Where are the Asia Pacific Leaders in Emission Reductions?

A carbon price would not force any big change
in the largest source of greenhouse gases – the electricity generation sector -
until after 2020, expert modelling shows. Most change will be due to the
existing 20% renewable energy target, with the carbon price slicing a further
11% from power sector emissions. Meanwhile, critics of the carbon price mechanism
– those who say Australia is taking action before other economies and therefore
exposing businesses to competitive disadvantage – are clearly mistaken, as
shown in a Carbon Ratings report by Connection Research.

Media reports in June – before the Government
announced its carbon price mechanism – paid little attention to a report on Carbon
Ratings for the top 100 companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange
(ASX). This report in the Sydney Morning Herald also failed to mention that Asia
Pacific major trading partners were actually also doing much more than
Australia to reduce emissions:

A $20 CARBON tax would have shaved just 2.3
per cent from the net profits of Australia’s top 100 companies last year, a
report has found.

BHP, Rio, Qantas, Bluescope Steel and
Wesfarmers would face the biggest liabilities, it said.

The tax hit would have been 5 per cent in
2009, when profits were cut by the global financial crisis, and would have
averaged 2.95 per cent over the past four years, the report by Connection
Research for major Australian investors found.

Its chief executive, William Ehmcke, said the
report showed ”most ASX 100 companies would be able to comfortably absorb the
cost of the tax, even if they were not eligible for free permits”.

With many high-emitting electricity
generators not among the 100 listed companies, they account for 24 per cent of
Australian emissions – and of that the mining giants Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton
emit about one third.

Also in the top emitters are Bluescope Steel
and OneSteel, likely to gain extra assistance in the final carbon package.

Reported in June in the Sydney Morning Herald
by Lenore Taylor

Critics of the Carbon Price Mechanism say
Australia is taking action before other economies and therefore is exposing
businesses to competitive disadvantage. Such claims are not supported by facts,
especially for carbon reduction targets, as shown by a comparison with Australia’s
major trading partners in the Asia Pacific region.

The report shows a map which sets out the
commitments made by Australia’s major trading partners – New Zealand, China,
India, South Korea and Japan – which have all made much higher commitments to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions than Australia.

See the full Carbon Rating report by
Connection Research at www.carbonratings.com.au

A decade until carbon tax pays off

Another report by Lenore Taylor on the carbon
price, this time in in Farm Weekly (5 June 2011):

A carbon price would not force any big change
in the largest source of greenhouse gases – the electricity generation sector -
until after 2020, expert modelling shows.

Until 2020 most change in electricity
generation would be due to the existing 20 per cent renewable energy target,
with the carbon price slicing a further 11 per cent from power sector emissions
through a small shift away from brown coal-fired power and reduced consumer
demand.

But the modelling, done for the federal
Treasury by MMA and ROAM Consulting and released yesterday, did not include the
government’s announced policy to pay for the early retirement of one or two
brown-coal generators, which could lead to much bigger emissions cuts in the
sector.

And it does show significant cuts to
electricity emissions between 2020 and 2050, as the carbon price rises and
clean coal, gas and geothermal power become the dominant sources of Australia’s
power.

By 2050, electricity generation accounts for
almost half of total emissions reductions.

Both modellers found that some regions
producing coal-fired power, particularly the Latrobe Valley and Gippsland in
Victoria, would not shrink economically as power production changed, because
they were well positioned to shift to the new sources of generation.

NSW, hardest hit by the carbon price with job
losses and reduced economic output according to separate modelling conducted
for the state government, is shown in the federal government modelling to
steadily increase its generation capacity.

According to the ROAM results, the state’s
generation capacity would double by 2050, with wind, new coal generation with
carbon capture and storage, and gas-fired power gradually taking over from the
black-coal plants.

Regarding Latrobe Valley and Gippsland, the
MMA analysis said, ”the level of generation with brown coal falls with a
carbon pricing regime. However … [the] region has close proximity to a major
natural gas resource and parts of eastern Victoria have access to good wind,
biomass and potentially geothermal resources.

”This leads to increased investment in
generation exploiting these resources, particularly natural gas resources. The
exploitation of these resources under carbon pricing means that the overall
level of electricity generation may not fall.”

And ROAM Consulting predicted electricity
generation in the Latrobe Valley might increase, as old brown-coal plants close
but gas, renewable and new carbon capture and storage plants are built.

Just like the Treasury modelling it informed,
both MMA and ROAM base their calculations on a $20 carbon price, not the $23
price the multi-party climate change committee eventually agreed upon.

Another model by the CSIRO, of what would
happen to road transport emissions, modelled a very different policy to the one
eventually announced.

