

5) JAPAN (1.4 billion metric tons, 11.0 metric tons per capita)

* Emissions - New Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama wants to cut Japan's emissions by 25 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 if Copenhagen agrees an ambitious deal, toughening a goal set by the previous government of an eight percent reduction.

* Finance - Hatoyama told the United Nations on September 22 that Tokyo would also step up aid. "Japan is prepared to offer more financial and technical assistance than in the past, in accordance with the progress of the international negotiations," he said.

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 25 Sep 09

Moulting Gliders
from Life's Indulgences

Chestnut-Bellied Malkoha collecting nesting material
from Bird Ecology Study Group

The Jesus bird
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Kusu Island pilgrimage season: 18 Oct - 16 Nov
from wild shores of singapore

Freedom for hawksbill turtles of Kusu Island
from wild shores of singapore

Coastal forest at Marina at Keppel Bay
from wild shores of singapore

A Meeting of Minds - Wilson and Watson in Conversation
from Encyclopedia of Life Blog

Read more!

Fanged frog, 162 other new species found in Mekong

Michael Casey, Associated Press 25 Sep 09;

BANGKOK — A gecko with leopard-like stripes on its body and a fanged frog that eats birds were among 163 new species discovered last year in the Mekong River region of Southeast Asia, an environmental group said Friday.

WWF International said that in 2008 scientists discovered 100 plants, 28 fish, 18 reptiles, 14 amphibians, 2 mammals and 1 bird species in the region. That is in addition to the 1,000 new species catalogued there from 1997 to 2007.


This photo taken Jan. 1, 2008, released by The World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) shows a Khorat big-mouthed frog, known by its scientific name Limnonectes megastomias at an unknown location in Thailand.

"After millennia in hiding these species are now finally in the spotlight, and there are clearly more waiting to be discovered," said Stuart Chapman, director of the WWF Greater Mekong Program.

Researchers working for WWF warned that the effects of climate change, including an upsurge in droughts and floods, threaten the diverse habitat that supports these species.

"Some species will be able to adapt to climate change, many will not, potentially resulting in massive extinctions," Chapman said in a statement. "Rare, endangered and endemic species like those newly discovered are especially vulnerable because climate change will further shrink their already restricted habitats."

Among the stars in this new list was a fanged frog in eastern Thailand. Given the scientific name Limnonectes megastomias, the frog lies in wait along streams for prey including birds and insects. Scientists believe it uses its fangs during combat with other males.

Another unusual discovery was the leopard gecko found on Cat Ba Island in northern Vietnam. Goniurosaurus catbaensis has large, orange-brown cat-like eyes, and leopard stripes down the length of its body.

Lee Grismer, of La Sierra University in California, said he found the gecko and was "engrossed" in capturing it "when my son pointed out that my hand was on a rock mere inches away from the head of a pit viper."

"We caught the snake and the gecko and they both proved to be new species," he said.

Other new species found were a tube-nosed bat named Murina harpioloides that lives in southeastern Vietnam and a new bird species called the Nonggang babbler found in the karst rainforest on the Chinese-Vietnamese border, an area of limestone fissures, sinkholes and underground streams.

Experts said a range of factors contributed to the upsurge in new species including better access to regions that have seen decades of war and political unrest and governments stepping up spending on research to protect and identify plants and animals.

The discoveries have been published in peer-reviewed journals and the WWF simply compiled the findings to publicize what it says could otherwise go unnoticed.

The WWF called for efforts to ensure the new species are protected, by preserving their habitat and the river networks that are a foundation of the region's ecosystem.

New species discovered in the Greater Mekong at risk of extinction due to climate change
WWF 25 Sep 09;

Greater Mekong - A bird eating fanged frog, a gecko that looks like it’s from another planet and a bird which would rather walk than fly, are among the 163 new species discovered in the Greater Mekong region last year that are now at risk of extinction due to climate change, says a new report launched by WWF ahead of UN climate talks in Bangkok.

During 2008 alone, scientists identified these rare and unique species within the jungles and rivers of the Greater Mekong, including a bird eating fanged frog that lies in streams waiting for prey, one of only four new species of musk shrew to be described in recent times, and a leopard gecko whose “other world” appearance – orange eyes, spindly limbs and technicolour skin – inspired the report’s title Close Encounters.

Such is the immense biodiversity of this region that some discoveries such as the tiger-striped pitviper were made by accident.

“We were engrossed in trying to catch a new species of gecko when my son pointed out that my hand was on a rock mere inches away from the head of a pitviper! We caught the snake and the gecko and they both proved to be new species,” said Dr Lee Grismer of La Sierra University in California.

Close Encounters spotlights species newly identified by science including 100 plants, 28 fish, 18 reptiles, 14 amphibians, 2 mammals and a bird, all discovered in 2008 within the Greater Mekong region of Southeast Asia that spans Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and the south-western Chinese province of Yunnan.

The reluctant flyer, Nonggang babbler, was observed walking longer distances than flying. It would only use its wings when frightened.

“After millennia in hiding these species are now finally in the spotlight, and there are clearly more waiting to be discovered,” said Stuart Chapman, Director of the WWF Greater Mekong Programme.

But no sooner are these new species discovered than their survival is threatened by the devastating impacts of climate change, the report warns.

Recent studies show the climate of the Greater Mekong region is already changing. Models suggest continued warming, increased variability and more frequent and damaging extreme climate events.

Rising seas and saltwater intrusion will cause major coastal impacts especially in the Mekong River delta, which is one of the three most vulnerable deltas on Earth, according to the most recent International Panel on Climate Change report.

“Some species will be able to adapt to climate change, many will not, potentially resulting in massive extinctions,” said Chapman.

