School Holidays Fun – Come down to RMBR this March Holidays!
from Raffles Museum News
Interaction between raptors and non-raptors
from Bird Ecology Study Group
110316 Venus Drive [day]
from Singapore Nature
Massive construction at Berlayar Creek
from wild shores of singapore and Interesting coastal trees at Labrador
Those that don't meet targets in two or three years may lose licences
Jessica Lim Straits Times 17 Mar 11;
FISH farms in Singapore have to reel in higher output or face the prospect of losing their licences.
The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) is setting targets for the 95 coastal fish farms to increase productivity. Each farm must yield a minimum of 17 tonnes of fish per half-hectare of space annually. That space is the average size of a fish farm here.
'What we need to do with regard to local farming is to ensure that all the land that has been set aside for local farming will be productive,' said AVA chief executive Tan Poh Hong yesterday.
Speaking at a press conference to announce its plans, she added that licences may not be renewed if targets are not met within two or three years.
According to the AVA, some possible reasons for poor harvests could be a lack of capital or skills, or misuse of space, like using the farm for entertainment purposes. The push is part of a greater move to lift the percentage of local fish in the national supply from the current 4 per cent to 15 per cent in the next five to 10 years.
Singapore imports 90 per cent of its food so increased local production would give some protection from disruptions in global food supply and escalating prices.
Currently, 23 of the 95 coastal farms exceed the 17-tonne target. Ten are getting 8.5 to 17 tonnes and 36 are netting less than 8.5 tonnes. The remaining farms are new or have undergone a recent change of ownership.
The AVA will send teams to farms in the next few months to identify gaps and develop improvement plans, such as helping farmers to apply for funds and sharing information on subjects such as fish vaccination and feeding.
The AVA is now more stringent with new applications for fish-farm licences, with applicants assessed for technical expertise and financial backing.
It launched a $5 million food fund in December 2009, and doubled it to $10 million in 2010, to improve the operations of local farms. However, only a few of the more capable fish farmers had applied, said Ms Tan.
Some fish farmers have got together to promote their interests. The Singapore Marine Co-operative Societies, the first farm co-op here, was set up in January this year, with 24 members who own eight farms.
It has not made any headway on meeting its target of more than 100 tonnes of fish a month from each of its member farms. Its founder Philip Lim, who owns a 3ha fish farm off Pasir Ris, said members now produce 55 tonnes of fish per year.
Other fish farm owners like Mr James Loh, 55, a fisherman for the past 20 years, think a lot more work will be needed to meet the target.
'I hope the AVA can help and give us some funding. We are so small, it's not easy,' said Mr Loh, who now produces 10 tonnes of fish a year from his half-hectare farm off the east coast.
AVA to help fish farms raise productivity
Channel NewsAsia 16 Mar 11;
SINGAPORE: The Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) is stepping up efforts to help local fish farms increase productivity.
This is to meet Singapore's target of being able to produce 15 per cent of fish consumed locally.
Over the next few months, AVA will be visiting every fish farm to understand the farmers' needs so that it can assist them in developing plans to help them achieve minimum production targets.
There are currently 111 fish farms in Singapore.
Of these, 95 are coastal farms and the other 16 comprise deep sea farms, hatcheries, industrial-scale farms and oyster or shellfish farms.
These farms produce about four per cent of Singapore's total fish consumption.
As part of AVA's licensing conditions for coastal fish farms, the farms are required to meet a minimum production target of 17 tonnes of fish per half-hectare space annually.
Of the 95 coastal farms, 23 are currently producing more than the minimum production level of 17 tonnes.
Ten are producing between 8.5 and 17 tonnes, while another 36 are producing at below 8.5 tonnes.
The remaining 26 farms are new farms or farms which had undergone a recent change of ownership.
AVA said it will work closely with farmers who are not meeting the minimum production target, to help them improve their productivity.
Specifically, the authority will help them identify gaps that hinder production and develop improvement plans.
Farmers will also be encouraged to leverage on AVA's Food Fund to improve farming technology and upgrade production capability.
-CNA/wk
Jermyn Chow Straits Times 17 Mar 11;
ANY decision on whether or not to have nuclear energy in Singapore is a long way away, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) reiterated yesterday.
Responding to requests from The Straits Times for an update on the nuclear option, MTI said that Singapore is in the midst of a 'pre-feasibility study on nuclear energy'.
It said safety is a very important consideration, and is one of the key areas being studied.
'It will be a long time before we make any decision on nuclear energy. We are closely monitoring and learning from the developments in Japan,' it added in a statement.
At an energy conference in November last year, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had identified nuclear power as an 'important part of the solution to mankind's energy problems'.
He said Singapore was building up its capabilities now because the nuclear option is one it 'cannot afford to dismiss'.
Measures taken will include getting in touch with nuclear experts as well as training local engineers and scientists.
He said then that MTI was doing a pre-feasibility study on having nuclear power here, but it will be a long time before any decision is made.
Those in the nuclear and energy fields contacted said that events in Japan were unlikely to derail the pre-feasibility study.
Assistant Professor T.S. Gopi Rethinaraj of the National University of Singapore's Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy said: 'What happened in Japan is an act of God and highly unlikely to happen in Singapore as it does not sit on any fault lines and will be insulated from any earthquakes or tsunamis.'
He holds a PhD in nuclear engineering from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Agreeing, Dr Hooman Peimani, who heads the energy security division at NUS' Energy Studies Institute, pointed out that there had been only two other major nuclear plant accidents over the last 60 years.
They were the 1979 partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island reactor in Pennsylvania in the United States, and the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine.
He said that aside from natural calamities, terrorist threats and saboteurs, there were no 'worst-case scenarios' that might hamper Singapore's nuclear capabilities.
'Even so, Singapore's oil refineries have already been so well guarded over the past 30 years, I don't think defence or security will be an issue,' said Dr Peimani, who presented a paper on the viability of underground nuclear reactors in Singapore at the Nuclear Power conference last year.
Mr Ravi Krishnaswamy, vice-president of consultancy Frost & Sullivan's Asia-Pacific energy and power systems practice, said that the decision to build nuclear reactors will take years.
During pre-feasibility studies, the authorities will, among other things, assess if nuclear energy is feasible and look at its implications on health, he said.
Decision on nuclear energy will take "a long time": MTI
Hoe Yeen Nie Channel NewsAsia 16 Mar 11;
SINGAPORE: Safety is one of the key considerations in a current pre-feasibility study on nuclear energy, and it will be "a long time" before any decision is made, said Singapore's Trade and Industry Ministry.
The ministry said this in response to a query from Channel NewsAsia which received comments from viewers who wanted to know about Singapore's nuclear plans in the wake of Japan's crisis.
The ministry said it is also monitoring and learning from the developments in Japan.
In November, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had said Singapore should not dismiss the option of nuclear power as a viable and clean source of energy.
Mr Lee also said a nuclear power plant could be built within his lifetime.
Friday's deadly quake and tsunami have damaged a nuclear power plant in Fukushima, causing fears of a nuclear meltdown.