According to the government procurement
system AusTender, MMA was paid $32,907 for its work and ROAM $145,200.

Both models showed a higher carbon price
would have driven a much faster transformation of the electricity sector.

The Coalition has attacked the assumptions
used in the Treasury modelling, which found household electricity prices would
rise 10 per cent owing to the carbon price, and has called for it to be scrapped
and redone.

However, the Climate Change Minister, Greg
Combet, maintained it was ”detailed and rigorous”.

Source: www.fw.farmonline.com.au

“Add 4 degrees & You’re Dead. More or less.”

Speaking on the ABC in Australia, Professor
Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, chief climate science advisor of the German
Government, made a point even the least-informed should be able to understand: “Our
body temperature is about 37 degrees. If you increase it by two degrees, 39, you
have fever. If you add four degrees, it is 41 – you are dead, more or
less.” More from Earth and paleo-climate scientist Andrew Glikson.

By Andrew Glikson in The Conversation (27
July 2011):

The Faustian bargain – while we debate the
numbers, the planet suffers

Earth and paleo-climate scientist at
Australian National University

Our weather systems are changing as the world
warms.

Speaking on the ABC, Professor Hans Joachim
Schellnhuber, chief climate science advisor of the German Government, made a
point even the least-informed should be able to understand.

“Our body temperature is about 37 degrees. If
you increase it by two degrees, 39, you have fever. If you add four degrees, it
is 41 – you are dead, more or less.”

When in the early 80s “economic rationalism”
assumed an overarching value in western societies, a rhetoric question arose:
what is the price of the Earth?

The question is no longer rhetoric. The
spectacle of people haggling over dollars vis-à-vis the future of the Earth’s
atmosphere-ocean system is a Faustian bargain not dreamt by science fiction
writers. It hardly conceals the increasing extraction of every available carbon
source from the ground, including coal, oil, oil shale, tar sand, gas and coal
seam gas.

Global emission reduction targets, ranging
from 40% relative to 1990 by Germany, to 5% relative to 2000 in Australia,
would still allow mean global temperatures to rise by three or four degrees
Celsius later in the century.

This will drive a major shift in climate
zones, disrupt river flow, raise sea levels on the scale of meters and lead to
heat waves, fires and storms.

Climate science focuses on the non-linear
nature of climate change where, once critical temperature thresholds are crossed,
warming is amplified by feedbacks from melting ice, opening water surfaces,
release of methane from permafrost and from polar sediments, leading to tipping
points.

According to NASA’s projections, “Goals to
limit human-made warming to two degrees Celsius and CO₂
to 450 parts per million are not sufficient – they are prescriptions for
disaster”

“Rapid reduction of fossil fuel emissions is
required for humanity to succeed in preserving a planet resembling the one on
which civilization developed.”

The disruption of the carbon and oxygen
cycles, which act as the “lungs of the biosphere” is raising CO₂
and other greenhouse gases to levels close to that of 16 million years ago and
is increasing at a rate unprecedented in geological history (with the exception
of global volcanic and asteroid impact events which led to mass extinction of
species).

This extreme rate retards the ability of
species to adapt to fast changing environments, threatening a mass extinction
of species, not least in the oceans.

A fundamental change in the global climate
regime ensues in a permanent state of El-Niño, such as existed before three
million years ago. At that stage the decline of polar-sourced cold currents
resulted in a stable equatorial warm pool and the demise of the La-Niña phase.
An intensification of the hydrological cycle leads to extreme weather events,
increasing around the world.

An acceleration in the rate of sea level rise
is projected by an increase in the melt rate of Greenland and Antarctic ice
sheets.

According to lead IPCC authors, the “climate
change that takes place due to increases in carbon dioxide concentration is
largely irreversible for 1000 years after emissions stop.”

A dumbing down of the political and media
discussion to the dollar price of carbon reflects years of cover-up on the
scientific measurements and direct observations of climate change around the
world.

An irrelevant discourse ensues between those
willing to undertake symbolic action and those who deny the science altogether.

Had the science been afforded a correct
publicity in the Australian media, the current political and economic fury
would be seen in their true perspective and the real meaning of a world three
to four degrees warmer would be understood.

According to Schellnhuber, “We are simply
talking about the very life support system of this planet.”

What is required is what has never been done
before in human history – a plan for the future.

The window of opportunity to turn the climate
trend around will close unless a coordinated global effort is made to reduce
emissions and a technological breakthrough is made to draw down atmospheric CO₂.