“Rare, endangered and endemic species like those newly discovered are especially vulnerable because climate change will further shrink their already restricted habitats,” he said.

Often these newly discovered species are highly dependent on a limited number of species for their survival. If they respond to climate change in a way that disrupts this closely evolved relationship it puts them at greater risk of extinction.

Over the next two weeks, government delegates will meet in Bangkok, Thailand, for the next round of UN climate change talks in the lead up to the Copenhagen Climate Summit this December, where the world is scheduled to agree on a new global climate treaty.

“The treasures of nature are in trouble if governments fail to agree a fair, ambitious and binding treaty that will prevent runaway climate change,” said Kathrin Gutmann, Head of Policy and Advocacy at the WWF Global Climate Initiative.

“Protecting endangered species and vulnerable communities in the Greater Mekong and elsewhere around the world depends on fast progress at the UN talks in Bangkok - a hugely important conference that can lay the groundwork for success at the Copenhagen Climate Summit this December.”

Download the report on the WWF website.

Climate change threatens rare species in Mekong: WWF
Thin Lei Win, Reuters 25 Sep 09;

BANGKOK (Reuters) - Climate change is threatening 163 rare species discovered only last year in the Greater Mekong region, conservation group WWF said Friday.

Events such as frequent droughts and floods plus a rise in sea levels spell danger for species in what WWF called in a report "one of the world's last biological frontiers," a region spanning Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam and China's Yunnan province.

"Forecasts for the Greater Mekong region show that climate change will dramatically alter ecosystems," Geoffrey Blate, WWF's regional climate change coordinator, told Reuters.

"Species most at risk are those with the least physiological tolerance to changes in temperature and precipitation, and those species with narrow or very restricted habitats."

Among the rare new species identified as vulnerable in the "Close Encounters" report are a bird that would rather walk than fly, a frog with fangs and a leopard-striped gecko with orange eyes.

Their habitats and the food they need for survival are often already restricted and climate change is expected to worsen the situation, according to the WWF.

It said many would not be able to adapt to climate change, "potentially resulting in massive extinctions."

With a diverse geography and climate zones, the Mekong is home to over 320 million people and numerous rare species, including the deer-like saola and the world's largest huntsman spider with a leg span of 30 cm (12 inches).

(Editing by Alan Raybould)

Read more!

A*Star flips a switch on smart energy

Agency calls prequalifying tender to build test facility for intelligent energy grid
Ronnie Lim, Business Times 25 Sep 09;

(SINGAPORE) In years to come, you could be looking at the humble electrical socket on your wall in a whole new light.

Singapore is setting up an experimental base for a future islandwide 'smart' energy grid which potentially will be able to incorporate power not just from mainstream power stations but also from new alternative energy sources.

With electric cars looking like becoming viable, one little scenario might involve car owners selling unused electrical power back into the national power grid while being also able to tap into the grid to recharge their batteries as needed.

But the possibilities as to what can be fed into the grid to diversify its sources will be limited only by the imagination and feasible technology. Potential sources could involve biodiesel, solar photo-voltaic cells or any feasible future technology.

Taking a step forward, the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*Star) yesterday called a prequalifying tender for a developer to design and build an Experimental Power Grid Centre (EPGC) microgrid and distributed energy test facility towards realising an intelligent national energy grid.

The EPGC microgrid and distributed energy test facility will be built on Jurong Island. EPGC - a new A*Star research centre based at the Institute of Chemical & Engineering Sciences - aims to be a world-class research centre for intelligent grids and distributed energy resources.

According to A*Star, the EPGC will conduct research, together with other collaboration partners, on intelligent grids, microgrids and on integration of distributed energy resources, including conventional and alternative fuels such as diesel, natural gas, biodiesel and hydrogen in a variety of power network configurations.

The distributed energy resources may include biofuel generators, fuel cells, electrical storage, solar photovoltaic, microturbines and electric, plug-in, hybrid vehicles which can sell back electricity to the system during peak demand hours.

A*Star said that the overall EPGC research infrastructure will comprise a remote command and control (C&C) facility located in Fusionopolis and the distributed energy test facility on Jurong Island. The C&C facility is being developed to support infocomm technologies and computer-based research activities and will also enable remote monitoring and control of the test facility on Jurong Island.

The latest EPGC project follows Energy Market Authority chief executive Lawrence Wong telling BT earlier this month that the development of a smart grid was an area which EMA was looking at together with other agencies here, and that it expects to announce 'the next steps of what we want to do' by year-end.

A smart grid, he said, can potentially allow plug-in electric cars (testing of which will start here next year) to re-sell energy back to the system. It can also integrate renewable energy options - accommodating, for example, the otherwise intermittent power obtained only during sunshine hours from solar panels.

'So when we look at smart grids, we are thinking about how to make our energy grid smarter,' said Mr Wong.

Singapore is already testing the use of smart meters under the Electricity Vending System (EVS) to eventually allow for full retail contestability, where households can choose which retailer to buy electricity from.

The EVS pilot in Marine Parade and West Coast will be completed by November, giving EMA the chance to study the feasibility of deploying it on a larger scale. That could also eventually become an integral component of the smart grid infrastructure here.

A*Star said in its EPGC tender document that the microgrid will be based on a low-voltage network and connected to the main grid. The power that can be generated from the microgrid will be around one megawatt.

This compares with the smallest generating unit of 2.13 MW in the power grid here - that of IUT Singapore's bio-methanisation plant, which creates energy from food-waste.

The tender for design, building, installation, testing and commissioning of the EPGC microgrid and distributed energy test facility - to be sited on Pesek Road, off Jurong Island Highway - will be done in two stages: prequalification, followed by a design-and-build tender.

The estimated timeline for the entire project, from award of tender, is about 15 months.

Read more!