The crisis has prompted several European countries to review safety standards at their plants.
- CNA/cc
No nuclear energy plans yet for Singapore but study in the works
Today Online 17 Mar 11;
Responding to MediaCorp's queries, Singapore's Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) reiterated that it "will be a long time" before the Government makes any decision on nuclear energy.
According to MTI, the Government was in the midst of a "pre-feasibility study" on nuclear energy. The pre-feasibility study is to explore whether Singapore can even begin to consider nuclear energy.
The MTI said: "Safety is a very important consideration and is one of the key areas being studied."
It added: "We are closely monitoring and learning from the developments in Japan."
Last November, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had said that while a nuclear power project was not scheduled to start any time soon, a nuclear plant could be built in Singapore "during my lifetime". ESTHER NG
Rethink Singapore's nuclear option
Straits Times Forum 17 Mar 11;
AS JAPAN continues to race against time to avert a nuclear disaster in the wake of last Friday's earthquake and tsunami, other Asian nations, including Singapore, should pause and review the feasibility of the nuclear energy option.
The Government and our experts must carefully study the claims of nuclear power plant companies that are promising high safety and reliability standards.
Despite the safety measures Japan adopted, what we have seen in recent days is a breakdown of the assurances by the nuclear industry.
Singapore is small and it is physically impossible to meet the 30km radius safety requirement for a nuclear power plant.
Siow Jia Rui
How sure are we of nuclear safety claims?
Letter from Siow Jia Rui Today Online 17 Mar 11;
AS JAPAN continues to race against time to avert a nuclear disaster in the wake of last Friday's earthquake and tsunami, described by Prime Minister Naoto Kan as the "most severe crisis" since World War II, it is useful for countries in Asia, including Singapore, to pause and rethink the feasibility of the nuclear energy option.
In 2008, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew noted at the Singapore Energy Lecture that "the real alternative that can produce the electricity generation to match oil and gas is nuclear".
As Singapore considers whether or not to embark on the nuclear option, I strongly urge our Government and experts/consultants to carefully study the claims of the nuclear power plant companies that are promising high safety and reliability standards.
Despite all the safety measures put in place in Japan, what we have seen in recent days is a breakdown of the assurances by the nuclear industry that the redundancies and fail-safe mechanisms will actually work.
We all know that the probability of a nightmare scenario can never be reduced to zero. Singapore is small and it is physically impossible to meet the 30-km radius safety requirement for a nuclear power plant.
Realistically, given Singapore's size, if a major nuclear accident were to take place here, we face the real risk of becoming a nation of refugees.
I, for one, am not willing to see that happening to our country or to put at risk the lives of our children and future generations of Singaporeans.
Nothing clean and green about nuclear power
Benjamin K. Sovacool, For The Straits Times 17 Mar 11;
THE unfolding situation with the Fukushima No. 1 and Fukushima No. 2 plants in Japan has underscored the grave safety concerns with nuclear power, which has never had a laudable environmental record.
South-east Asian planners, including those in Singapore, often forget the serious environmental impact associated with other parts of the nuclear fuel cycle, especially those relating to uranium mining and climate change.
For example, the uranium needed to fuel all reactors, including those in Japan, is mined in three different ways: underground mining, open-pit mining and in-situ leaching. Each is hazardous, and bad for people and the environment.
Underground mining extracts uranium much like other minerals such as copper, gold and silver, and involves digging narrow shafts deep into the earth.
Open-pit mining, the most prevalent type, is similar to strip mining for coal, where upper layers of rock are removed so that machines can extract uranium.
Uranium miners perform in-situ leaching by pumping acid or alkaline liquid solutions into the areas surrounding uranium deposits.
In Australia, the third-largest producer of uranium, a detailed investigation of the environmental impact from the Rum Jungle mine found that it discharged acidic liquid wastes directly into creeks that flowed into the Finniss River.
The Roxby Downs mine has polluted the Arabunna people's traditional land with 80 million tonnes of annual dumped tailings, in addition to the mine's daily extraction of 30 million litres of water from the Great Artesian Basin. The Ranger mine has seen 120 documented leaks, spills and breaches of its tailings waste, which has seeped into waterways and contaminated the Kakuda wetlands. The Beverley mine has been fined for dumping liquid radioactive waste into groundwater.
In China, the country's largest uranium mine, No. 792, is reputed to dump untreated radioactive water directly into the Bailong River, a tributary of the Yangtze.
In India, researchers from the Bhabha Atomic Research Centre in Mumbai found that underground uranium mines at Bhatin, Narwapahar and Turamdih, along with the uranium enrichment plant at Jaduguda, discharged mine water and mill tailings contaminated with radionuclides such as radon and residual uranium, radium and other pollutants directly into local water supplies.
Such examples have not been chosen selectively, with scores of serious documented incidents also at uranium mines in Brazil, Canada, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, South Africa, Tajikistan, the United States, Uzbekistan and a slew of African states - virtually every major country where it is produced.
Even climate change, an issue the nuclear industry has been quick to rally around, does not bode favourably for new nuclear plants. Reprocessing and enriching uranium require a substantial amount of electricity, often generated by fossil fuel-fired power plants. Uranium milling, mining, leaching, plant construction and decommissioning all produce substantial amounts of greenhouse gases.
When one takes into account the carbon-equivalent emissions associated with the entire nuclear life cycle, nuclear plants contribute significantly to climate change - and will contribute even more as stockpiles of high-grade uranium are depleted.
An assessment of 103 life-cycle studies of greenhouse gas-equivalent emissions for nuclear power plants found that the average carbon dioxide emissions over the typical lifetime of a plant are about 66g for every kilowatt hour (kwh), or the equivalent of about 183 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2005.
If the global nuclear industry were taxed at a rate of US$24 (S$31) per tonne for the carbon-equivalent emissions associated with its life cycle, the cost of nuclear power would increase by about US$4.4 billion per year.
A secondary impact is that by producing large amounts of heat, nuclear power plants contribute directly to global warming by increasing the temperature of water bodies and localised atmospheres around each facility.
The carbon-equivalent emissions of the nuclear life cycle will only get worse, not better, because, over time, reprocessed fuel is depleted, necessitating a shift to fresh ore, and reactors must utilise lower-quality ores as higher-quality ones are depleted.
The Oxford Research Group projects that because of this inevitable shift to lower-quality uranium ore, if the percentage of world nuclear capacity remains what it is today, by 2050, nuclear power would generate as much carbon dioxide per kwh as comparable natural gas-fired power stations.
These two factors - the environmental degradation with uranium mining, and the associated greenhouse gas emissions from nuclear power facilities - mean that regardless of whatever happens in Japan, nuclear power is in no way clean, green or carbon-free.
The writer is an assistant professor at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy.
Lee U-Wen Business Times 17 Mar 11;
(SINGAPORE) Thailand has frozen its plans to build its own nuclear power plants in the wake of the ongoing nuclear crisis in Japan following a series of meltdowns at the quake-hit power complex in Fukushima.