Dr
Andrew Glikson, a Earth and paleoclimate scientist, is a Visiting Fellow at the
School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National University, where
he is reviewing the effects of climate on prehistoric human evolution. He is
also an Honorary Professor at the Center for Excellence in Geothermal Research,
The University of Queensland, and is affiliated with the Climate Change
Institute and the Planetary Science Institute, Australian National University.
He graduated at the University of Western Australia in 1968, conducted
geological surveys in central and western Australia and became a Principal
Research Scientist with the Australian Geological Survey Organization (now
Geoscience Australia).

Source: www.theconversation.edu.au

Invest Long Term for Sustainability, Climate & Behavioural Change

“Many Japanese companies have a long-term
approach. Fujitsu’s sustainability policy is out to 2100,” the Company’s Global
Sustainability head Alison Rowe told delegates at the Climate Change &
Business Conference in Wellington last week. This makes it easier to deal with
issues such as climate change that have such a long time horizon to realise
benefits of investment and changed behaviour. And electric vehicles could be a
great solution for households here looking for an economical second car for around-town
driving, as New Zealand has the second highest rate of car ownership per
capita, behind the United States.

Climate Change and Business Conference, Wellington
(2 August 2011):

In business offices around Japan, executives
are not wearing ties. The historically conservative country has adopted a “no
ties” trend as a means to be more comfortable in the workplace and therefore
reduce the need for air conditioning, and the electricity required to drive it.

The behaviour change has come in response to
the continued intermittent power outages following the March earthquake and
nuclear generator accident. But, as Alison Rowe, Global Executive Head Sustainability
at Fujitsu, says, this is a very Japanese response. “Japanese believe in the
community and will voluntarily do what is necessary to address a community
concern or goal,” said Ms Rowe.

Speaking this morning at the 7th
Australia-New Zealand Climate Change & Business Conference, Ms Rowe
outlined Japan’s policy response to climate change and the impact this has on
business.

Japan has taken leading action on climate
change, committing to reduce emissions by 25% by 2020 and indicating an
intention to start an emissions trading scheme. This commitment remains, despite
the major nuclear accident and the resulting economic and energy supply impact acknowledging
a major review of energy policy is underway.

Ms Rowe said business has welcomed the moves
by the government, viewing the climate change initiatives as guidelines to a
voluntary response. “In Japan, you don’t have to develop a new business case
for sustainability, per se, as sustainability is an inbuilt part of business
operations, values and the community,” said Ms. Rowe. “Initiatives to reduce
emissions and improve efficiency are part of our day to day operations.”

Japan tends to have a very long term planning
horizon which takes into account some of the more difficult issues like climate
change. “Many Japanese companies, including Fujitsu, have a long-term approach.

Fujitsu’s sustainability policy is out to
2100,” explained Ms Rowe. “This makes it easier to deal with issues such as
climate change that have such a long time horizon to realise benefits of
investment and changed behaviour”.

Ms Rowe was speaking at the Climate Change
& Business Conference which continues in Wellington today. The event hosts
more than 300 delegates with approximately 70 business and policy experts presenting
on implications of climate change and best practice response.

Wellington (2 August 2011):

Electric vehicles could be a great solution
for New Zealand households looking for an economical second car for around-town
driving.

New Zealand has the second highest rate of
car ownership per capita, behind the United States. And at 52%, New Zealand has
one of the highest rates of households owning 2 cars or more.

These unexpected statistics were revealed by
Elizabeth Yeaman, Manager of Transport Partnerships at New Zealand’s Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) as part of a discussion on
transport at the 7th Australia-New Zealand Climate Change & Business
Conference.

In discussing the uptake of electric
vehicles, Ms Yeaman commented “Electric vehicles are used most for around-town
commuting rather than long family outings, so the fact that New Zealand has one
of the highest levels of car ownership and number of 2-car families would
indicate there is plenty of room for use of electric vehicles.”

Also speaking at the session was Kristian
Handberg, Project Manager of Low Emissions Vehicles for the Victorian
Department of Transport in Australia. Mr Handberg gave details of Victoria’s
electric vehicle trial which, although at an early stage, has been successful.
“People love using their electric vehicles,” said Mr Handberg. “Initial
concerns about restricted range have dissipated once users try the car and
become accustomed to how it works and recharges.”

The Victorian government launched its
Electric Vehicle Trial in 2010 to help Victoria better understand the process,
timelines and barriers for transitioning to electric vehicle technologies. The
trial, which finishes in 2014, is seeking a total of 180 households to take an
electric vehicle for three months each. “The early results have been
encouraging” said Mr Handberg, “with positive feedback on driving the vehicles,
the ease of use and the acceptance of the range limitations.”

Wellington City is also running an electric
vehicle program. In September 2010, Wellington became the first New Zealand
city to trial production electric cars with the launch of a fleet of eight
battery-powered Mistubishi electric vehicles. The cars are being used by the
City Council, Meridian Energy, The Wellington Company and New Zealand Post. The
four-seater, battery-powered Mistubishi iMiEV has a range of up to 155km and
zero drive-time emissions.

“We love our electric vehicles,” says Chris
Cameron, Principal Advisor on climate change for Wellington City Council. “They
are fun to drive, quick off the mark and make you feel incredibly good knowing
there are zero emissions.”

Ms. Yeaman and Mr Handberg were speaking at
the Climate Change & Business Conference which continues in Wellington
today. The event hosts more than 300 delegates with approximately 70 business and
policy experts presenting on implications of climate change and best practice
response.

Source: www.climateandbusiness.com

Sustainable Finance & the Business of Low Carbon Economic Growth

Business leaders from a variety of industries
have joined with the World Resources Institute (WRI) to launch a new initiative
to identify breakthrough sustainability solutions for businesses. The Next
Practice Collaborative will focus on business and finance models for low-carbon
economic growth in major markets like the US, China, Mexico, India and Brazil.
And sustainable finance will be at the top of the agenda for policy makers,
asset owners, fund managers, advisers and corporations from across the value
chain when they meet in Hong Kong for the Association for Sustainable and Responsible
Investment in Asia (ASrIA) 10th Anniversary Conference on 28-29 September 2011.

HONG KONG, 25 July 2011 — Sustainable
finance will be at the top of the agenda for policy makers, asset owners, fund
managers, advisers and corporations from across the value chain when they meet
in Hong Kong to explore common ground and mark a significant industry milestone
at the ASrIA 10th Anniversary Conference on 28-29 September 2011, at the Grand
Hyatt Hong Kong Hotel.

International leaders and experts from the
Asia Pacific region will examine the progress, share perspectives on key
challenges facing the industry to shape Asia’s next decade. ASrIA is at the
forefront of sustainable growth, providing industry leadership, in-depth
studies and valuable resources to sovereign wealth funds, regulators, asset
managers, corporates, service providers and policy groups.

“As the global centre of gravity shifts
towards Asia, this unique opportunity will examine how Asian financial markets
are approaching sustainability and highlight best practice and innovation in
both the developed and emerging economies,” says ASrIA chair Alexandra Tracy.
“Participants from across the financial eco-system will debate key issues to
explore the opportunities and challenges for scaling up sustainable finance in
Asia Pacific region. We hope ASrIA’s 10th Anniversary Conference will chart the
path for the next ten years of responsible investment and sustainability
practice.”

“Investing in a socially and environmentally
sustainable way has emerged as a winning value proposition in Asia — it’s
prudent risk management and leaves lasting benefits for communities and
investors,” says Sérgio Pimenta, East Asia and Pacific Director at IFC,
the member of the World Bank Group focused on private sector development in
emerging markets. “We are a key sponsor of ASrIA’s 10th Anniversary
Conference because we need to discuss how to scale-up sustainable investments
dramatically. Our future depends on it.”

Delegates will identify and address issues
that are common to and unique within markets across this diverse region, such
as China, India, Japan, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippine, Singapore,
Taiwan, Hong Kong, Thailand, Australia and Vietnam. Respected industry leaders
will tackle climate change, shareholder engagement and disclosure,
environmental, social, minority rights and discuss the current status of the
sustainable finance industry in industrialised, maturing and emerging markets
across Asia. Attendees include senior executives and decision makers comprising
representatives from listed equities, debts, alternative assets and impact
investing, regulators, capital markets, SRI pioneers, corporates, civil society
and NGOs.

IFC is a major sponsor and other sponsors
include SAM (founding ASrIA member), Dow Jones Indexes,  Bloomberg LP, Sindicatum Carbon Capital and
NewForests enabling participants to seek industry agreement on key priorities
for the next decade when setting goals for sustainable finance in the region
and beyond. Details about sustainable finance are available at www.ASrIA.org,
providing the latest information, online resources and the 10th Anniversary
Conference registration.

Sponsors:

Rodrigo Amandi of Sustainable Asset
Management (SAM) “The conference allows for discussion of balancing the
economy, society and environment, and the advancement of international best
practice in sustainable finance in Asia. I am confident that in the next
decade, Asia’s financial markets will become increasingly aware of the
opportunities from sustainable investment and financing.”

“We are delighted to be a sponsor of ASRIA’s
10th Anniversary Conference,” said David Brand, Managing Director of New
Forests, Pty Ltd.  “The conference
will showcase best practice in sustainable and responsible investment and
demonstrate that the Asian economy is not only a great growth opportunity, but
a place where economic, social and environmental issues will need to be
integrated.  These opportunities are not
solely in the debt and listed equity markets, but also in alternative assets
such as natural resources and infrastructure.”