Thai Deputy Prime Minister Suthep Thaugsuban announced yesterday that the government would indefinitely halt all plans to build nuclear facilities in the Kingdom.
Mr Suthep, who is also minister-in-charge of national security, said: 'I don't want to press on with the nuclear plant construction plan as I don't want Thai people to risk their lives.'
He added that the nuclear situation in Japan 'is not worrying for Thailand as it is far away'.
His comments came a day after Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva ordered the Energy Ministry to review its plan to build five nuclear power plants in various provinces across Thailand, South-east Asia's second- largest economy.
The ministry is studying two key issues in detail: emergency measures, and the potential of nuclear plants to be terrorist targets.
Mr Abhisit has also instructed all related public agencies to monitor and assess the ongoing situation in Japan's atomic power plants closely.
Under its current 20- year power development plan, Thailand will have five nuclear power plants with a combined generating capacity of 5,000 megawatts by 2025.
Government spokesman Panithan Wattanayagorn, however, told reporters on Monday that Mr Abhisit 'personally does not favour' the construction of nuclear plants in Thailand.
'His concern is mounting given the problems in Japan if Thailand is to adopt the Japanese model. Even with high technology, Japan has not yet been able to restore the cooling system. This shows there are flaws even when you have excellent technology,' he said.
The U-turn by the government is certain to cheer various civil groups that recently formed an alliance to protest against the planned construction of nuclear power plants in up to eight shortlisted provinces.
Thailand's decision to suspend its atomic power plans indefinitely follows a similar action by Switzerland, which last week froze its proposal to replace and build new nuclear plants.
Malaysia, which had intentions to establish its first atomic power plant by 2021, has now said it wants to learn from Japan before making its next move. India, meanwhile, will undergo a safety review of its 20 reactors before committing to a plan to spend US$175 billion on nuclear energy over the next 20 years.
Other countries such as Indonesia - which is planning four plants by 2025 - are of the view that governments should look at nuclear power as a secure energy supply to reduce global dependence on fossil fuels.
There are 442 reactors globally that supply about 15 per cent of the world's electricity, with a further 65 under construction, according to the London- based World Nuclear Association. There are plans to build more than 155 additional reactors, most of them in Asia, with 65 of these already underway.
Fidelis E. Satriastanti The Jakarta Globe 17 Mar 11;
If a nation as technologically advanced as Japan is struggling to contain a nuclear catastrophe, what chance does Indonesia — given its poor regulatory climate, low level of technology and weak response to any disaster — have of safely running a nuclear plant?
That was the question posed on Wednesday by experts, activists and politicians in response to officials’ claims a day earlier that it was safe to build a nuclear power plant here.
Sony Keraf, a former environment minister and member of the opposition Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), said the unfolding nuclear crisis in Fukushima, Japan, was sufficient reason to end all talk of building a similar plant in Indonesia.
“This debate is over. I’m not talking about the scientific reasons but simply using common sense here,” he said.
“Developed countries like Germany and Russia, which are known for their high level of technology, have stated they will review their nuclear power plants, so why is the Indonesian government acting otherwise? It’s strange.”
Sony also cited Indonesia’s poor safety culture of lack of discipline compared to Japan, particularly in regard to natural disaster mitigation, as further arguments against building a nuclear plant here.
Alvin Lie, a senior politician from the ruling coalition’s National Mandate Party (PAN), echoed the sentiment. “Even Germany is rethinking its power plants,” he said, “so why are we so eager to develop one here?”
He added that if the government was really keen to push ahead with the plan, the officials backing it should be made to live near the reactors. “If not, we should build the nuclear plant near the State Palace or the House of Representatives,” Alvin said. “Would they go for that?”
The government has proposed two sites in Bangka-Belitung province to host nuclear power plants. It plans to build four reactors, each requiring an outlay of up to Rp 20 trillion ($2.3 billion), by 2025. The plants are expected to produce a combined 4,000 megawatts of electricity, or a quarter of Java’s power demand.
The government also claims the reactors will be of the fourth-generation type — a technology currently in the research phase and only expected to be commercially viable by 2030 at the earliest.
Iwan Kurniawan, a nuclear expert, said the government’s claim that it would build fourth-generation reactors made no sense.
“In addition, are there any safe sites in this country for a nuclear power plant?” he said. “[Bangka-Belitung] experiences frequent earthquakes of magnitude 4.9 and up, but the government claims it’s safe. But given the potential of damage from an earthquake, it’s still too risky.”
Technology aside, Iwan added, Indonesia is just not yet prepared to deal with a potential radiation leak.
Nur Hidayati, from Greenpeace Southeast Asia, questioned the government’s claims of compliance with regulations laid out by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
“It has never been clear about the studies conducted by Batan for complying with the IAEA regulations,” she said, referring to the National Atomic Energy Agency.
Indonesia's Nuclear Plans Intact Amid Japan Crisis
Jakarta Globe 16 Mar 11;
Indonesia said on Wednesday that it will press on with plans to build a nuclear plant close to a fault line, despite the atomic emergency in earthquake and tsunami-ravaged Japan.
“If we pick to build it on Bangka Island, it will be based on several considerations which are in line with international safety criteria,” National Atomic Energy Agency (Batan) chief Hudi Hastowo said.
Bangka lies east of Sumatra island, where a 9.1-magnitude undersea earthquake triggered a tsunami in 2004 killing 220,000 people in countries around the Indian Ocean, including 168,000 in Indonesia.
“The site has a relatively stable record of seismic and volcanic activity,” he said, adding that the agency will “certainly” adopt more sophisticated technology than Japan.
“It’s too premature to discuss how the Japan crisis will directly affect our project,” he said.
“But in 2022 when we build the plant, we’ll use a better technology system,” he added.
The disaster that has befallen Japan’s Fukushima plant has prompted some experts to cast a worried eye at nuclear plants in seismic zones.
Twenty percent of the 440 commercial reactors in operation around the globe are located in areas “of significant seismic activity,” according to the World Nuclear Association (WNA), an industry group.
Some of the 62 additional plants under construction are also in quake-prone zones, along with many of the nearly 500 units on order or proposed, especially in fast-developing countries, the group said.
Green groups including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth urged Southeast Asian leaders to stop plans to build nuclear plants to meet energy needs and direct the funds towards green technology.
“We call on the heads of state to immediately cancel their plans to develop their nuclear projects,” they said in an open letter to Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, Philippine President Benigno Aquino and Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva.
Agence France-Presse
T.N. Alagesh New Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
TEMERLOH: Pahang Wildlife and National Parks Department (Perhilitan) made a shocking discovery when they raided a restaurant in Kampung Kubang Rusa in Merapoh, Kuala Lipis, on Tuesday.
In the 10am raid, the team found bottles containing tiger skin and claws, believed to have been part of the exotic delicacies served at the restaurant.
It is learnt that tigers could fetch up to RM300,000 each on the black market.
They also found 17kg of barking deer meat, two skinned mousedeers, 54 pheasant (burung kuang) feathers and a live white-breasted waterhen (burung ruak-ruak).