Delegates:

“I believe it is important to understand how
our institutional investor peers work with their investment managers to
incentivise inclusion of corporate governance issues in asset allocation and
portfolio construction for the future sustainability and growth of Asia’s
investment industry, especially investments for the pension plans/funds.  I look forward to working with ASrIA to
advance the industry’s development,” said Ka Shi Lau, Vice-Chair of the Hong
Kong Trustees’ Association.

Speakers:

“There seems to be an emerging consensus that
ESG issues need to be at the heart and centre of the plan, as India embarks on
the growth journey for the next decade,” says Sumantra Sen, Founder and
Principal Researcher at Responsible Investment Research Association (RIRA). “It
may be great opportunity for the domestic institutions, policy makers and other
key stakeholders to participate in ASrIA’s
‘Across the Value Chain’ conference in September this year to learn and
share some of the best practices with peers in the region.”

“As the market regulator, we want to
strengthen ESG reporting among listed companies for their own benefit, and also
for the benefit of investors,” says Mark Dickens, Head of Listing Division,
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing.

“At ASrIA’s 10th Anniversary Conference I
look forward to sharing our experiences in responsible investing with my
institutional investor peers in Asia,” says David Russell, Co-Head of
Responsible Investment at Universities Superannuation Scheme. “USS helped
establish the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change a decade ago. We
hope to provide insights into effective investor collaborations and believe
climate and environmental concerns remain critical – no more so than in Asia.”

“This is an exciting time to invest in
Pakistan,” says Haroon Askari, Deputy Managing Director & Chief Operating
Officer of the Karachi Stock Exchange. “As we move towards becoming a
demutualised publicly-traded company, KSE is looking for insights into not only
how to manage that transition but also to explore ways to encourage Pakistani
companies to disclose more environmental, social and corporate governance
information to investors and other stakeholders. By gathering stock exchange
representatives, the ASrIA 10th Anniversary Conference will be of tremendous
value to share practical experiences.”

About ASrIA

Launched in 2001, The Association for
Sustainable and Responsible Investment in Asia (ASrIA) is a not for profit,
membership association taking a leadership role in promoting corporate
responsibility and sustainable finance practice in the Asia Pacific region.
Members are drawn from the Asian and international financial services industry
with an interest in sustainable investment. ASrIA’s goal is to build market
capacity for SRI by fostering the creation of SRI products and services and
providing training and support services, including conferences, seminars,
workshops, research projects and publications to raise the standards of SRI
practice and build momentum for SRI in Asia and beyond.

Source:
www.asria.org and www.conference.asria.org/2011/

Business Leaders Join to Identify Breakthrough
Sustainability Solutions

News from SustainableBusiness.com (29 July
2011):

Business leaders from a variety of industries
have joined with the World Resources Institute (WRI) to launch a new initiative
to identify breakthrough sustainability solutions for businesses.

The Next Practice Collaborative will focus on
business and finance models for low-carbon economic growth in major markets
like the US, China, Mexico, India and Brazil.

Founding members of the collaborative are
Alcoa, AkzoNobel, CEMEX, Johnson & Johnson, Siemens, Staples and United
Technologies Corporation.

“The Next Practice partnership is about
re-imagining the bar for corporate leadership,” says Manish Bapna, interim
president, WRI. “While it has been encouraging to see more and more
companies improving their environmental performance and reaping the business
benefits, leading businesses understand that it is time for real innovation and
new thinking, not just incremental improvement.”

CK Prahalad, the late business thought leader
and WRI board member coined the term “next practices,” to describe
business strategies that generate innovation, competitive advantage, and
industry transformation by seizing opportunities in tomorrow’s markets. Next
Practice is founded on that vision.

CEMEX, for example, wants to pioneer new
financing models in rapidly urbanizing areas in Latin America and other
developing countries that create sustainable housing at the lowest cost of
acquisition and total ownership, through energy-efficient design and materials
use.

“By developing environmentally sound
homes that are inexpensive and accessible to low-income families, we can make a
breakthrough in the sustainable solutions marketplace,” says Luis Farias,
Sr. Vice President of Energy and Sustainability at CEMEX.

Companies will draw on insights from a group
of advisors to refine and advance these next practice project ideas. This group
includes individuals such as ,Carter F. Bales chairman, NewWorld Capital Group
LLC; David Blood, co-founder and senior partner, Generation Investment
Management; Stefan Heck, Director, McKinsey & Company; Rebecca Henderson,
Senator John Heinz professor of Environmental Management, Harvard Business
School; Charles O. Holliday, Jr., former CEO of DuPont and Chairman, Bank of
America; and Jigar Shah, CEO, Carbon War Room.

For WRI, Next Practice represents the next
stage in the organization’s long history of working with the private sector to
develop and advance innovations for practical, cost-effective business
strategies for a sustainable future.

Source: www.wri.org
and www.sustainablebusiness.com

Environmentalists have praised Fuji Xerox for
cutting ties with a big paper manufacturer accused of wrongfully logging
Indonesian rainforests.  The Australian arm
of the Japanese company announced this week it will no longer be doing business
with Asia Pacific Resources International (APRIL), which owns one of the
world’s largest paper mills. And according to a study by Forest Watch Indonesia
(FWI), a non-governmental organisation, Indonesia has the fastest rate of
deforestation in the world, losing 15 million hectares of forest cover from
2000 to 2009, an area equivalent to half the size of Malaysia.

The Australian (4 August 2011):

Environmentalists have praised Fuji Xerox for
cutting ties with a big paper manufacturer accused of wrongfully logging
Indonesian rainforests.

Fuji Xerox Australia announced today it will
no longer be doing business with Asia Pacific Resources International (APRIL),
which owns one of the world’s largest paper mills.

Fuji Xerox managing director Nick Kugenthiran
said fresh allegations of APRIL unsustainably clearing forest land in Sumatra
was the final straw after months of doubts.

ABC’s Foreign Correspondent program on
Tuesday aired allegations APRIL is building plantations at an highly
destructive rate, with question marks over the acquisition of permits.

“Over the past eighteen months we have
been concerned with the lack of progress with regard to APRIL’s logging
practices in Indonesia,” he said in a statement.

“Our concerns were grave enough for us
to take steps in June 2011 to review our relationship with APRIL.

“Due to these concerns and further
issues brought to our attention, we have made the decision to cease all
procurement with APRIL.”

Comment was being sought from the company.

Greenpeace and the forestry union also
welcomed the announcement, and urged other retailers, such as Officeworks -
which buys APRIL products – to follow its lead.

“Other Australian companies and
retailers need to take a good hard look at where their pulp and paper products
come from,” Greenpeace’s Reece Turner said.

Both the federal government and its consumer
watchdog has been asked to investigate the illegal logging claims, to which
APRIL has yet to respond.

Source: www.theaustralian.com.au

Straits Times (29 July 2011):

South-east Asia’s forests under threat:
Indonesia

Deforestation rate is world’s fastest;
Kalimantan worst affected

JAKARTA: Indonesia has the fastest rate of
deforestation in the world, losing 15 million ha of forest cover from 2000 to
2009, according to a study by Forest Watch Indonesia (FWI), a non-governmental
organisation.

That area would be equivalent to half the
size of Malaysia.

‘In 2000, Indonesia had 103 million ha of
forest, but only 88 million ha were left in 2009. Therefore, the speed of
deforestation during those years was 1.5 million ha per year,’ FWI executive
director Wirendro Sumargo was quoted as saying on Wednesday by the Jakarta
Post. ‘That is the fastest tropical deforestation rate in the world,’ he added.

The worst area affected, FWI found, was in
Kalimantan, which accounted for slightly more than a third of the total area
lost. Mr Sumargo said that 5.5 million ha of the 15 million ha destroyed were
in that region. ‘The worst condition was in Central Kalimantan, which lost 2
million ha,’ he said.

The study was conducted by analysing Forestry
Ministry data in 2000 and then comparing it to data from satellite photos in
2009. Deforestation was mainly caused by oil palm plantations and pulp
companies, according to the study.

‘The root was our corrupt political and
economic system. Government policy is often inconsistent and less strict, and
it is very easy for many parties to cause deforestation,’ Mr Sumargo said.

A previous study conducted by FWI showed that
from 1985 to 1997, Indonesia lost 21.6 million ha of forest, with the speed of
deforestation at 1.8 million ha a year. The figures tally with a recent United
Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) study which showed Indonesia,
from 2000 to 2005, lost 1.87 million ha every year.

The FAO said Jakarta has had some success
tackling the problem through better conservation awareness and government
policy but warned against complacency.

Norway and Indonesia signed an agreement in
May last year under which Jakarta promised to impose a moratorium on clearing
its forests. In return, Norway vowed to pay US$1 billion (S$1.2 billion), based
on Indonesia’s performance in achieving long-term goals to slow deforestation.
A long list of exemptions, which included extensions of existing permits,
disappointed environmentalists.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

Toyota Best Global Green Brand & BMW Wakes Up with Electric Dream Cars

A new Interbrand study says Toyota is “a
leading example of making the environment a core management priority, while
also engaging in a meaningful way with audiences around the world.” 3M and
Siemens finished 2^nd and 3^rd in the Best Global Green
Brands survey published this week. And when BMW sets up a new division to make and
market electric and hybrid cars, it ranks as one of the most sensational
automotive events in recent history. Every member of the board of directors of
the Bavarian manufacturer was present, underlining the importance of this new
family of i-concept cars.