The 44-year-old restaurant owner, who lives next door, is now facing a maximum RM500,000 fine and a five-year jail term for each of the offences.
It is learnt that the suspect, who was later released on police bail, had previous convictions for possessing barking deer meat in 2008.
State Perhilitan director Khairiah Mohd Shariff said the enforcement team also made a simultaneous raid on a nursery in Janda Baik, where they seized a live sulphur-crested cockatoo and two serindit (blue-crowned hanging parrots).
The 41-year-old owner claimed he had obtained the birds from a friend.
Khairiah said the enforcement team also found wild boar meat at two homes in Bera on March 14.
At the first house in Kampung Kerayong, two men led them to a refrigerator where the wild boar parts and meat were kept.
She said the duo, aged 37 and 72, claimed the meat was for their own consumption.
The team later raided a second house in Kampung Kemayan, Bera, where the 51-year-old owner had kept 13kg of wild boar meat in a freezer.
She said all the suspects did not possess a valid licence from Perhilitan to keep the animals.
Tiger parts seized during restaurant raid
TRAFFIC 16 Mar 11;
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 16th March 2011—A restaurant owner could face RM600,000 (USD196,000) in fines and time in jail after authorities found him in possession of meat and parts of several protected species including several pieces of dried Tiger parts.
Officers from the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (Perhilitan) in Pahang, a state on the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia, found close to 17 kilogrammes of Common Barking Deer meat, two skinned Mouse Deer, 54 Argus Pheasant feathers, a White-breasted Waterhen when they raided the man’s house and shop in a raid yesterday (15th March).
The dried Tiger parts were found in a sealed glass jar along with dried parts of several other animals, which will be sent for forensic analysis.
The find of Tiger parts in the suspect’s possession is significant because his village of Kubang Rusa in Merapoh, lies within the country’s most important Tiger corridor, said Pahang Perhilitan Director Khairiah Mohd Shariff.
This corridor, Sungai Yu, is a critical link between the Taman Negara national park and the Main Range, two of Malaysia’s most important Tiger landscapes, as identified in the country’s Tiger Conservation Action Plan.
The suspect is a second-time offender, having been convicted in 2008 for possession of Barking Deer meat without a permit. He could face two charges under Section 68 of the Wildlife Conservation Act 2010 for keeping the Tiger parts and Argus Pheasant feathers without a permit. Unlawful possession of some totally protected species such as Tigers, also carries a mandatory jail requirement under this law.
The suspect also faces another three charges under Section 60 of the same Act for keeping the protected White-breasted Waterhen and exotic meats without a permit. He is out on bail pending trial.
In two other operations this month, Perhilitan Pahang seized Wild Boar meat from two houses in the town of Triang and are expected to charge two local men and a woman for being in possession of the meat without a licence. And earlier in February, officers also seized a Sulphur-crested Cockatoo and two Blue-crowned Hanging-parrots from a man in the town of Janda Baik.
All suspects face heavy fines under the new law which came into force last December.
So far this year Perhilitan Pahang has also seized four guns from people who have committed hunting offences in the State, including one home-made gun.
Khairiah expressed concern over the abuse of weapons for illegal hunting and told a press conference that the Department would not hesitate to use its powers under the new law to confiscate guns under these circumstances and seek police assistance to revoke an offender’s licence to carry and use a gun.
"It is wildlife traders such as this one that have given Malaysia a reputation as being a poaching hotspot and trade hub. These criminals are posing a serious threat to the continual survival of many increasingly threatened species," says TRAFFIC Southeast Asia's Regional Deputy Director Chris R. Shepherd.
"The authorities are to be applauded for taking action, especially in such a critical Tiger landscape. TRAFFIC urges the authorities to penalize this man and others like him to the full extent of the law to deter further such crime, and to demonstrate just how serious they are about protecting Malaysia's natural heritage," he said.
Michel Comte Yahoo News 16 Mar 11;
OTTAWA (AFP) – Canada must limit large-scale industrial activity in its boreal forest, the world's largest intact timberland, to preserve millions of lakes and rivers critical to forming Arctic sea ice, a new report said Wednesday.
The first of its kind study by the Pew Environment Group shows Canada's boreal forest contains more unfrozen freshwater than any other ecosystem, totaling more than 197 million acres of surface freshwater.
"When you look at a color-coded map of the world's (unspoiled) freshwater reserves (marked in blue), it's just shocking to see all the blue in Canada," the study's lead author Jeffrey Wells told AFP.
Canada's boreal forest possesses one quarter of the planet's wetlands, half the world's lakes larger than one square kilometer in size, five of the 50 largest rivers and the single largest remaining unpolluted fresh water body, Great Bear Lake.
Maintaining its flows, which contribute a majority of the freshwater input into the Arctic Ocean, is critical to forming Arctic ice as they decrease the salinity of the sea water, allowing it to freeze more quickly and easily.
But forestry, oil and gas extraction, mining and hydropower generation, the study warned, is rapidly increasing and negatively impacting the boreal water quality and quantity, as well as the surrounding ecosystems.
Lakes have been drained to access minerals underneath or to dispose of tailings and other mine waste. Erosion after logging is increasing amounts of silt and water flowing into rivers, and on a large scale can reduce regional precipitation. Construction of hydroelectric dams also has destroyed or degraded wetlands.
The boreal development footprint is currently 728,000 square kilometers (180 million acres).
Canada has already set aside 185 million acres from development, including key wetland and river areas, representing more than 12 percent of the 1.2 billion-acre forest.
But, the report concludes that governments should protect entire river, lake and wetland ecosystems by preserving intact at least 50 percent of Canada's boreal forest.
It also demands adherence to "sustainable" development in the rest of the vast northern forest.
In eastern Canada, most of the boreal rivers and lakes drain into the immense Hudson and James bays before the water is carried northward to the Labrador Current and flows south into the North Atlantic.
In western Canada, the flow from the Mackenzie River influences the strength and movement of major currents including the Beaufort Gyre and the Transpolar Drift, which carries cold, less-salty polar waters south into the deepwater North Atlantic Conveyor and back to the tropics.
Freshwater from the Yukon River flowing into the Bering Sea similarly contributes to the extensive sea ice of the Bering Sea before continuing north, eventually contributing to the North Pacific Current that rushes through the Bering Strait into the Arctic Ocean.
Stemming these flows would result in less seasonal Arctic sea ice which could hasten the rise in average temperatures worldwide.
Unchecked, warming in turn could lead to decreased precipitation in areas of the boreal forest, drying lakes and ponds that risk becoming so low that they no longer have outflow, the study said.
The Canadian boreal lakes and river delta sediment, peatlands and wetlands are also the largest on-land carbon storehouse in the world, storing more than 400 trillion pounds of carbon, it noted.
The analysis is the first compilation of decades of research on Canadian boreal water reserves from more than 200 peer-reviewed scientific studies, government reports and other sources.
A rattan species new to Singapore
from lekowala!