Toyota the world’s greenest brand –
Interbrand

By Paul Lienert, Correspondent, Inside Line (29July
2011):

•A new
Interbrand study says Toyota is “a leading example of making the
environment a core management priority, while also engaging in a meaningful way
with audiences around the world.”

•Global brands 3M and Siemens finished 2nd and
3rd.

•Results of the Best Global Green Brands
survey were published this week.

LONDON — A new study by Interbrand has
acclaimed Toyota as the world’s greenest brand, ahead of multinational
industrial giants 3M and Siemens.

Results of the first-ever Best Global Green
Brands survey were published this week by the international brand consultancy,
which just last September said Toyota’s massive recalls had caused it to drop
from 8th to 11th place in Interbrand’s better known Best Global Brands study.
At the time, Interbrand said Toyota had lost 16 percent of its brand value.

Earlier this year, a different survey, the
annual BrandZ Top 100 study released in May by media giant WPP’s research
subsidiary Millward Brown, said Toyota had overtaken BMW as the world’s top
automotive brand. That study valued the Toyota brand at $24.1 billion and said,
“Toyota has successfully proven that having a brand that consumers trust
and are loyal to can help companies survive crises.”

Interbrand’s new Best Global Green Brands
survey, in contrast, was designed to measure environmental performance, based
on public records, coupled with public perception of a brand’s environmental
sustainability.

Based in part on interviews with more than
10,000 consumers in such global markets as the U.S., U.K., France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, Brazil and India, the study gave Toyota a Green Performance Score
of 64.19 points.

Citing the automaker’s pioneering development
and commercialization of hybrid vehicles, spearheaded by the Prius Interbrand
singled out Toyota as “a leading example of making the environment a core
management priority, while also engaging in a meaningful way with audiences
around the world.”

Interbrand added that “the strongest
green brands consistently differentiate themselves and engage in green
activities that consumers find relevant, as well as implement profitable green
practices across their organization, from setting and executing environmental
programs to effectively measuring and reporting their performance to the
public.”

Inside Line says: Despite wrestling with a
plethora of daunting issues, ranging from Japan’s earthquake and tsunami to the
global recall of millions of vehicles, the Toyota brand continues to show
remarkable resilience.

Source: www.insideline.com

BMW’s electric dream

Bavarian company plugs into the future with
new line of cars

By Shreejit Changaroth for Straits Times in Frankfurt
(6 August 2011):

The all-electric i-3 Concept and the
petrol-electric hybrid i-8 Concept (ABOVE) are just the first

When BMW sets up a new division to make and
market electric and hybrid cars, it ranks as one of the most sensational
automotive events in recent history. Perhaps even more so than Toyota’s
creation of Lexus and Mercedes’ foray into micro-mini Smarts.

At the Bavarian manufacturer’s premiere of
the i-Series here, every member of the board of directors was present,
underlining the importance of this new family of cars.

Two cars were shown: an all-electric i-3
Concept and a petrol-electric hybrid i-8 Concept.

Two years ago, BMW showcased various aspects
of its electric car project, known at that time as the Mega City Vehicle (MCV).
The complete running prototype is now called the i-3 – an amalgam of
technologies developed for the MCV.

The i-3 Concept is a compact and stylish
five-door hatchback designed as an urban runabout. In order to keep overall
weight as low as possible, the chassis is basically a carbon composite
monocoque passenger cell bonded to an aluminium frame that carries the
drivetrain.

i-3 is a pure electric vehicle and designed
from scratch. Located in the rear is a 170hp electric motor driving the rear
wheels. Coincidentally, the 250Nm of torque produced by the motor means the i-3
has identical power and torque figures as the latest BMW 118i. And like the
118i, the i-3 also accelerates from rest to 100kmh in under eight seconds.

Electrical energy for the i-3′s motor is
provided by batteries that are laid out in the floor, under the seats. BMW says
this configuration is ideal in terms of space efficiency and crash safety.

Although some styling features, like the
expansive glass over the doors, may not make it to production, the i-3′s
overall size and shape, as well as its chassis and drivetrain, will remain
largely unchanged when the car arrives in showrooms some time in 2013.

The i-8 Concept is based on the BMW Vision
EfficientDynamics concept car. Fascinating to look at, the i-8 hybrid also
promises astonishing performance figures: 0-100kmh in under five seconds and a
fuel economy of between 5 and 7 litres/100km.