Celebrating Dugongs in 2011!
from Celebrating Singapore's BioDiversity!
Fatal flightpath
from The annotated budak
Pink-necked Green Pigeon – call
from Bird Ecology Study Group
Time to infect with passion – Banded-leaf monkey girl speaks at TEdxNUS
from The Biodiversity crew @ NUS
Fifteen conservation issues to watch
from Mongabay.com news
Letter from Helen Lim Today Online 16 Mar 11;
WE REFER to Mr Ong Li Min's letter, "Road-building: Are other relevant authorities involved in decision?" (March 7).
We understand the concerns that the construction of the new access road into the Faber area could affect the environment in the area. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) had taken this into consideration when planning this new access road.
We are working closely with the Urban Redevelopment Authority and National Parks Board (NParks) to minimise any impact to the existing environment and the number of trees affected. This includes planting a dense row of trees along the new stretch of road.
NParks is also selecting the appropriate species of trees which not only provide shade but also attract birdlife.
We have taken a holistic approach in ensuring a quality living environment. It includes not just having a green environment but also a congestion-free one. The new access road is important in ensuring that the living environment is not affected as traffic increases in the future due to new housing developments in the area.
Prior to the start of this project, the LTA had consulted the Adviser, Neighbourhood Committee Members, Grassroots Leaders and residents on the new road at various dialogue sessions. As in many things, there are difficult trade-offs to be made and this access road is necessary for the wider public interest.
We thank Mr Ong for his feedback.
Road-building: Are other relevant authorities involved in decision?
Letter from Ong Li Min Today Online 7 Mar 11;
I AM writing in response to Daryl Yong's letter, "Some of us would rather have a road" (Feb 28), which addresses Ms Chow Bee Lin's letter "Bird sanctuary under threat" (Feb 24).
I am concerned with Mr Yong's statement that "conservationists should refrain from claiming to speak for unborn persons", made in response to Ms Chow's stand that the Land Transport Authority (LTA) should refrain from building the road which cuts across the bird sanctuary at Clementi, as nature should be preserved for future generations.
While I agree with Mr Yong that it is "anybody's guess what future generations would prefer", I am heartened that individuals such as Ms Chow take interest in issues of the environment. What is good for future generations is certainly up for debate and it is my belief that a healthy debate will help our policymakers consider stakeholders' viewpoints and ultimately arrive at better decisions. Hence, this should be encouraged.
I am not a conservationist but I applaud Ms Chow for challenging the LTA's decision so that Singaporeans can be aware of this environmental issue. Otherwise, this decision might pass unnoticed.
Personally, I prefer to preserve of the bird sanctuary in Clementi, particularly since it is home to a few endangered bird species. As other members on TodayOnline's Voices forum note, a sanctuary cannot be replaced once it is removed.
I wonder, when the LTA makes a decision that impacts outside of their scope (in this case, it touches on the environment), are the other relevant authorities such as the National Environment Agency, National Parks Board or Urban Redevelopment Authority involved in the process?
I would be interested to hear the LTA's and/or other authorities' comment on this matter.
Minimal nuclear risk in Singapore
Govt urges public calm as its agencies continue to monitor the situation
Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
THE Singapore Government last night urged the public not to be unduly alarmed by the Fukushima nuclear incident and said there was minimal risk of a radiological plume over the Republic.
It added that its agencies were monitoring radiation levels and food imports from Japan, and that there was currently no need for aircraft and passenger screening.
But as a precaution, returning Singaporeans who were within the evacuation zones on or after last Saturday should go for a medical consultation.
An inter-ministry statement said the Government has been closely monitoring the situation in Japan and assessing its possible impact here.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) is in contact with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and other overseas experts to get the latest information available.
The IAEA currently categorises the nuclear incident in Fukushima as a Level 4 accident - on a scale that goes up in severity to 7. According to the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale, this means that it is an 'accident with local consequences'.
'Although the current situation remains serious in Japan, the incident site is more than 5,000km away,' the statement said.
It added that NEA was conducting daily modelling studies.
Its simulations, and those carried out by the World Meteorological Organisation-designated Regional Specialised Meteorological Centres for Environmental Emergency Response in Tokyo and Melbourne, have shown that 'at such a distance, there is minimal risk of Singapore being affected by the radiological plume'.
Said the statement: 'The public is advised therefore not to be unduly alarmed about exposure to radiation in Singapore arising from the Fukushima accident.'
Nevertheless, the NEA has been tracking the impact on Singapore's radiation levels through its radiation monitoring stations, and 'no abnormal changes in Singapore's radiation levels have been detected so far'.
It said the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) was working with its counterparts in Japan and continued to keep a close watch on food imports from Japan.
On its part, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) has been monitoring the potential impact of the incident on flights and airport operations. 'Developments so far do not necessitate the screening of aircraft or passengers for radiation,' it said.
But Changi Airport has in place contingency plans to deal with radioactive contamination, and developments are being monitored and reviewed.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) assesses that it is 'highly unlikely' that any Singaporean who was outside the evacuation zones - currently a 20km radius from the Fukushima Daiichi plant and a 10km radius from the Fukushima Daini plant - will need any form of medical assessment 'as there is negligible risk, if any, of impact on health'.
However, any returning Singaporean who was within the evacuation zones on or after last Saturday should visit the emergency department of a public restructured hospital for a medical consultation when he arrives.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) also reiterated its earlier advisory strongly urging Singaporeans to defer non-essential travel to Japan. Those who must travel there should register with the MFA at www.mfa.gov.sg
Singaporeans in Japan should also take precautions, monitor the local news and take heed of the Japanese government's advice. Those wishing to leave Japan should closely monitor the situation, check with the local authorities as the main access roads to airports may be closed and trains may not be running on schedule, and reconfirm their flights.
MFA has also dispatched additional staff to its embassy in Tokyo.
UN says winds blowing radioactivity to sea
Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
GENEVA: The UN weather agency said yesterday that winds are currently blowing radioactive material towards the ocean, and that there were 'no implications' for Japan or countries nearby.
'All the meteorological conditions are offshore, there are no implications inshore for Japan or other countries near Japan,' Dr Maryam Golnaraghi, who heads the weather agency's disaster risk reduction programme, told journalists.
A World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) spokesman warned, however, that the conditions 'will fluctuate as the weather systems progress'.
Winds yesterday and today in the stricken area will mainly blow towards the east to the open ocean. But if particles are released in the lower levels of the atmosphere today, 'they will be westerly, they will be towards inland (Japan)', Dr Golnaraghi said.
'So what it means is that depending on the concentration of the particles and depending on which level of the atmosphere they are issued, they could be taking a very different trajectory,' she added.
Explosions at Fukushima No.1 plant, about 270km north-east of Tokyo, have sent out low levels of radiation.
Officials in Ibaraki, a neighbouring prefecture just south of Fukushima, said that up to 100 times the normal levels of radiation were detected yesterday.
Tokyo also reported slightly elevated radiation levels, but officials said the increase was too small to threaten the 39 million people in and around the capital. Still, Austria said it was moving its embassy from Tokyo to Osaka, 400km away, due to radiation concerns.
China became the first government to organise a mass evacuation of its citizens from Japan's north-east yesterday. The Chinese embassy in Tokyo said it was preparing to send buses to remove its nationals from Miyagi, Fukushima, Ibaraki and Iwate prefectures, the hardest-hit areas.
The number of Chinese affected is unclear, but the Commerce Ministry in Beijing said it had contacted 22,155 Chinese nationals in the quake-hit areas, while another 261 cannot be reached. Many Chinese work in factories in Japan, and the area around Fukushima is home to many small manufacturers.
China Southern Airlines said it will use larger, 272-seat aircraft on the route between Tokyo and the Chinese city of Shenyang to handle the evacuees.
Threat of winds possibly spreading radiation has put the region on alert.
Russia has been closely monitoring the radiation level since Friday.
Mr Sergei Kiriyenko, chief executive of Russian federal atomic energy agency Rosatom, said that the Far East region was not threatened by the nuclear accident in Japan - even in the worst-case scenario.
'Although the worst scenario of radiation coincides with the worst wind situation, no threat exists in Russia's Far East,' he said.
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE, ASSOCIATED PRESS, REUTERS
Malaysia: Readings show our radiation levels are normal, says ministry
Wong Pek Mei The Star 16 Mar 11;
PETALING JAYA: The environmental radiology monitoring system at six locations in the country shows that radiation levels are normal, said Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Datuk Seri Dr Maximus Ongkili.
“We are monitoring it hour by hour and everything seems to be normal,” he said.
The system is located in Chuping, Ipoh, Kota Kinabalu, Kuantan, Kudat and Senai.
The earthquake and tsunami in Japan had impacted the nuclear station in Fukushima Daiichi that has six units of nuclear reactors.
An explosion occurred at reactor 2 at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan yesterday. It was the third reactor to explode since Saturday.
Dr Ongkili also advised Malaysians not to believe speculation that radiation from a nuclear plant in Japan would reach the Philippines and other Asian countries.
“It is unfounded, based on the latest information obtained from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA),” he said.
Since yesterday, public concerns have been circulating through text messages and the Internet that radiation leaks from the nuclear plant would spread to Asian countries.
He said that radiation portal monitoring systems had been available at international entry points at the KL International Airport, Penang, Kota Kinabalu and Kuching airports since 2009 to detect if any passenger or baggage are contaminated with radioactive material.
Technical information on the catastrophe in Japan can also be accessed via the IAEA website at www.iaea.org, NISA website at www.nisa.meti.go.jp and at the Malaysian Atomic Energy Licencing Board (AELB) radiology information centre hotline at 1800-88-7999.
Meanwhile, radiological health and safety expert Prof Dr Ahmad Termizi Ramli said Malaysians should not worry despite the third explosion at the Japanese nuclear plant.
Expert: Winds heading toward west coast of US
Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
GEORGE TOWN: Malaysians need not worry about radiation particles heading here from Japan as prevailing winds are now drifting toward the west coast of the United States.
A spokesman from the Malaysian Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB) said it obtained the information from the Japan Meteorological Agency.
“The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) also informed us that the situation remained under control in Japan, despite the fire at the Unit 4 reactor and explosion at the Unit 2 reactor of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant,” he said.
The spokesman added that the dose rate of up to 400 millisievert per hour detected at the site was reported to be dropping, according to IAEA.
The Health Ministry has moved quickly to quell rumours that radioactive winds were heading toward Malaysia.
Health Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai told reporters at Parliament lobby yesterday that the Malaysian Nuclear Agency was monitoring the situation.
“As for now, the radiation is contained to just a certain region in Japan. It is highly unlikely that it will reach Malaysia,” he said.
“I hope the public will not believe the rumours that are circulating through SMS.”
Fukushima is about 5,600km north-east of Kuala Lumpur.
Malaysia: 'Leak won't affect us here'
Rozanna Latiff and Darshini Balan New Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
KUALA LUMPUR: Despite reports of radioactive leak at Japan's troubled plants, experts said adverse effects were unlikely to be felt here even in the case of a meltdown.
Malaysia Nuclear Agency deputy director-general Dr Muhd Noor Muhd Yunus said an emergency would only arise if a meltdown occurred in the core reactors, releasing dangerous levels of radiation into the air.
"This is the worst-case scenario. However, the likelihood of that happening is low as the power plant has already shut down the core reactors and has taken steps to reduce further damage.
"This is very different from the Chernobyl incident (in 1986) where there was no containment structure and the reactor was still active," Dr Noor said yesterday.
He said even if a leak occurred, it was unlikely for radioactive dust to travel to Malaysia before it dissipates as current weather conditions showed that the winds were travelling in the opposite direction.
"Given the distance and current wind directions, there shouldn't be anything to worry about."
He said radiation levels in Malaysia had so far remained normal despite reports of radioactive material being released at the Fukushima plant, where cooling systems were damaged when an 9.0 magnitude earthquake and tsunami struck Japan last week.
"The authorities here are continuing to keep track of radiation levels in the air, rainwater and soil at their monitoring stations and will alert the public if the situation worsens."
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia nuclear physicist and radiological health and safety expert Prof Ahmad Termizi Ramli said even in the event of a nuclear meltdown, the effects on Malaysia were expected to be minimal due to the distance involved.
"Radiation dust can travel here via wind but with Malaysia being more than 5,000km away, any radioactive material would be diluted by the time it arrives.
"Trace amounts may be found but the effects would be so small as to make them indistinguishable from the effects created by the background radiation already present in our environment."
He said it was important to take news reports on increased radiation levels with the right perspective.
"Yes, radiation levels in the air have multiplied at the plant itself but the situation is localised and would not spread beyond short distances.
"The Japanese have only asked citizens within a 30km to evacuate the area. What more us Malaysians, who are 5,000km away?
"There will be some effect to our environment, but not to the extent of being a cause for concern."
He said it was impossible for "acid rain" to be formed as a result of a leak as nuclear power plants did not produce gaseous chemicals such as sulphur dioxide or nitrogen.
"Acid rain has got nothing to do with nuclear power plants which produce radioactive materials and not chemical pollutants such as sulphur."
He also said the chances of a full-scale nuclear meltdown occurring at the Fukushima plant was low due to the contingency measures in place.
"The Japanese had gone through the effects of two atomic bombs -- they take radiation exposure and containment very, very seriously and are well-prepared for any emergency.
"In fact, the only people who are in danger of high levels of radiation exposure are those working at the plant itself and those in the immediate vicinity. Even the general Japanese population are mostly safe."
Meanwhile, the Atomic Energy Licensing Board and the Malaysia Nuclear Agency assured that there was no rise in the level of radiation in the country.
The Science and Technology Ministry, in a press statement yesterday, said the monitoring was done at six locations nationwide at Chuping, Ipoh, Kota Kinabalu, Kuantan, Kudat, and Senai using the Electronic Records Management System.
'Contingency plan if country is put at nuclear fallout risk'
Maizatul Ranai New Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
KUALA LUMPUR: The government has a contingency plan should there be a nuclear meltdown in quake- and tsunami-ravaged Japan.
Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Datuk Seri Dr Maximus Ongkili said the plan, which was based on International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) guidelines, would be implemented if the country was put at risk.
"The plan will prepare us for any unwanted incidents should the situation get worse," he said after launching the Asean Youth Forum on Innovation and Creativity at the National Science Centre yesterday.
However, he declined to state what this contingency plan would entail.
Asked what efforts were under way to ensure the safety of Malaysians, he said the ministry had been assisting the National Security Council in monitoring the nuclear incidents in Japan.
He said the ministry's agencies -- the Atomic Energy Licensing Board and Nuclear Malaysia -- were also keeping a close watch on the situation by retrieving information and data from IAEA and Japan's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (Nisa).
"The agencies regularly update us on the happenings and latest developments in the country to ensure Malaysians here are safe."
Ongkili said to date, the environmental radiology monitoring system at six locations throughout Malaysia -- in Chuping, Ipoh, Kota Kinabalu, Kuantan, Kudat and Senai -- did not show any significant rise in radiation levels here.
"The system shows that the current level is normal and people need not fear risk of radiation."
Experts Say Country Safe From ‘Radioactive Rain’
Ismira Lutfia Jakarta Globe 15 Mar 11;
Indonesian scientists gave assurances on Monday that there was no need for people here to worry about radiation leaking from a nuclear power plant in Japan.
Djarot Wisnubroto, deputy for nuclear technology development at the National Atomic Energy Agency (Batan), said Japan was simply too far away for possible radioactive dust to have an impact on Indonesia.
While the radiation resulting from a system failure at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, 240 kilometers north of Tokyo, might adversely affect those in close proximity to the reactor, he said those in areas further away were not in any danger.
“It is too insignificant to affect Indonesia, which lies thousands of kilometers away from Japan,” he told the Jakarta Globe.
The International Atomic Energy Agency announced on Monday that Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency had informed it of a hydrogen explosion that occurred at about 1 a.m. on Monday at the Unit 3 reactor at Fukushima Daiichi.
All personnel at the site have been accounted for, although six injuries were reported.
The UN nuclear monitoring agency also said the reactor building had suffered damage in the explosion but the primary containment vessel had not been damaged. Unit 3’s control room remained operational.
The explosion was the second to occur after a blast at the plant’s Unit 1 reactor on Saturday. That reactor’s cooling system, which should have operated automatically after it was shut down following Friday’s 9.0-magnitude earthquake, failed to function after the plant was struck by the quake-triggered tsunami.
In Indonesia, people have reported receiving a text message warning them about rain that may be carrying radioactive particles from the explosion at the Fukushima plant.
Natio Lasman, chairman of Indonesia’s Nuclear Energy Regulatory Agency (Bapeten), said the fact that Japan had not declared areas outside Fukushima as at risk indicated that there was no danger for people not in the immediate vicinity of the plant.
“They have doubled the emergency measures by evacuating residents from a 20-kilometer radius around the plant,” he said, but have not extended the evacuation zone beyond that.
The direction of the wind is also blowing possible radioactive dust in the opposite direction of Indonesia, he added.
Kukuh Ribudiyanto, from the Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency (BMKG), however, said the wind could still change direction and blow south.
Where the winds blow: Experts ponder fallout risks
Anthony Lucas Yahoo News 15 Mar 11;
PARIS (AFP) – Experts monitoring weather patterns for any fallout from Japan's stricken nuclear plant said Tuesday the winds had so far been favourable but they were less confident about the outlook later this week.
The World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) said winds on Saturday and Monday -- when two blasts occurred at Fukushima -- were blowing to the northeast and east, in other words out over the Pacific.
"All the meteorological conditions are offshore, there are no implications inshore for Japan or other countries near Japan," said Maryam Golnaraghi, who heads the WMO's disaster risk reduction programme.
But on Tuesday, the winds temporarily shifted, coming instead from the northeast, the Geneva-based WMO said, quoting the Japanese Meteorological Agency.
For Wednesday, "the forecast is for northerly winds and later westerly, (for winds that are) near-surface and at 1,000 metres (3,250 feet)," it said. Thereafter, conditions "will fluctuate as weather systems develop and progress."
In Tokyo, 250 kilometres (155 miles) southwest of Fukushima, the authorities said higher-than-normal radiation levels had been detected in the capital on Tuesday but not at harmful levels.
The WMO activated a so-called environmental emergency response mechanism on Saturday, with three regional centres in Beijing, Tokyo and Obninsk, Russia, monitoring weather patterns.
The benchmark for fallout from a nuclear disaster is the April 26, 1986, explosion at Chernobyl, which spewed radioactive dust across parts of Ukraine, Russia and Belarus and even reached as far as Ireland, more than 1,600 kilometres away.
In the Russian Far East, the meteorological service at Vladivostok, less than 1,000 kilometres west of Fukushima, said radiation levels were within normal limits.
The service's spokeswoman, Varvara Koridze, said that air samples "contained the usual background components. Radionuclides that would have been the result of an explosion were not found."
Boris Lamash, head of the climate department at Far Eastern Federal University, said prevailing winds at this time of year in the region were westerlies and northwesterlies, which helped push harmful material away.
In the United States, meteorologist Jeff Masters used a modelling program from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to determine where radioactivity would spread.
"The great majority of these runs have taken plumes of radioactivity emitted from Japan's east coast eastwards over the Pacific, with the plumes staying over water for at least five days," he said.
"It is highly unlikely that any radiation capable of causing harm to people will be left in the atmosphere after seven days and 2,000 miles-plus of travel," said Masters, founder of the Weather Underground online weather forecasting service.
Cyril Honore, deputy head of forecasting at the French state weather service, Meteo France, was cautious.
"Japan lies in temperate latitudes, so winds are generally west-to-east, but this prevailing direction does not rule out the possibility of very strong variations," he told AFP.
He also noted that contaminated dust from Fukushima could disperse in wide patterns.
"A cloud, or air mass, is not an enclosed bloc. It is exposed to horizontal and vertical turbulence, so matter is dispersed or diluted according to atmospheric directions," Honore said.
Radiation threat in Japan
Straits Times Forum 15 Mar 11;
MS CINDY LOW: 'The current threat of massive radiation in Japan as a result of the quake-triggered crippling of two nuclear reactors raises a question about Singapore's preparations for a nuclear power option ('Govt preparing for nuclear power option'; Nov 2, last year).
Japan's current nuclear crisis has seen emergency evacuations of people within a 20km radius of the plant. If a similar nuclear emergency strikes Singapore, it would mean that roughly half the country must be evacuated. Regardless of the safety precautions, the threat of mass radiation is a cause for concern. How does the current crisis affect the Government's consideration of building a nuclear plant in Singapore?'
Govts undeterred by Japanese incident, determined to carry on
Ravi Velloor Straits Times 16 Mar 11;
NEW DELHI: As Japanese engineers in Fukushima work to contain the worst nuclear incident in three decades, Asia, the region with the world's most frenetic nuclear reactor building programme, seems determined to ride out the storm and carry on.
Indeed, it may have little choice in the matter.
From Manila to New Delhi, governments had been increasingly looking to nuclear power as a solution to cut dependence on fossil fuels and the pressure to reduce carbon-emitting fuels that damage the environment.
Little wonder that most of the 155 reactors planned or being built are in Asia.
Although there is no nuclear power plant operating in Asean, almost every member, with the exception of oil rich Brunei and tiny Laos, are pondering the merits of adding nuclear power to the energy grid.
Vietnam plans eight nuclear power plants by 2030, producing as much as 16,000MW of power. Indonesia plans four plants producing 6,000MW by 2025.
For many neighbouring nations, there is nothing more worrisome than an accident in a future nuclear plant on the main island of Java, especially in seasons when the wind is blowing northwards.
The meltdown at Fukushima has come as a nightmare for national leaders and economic planners, who now have to factor in additional safeguards. They also have to assuage mounting concerns among a leery public who remain to be convinced about the merits - and safety - of nuclear power.
In Europe as well as the United States, calls have been made for governments to halt the expansion of nuclear power plants. Germany has ordered a provisional shutdown of some of its nuclear reactors until a three-month review is completed, and Switzerland has already put a halt to its plans.
Yet, with energy consumption growing apace, Asian governments cannot rule out the nuclear option, however dangerous it may seem.
Yesterday, Malaysia, which is eyeing its first nuclear plant by 2021, said the disaster in Fukushima will not affect the country's plans. But Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Peter Chin, in a tilt to public sentiment, said: 'The government will not do it secretly without informing the public.'
Indonesian legislator Satya Yudha, from Parliament's Commission VII, which looks at energy issues, said the government should not 'write off' nuclear energy because of Japan.
'Sooner or later, we will need it,' he said. 'The government's task is to look at diversifying energy sources because without secure energy supply we cannot advance. In the meantime, we need to educate people properly about nuclear energy.'
Besides, said Mr Ferhat Aziz, a spokesman for the Indonesian National Nuclear Energy Agency, Indonesia is better prepared today than Japan and South Korea were at the start of their civilian nuclear energy programmes.
He told The Straits Times that the agency was looking closely at possible plant locations. These include Bangka-Belitung province off the east coast of Sumatra, the island of Kalimantan and the Muria Peninsula on the northern coast of Central Java.
In India, which has announced plans to spend some US$175 billion (S$225 billion) on building nuclear plants over the next 20 years, the Nuclear Power Corp (NPC) is reviewing safety at its 20 nuclear plants across the country. 'This event will be a big dampener for our programme,' says Mr Shreyans Jain, head of the NPC.
China is set to add 10 to 27 nuclear reactors over the next five years. 'China has to learn lessons from the accident in Japan but will not give up on nuclear energy,' says Mr Zhang Lijun, China's vice-minister for environment.
Countries such as China and India may have little choice. World energy consumption - still hugely dependent on fossil fuels - is rising by the day. The International Energy Agency says Asean's energy demand is going up at a rate of 3.3 per cent a year, compared with 2.5 per cent elsewhere.
Alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and biomass can fill only so much of the gap and oil wells are drying up faster than the world can discover new sources.
It is for this reason that no significant nation in the world can really write off nuclear energy. But tell that to the man in the street. This week, a Malaysian microblogger summed up the scepticism that many Asians feel about the arguments for nuclear energy. 'I am quite happy to see Malaysia build a nuclear power plant,' he wrote on Twitter, 'as long as it is built next to the prime minister's house.'
With Lynn Lee in Jakarta, Teo Cheng Wee in Kuala Lumpur, Grace Ng in Beijing, and Nirmala Ganapathy in New Delhi
Indonesia unfazed by Japan nuclear crisis
Tifa Asrianti, The Jakarta Post 15 Mar 11;
Concerns over a possible nuclear disaster in Japan should not deter Indonesia from its ambition to build a nuclear power plant in the future, an official at the country’s atomic agency said.
Hudi Hastowo, head of the National Atomic Energy Agency (Batan), told The Jakarta Post that using nuclear energy was one of the best solutions to address the country’s power shortage issue. He played down the safety issue that anti-nuclear activists have been voicing, saying that it would be safe to have one.
“We should think 20 years ahead. What will we do then to fulfill the electricity demand?” he added.
Indonesia, located in the Ring of Fire and therefore prone to massive earthquakes that can trigger tsunamis, has been planning to build a nuclear power plant, although locals and environmental activists oppose the plan.
The country experiences frequent electricity shortages characterized by rolling blackouts. To address the problem, the government launched the first 10,000-megawatt power program, with all proposed power plants to be coal-fired.
Chalid Muhammad from environmental NGO Indonesia Green Institute said that the government should stop the plan to build the reactor because 83 percent of Indonesia’s area was prone to disasters such as earthquakes and tsunamis.
“The government should focus on building decentralized power plants that use renewable energy sources, such as microhydro and geothermal plants. Those small-scale plants can fulfill the electricity demand and are a lot safer compared to larger sized plants,” he said.
Hudi argued, however, that the government could not use only one or two energy sources, saying it needed to expand beyond these, emphasizing that nuclear energy could produce a large amount of electricity supply.
“People always say that we should use renewable energy sources such as geothermal energy, but to what extent can it meet the demand? We will use all kinds of energy sources, we need to diversify,” he insisted.
The government has conducted several feasibility studies on nuclear power plants, including those used in South Korea, which uses the Pressurized Water Reactor system.
The reactors used in the Fukushima Daiichi Plant in the northeast of Tokyo, Japan, is the Boiling Water Reactor, which is another type of light water reactor. The plant first began operation in October 1970 and was originally scheduled to be shut in February but had its operation license extended for another 10 years. Hudi said that the problem in Japan’s reactor was not caused by low-level technology, but the catastrophic tsunami following the 8.9-magnitude earthquake last Friday.
“The facility stopped operation when the earthquake hit. But the tsunami swept the cooling system away so the release of the residual heat inside the reactor could not be stopped as planned,” he said.
He assured that the technology used in an Indonesian nuclear plant would be the most up to date, adding that a safe location played an important role in the plant’s security. “If we use state-of-the art technology but place it in a dangerous location, the facility will face the same risk as a less sophisticated one. We have to find a location that suits international requirements, including one that is safe from tsunamis and other natural elements,” he said.
The government has been conducting a land analysis to find the best location for the plant. Among the location options are Muria Peninsula in East Java and Bangka Belitung province.
“Muria is just one of many options. If the people reject the facility, we can’t force the plan,” Hudi said.
After the nuclear crisis in Japan, environmental NGOs in France and Germany have been holding anti-nuclear rallies, saying that what happened in Japan could also happen in their countries too.
Posts
visitors since Nov 07