There are two power plants in the i-8.
Driving the front wheels is essentially the same drivetrain used in the i-3. A
mid-mounted internal combustion engine drives the rear wheels. With just three
cylinders and a total displacement of 1.5 litres, the petrol engine does not
sound like a lot. In reality, however, the turbocharged unit is quite a fine
piece of work, putting out a maximum of 220bhp.

Each power plant can run independently or in
tandem, when a total of 348bhp and 550Nm of torque can be unleashed to propel
the i-8.

These concept cars are just the first two
models of BMW’s bold i-Series. Between the i-3 and i-8, there could well be
more electric or hybrid products bearing the blue-and-white emblem in the near
future.

Undoubtedly, BMW will gauge the response to
the first two cars before deciding which direction its i-Series will take in
future.

Source: www.straitstimes.com

PR Power of Good: Create Consumer Citizens & Sustainable Businesses?

As companies are now facing major challenges,
such as resource scarcity and climate change, radically changing the way we do
business, we need a fresh business revolution, says Stephanie Draper of the
Forum of the Future. As companies seek to shape their world for the better, and
profit from it, we need to engage the masses – in creating closed-loop
products, in changing consumption patterns and the like. We could follow the
example of Edward Bernays, who instigated the birth of Public Relations and created
consumerism. We now have to use his techniques to produce “consumer
citizens” and reward sustainable businesses involved in creating a better
future.

Stephanie Draper for the Guardian
Professional Network (5 August 2011):

One of the major changes in the last century
has been the rise of the consumer. But this isn’t something that just happened
– the consumer was created, and the way it happened is an important lesson in
engaging people on sustainable business.

The key figure in this story is Edward
Bernays. Not someone I was particularly familiar with until Adam Curtis’s
brilliant Century of Self on BBC4 a few years ago. Bernays was the nephew of
Sigmund Freud. He combined his uncle’s work on unconscious desires with
thinking on crowd psychology to influence the masses. His basic idea was that
human behaviour is driven more by emotion than by logic and that by harnessing
that emotion at a group level you could get people to do what you wanted them
to do. In his book, Propaganda, he said: “If we understand the mechanism
and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the
masses according to our will without their knowing about it?”

He developed his approach during the first
world war when he was helping the American propaganda effort. In peacetime he
saw the opportunity to convert this expertise in mass persuasion to the
markets.

Having understandably renamed his approach
Public Relations (PR), one of his first major campaigns was getting women to
smoke. At the time it was socially unacceptable for women to be seen with a
cigarette. That meant half the number of potential customers for The American
Tobacco Company. So Bernays arranged for a group of rich debutants to light up
simultaneously during the 1929 Easter Day Parade. He saw that it was news, not
advertising, that would get the message to the people and told the press that
there was going to be a protest that day on “lighting the torch of
freedom”. It was this phrase that hit the headlines – squarely positioning
smoking with female independence and liberty. From that moment on, smoking was
seen as a sign of freedom for women, and grew as a result. This was a classic
appeal to the emotional rather than the rational. It is quite clear that
smoking does not make you free (probably a more appropriate slogan for the
washing machine or the pill), but the association made women feel powerful, and
it stuck.

Today we are well-versed in buying things
because they say something about us, or make us feel a certain way, but it was
a complete transformation in the 1920s when most selling was done on the basis
of information and function. Bernays spent a lifetime helping companies connect
with the “irrational emotion” of their customer. Many of Bernays’s
techniques, such as press releases, product placement and tie-ins are still
prevalent today. He pioneered a whole new way of doing business.

There are all sorts of questions around this
sort of mass persuasion – the act of converting active citizens into passive
consumers (and aiming to control them in the process) doesn’t support a more
sustainable approach and some of the methods are opaque and manipulative.
Bernays is far from a sustainability hero given his contribution to the
consumption challenges that we now face. But we can certainly learn from him.
Taking ideas and products from niche to mainstream is a key step on Forum’s Six
Steps to Significant Change. It helps to create the tipping point and is often
where sustainable business initiatives stumble. That is essentially what Bernays
did.

Companies are now facing major challenges,
such as resource scarcity and climate change that are radically changing the
way we do business. We need a fresh business revolution – one where companies
seek to shape their world for the better, and profit from it. To do this we
need to engage the masses – in creating closed-loop products, in changing
consumption patterns and the like. And we need to do that in a way that
connects with people as people, as Bernays did. A good example of this is
Nike’s Better World video, which creates an emotional attachment and inspires
you to do something different through sport. This is a change at least as big
as the one that Bernays instigated with the birth of PR. He created
consumerism, we now have to use his techniques to translate that into
“consumer citizens” that reward sustainable businesses and are
involved in creating a better future.

Stephanie Draper is director of change
strategies at Forum for the Future

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Designing for light, air, water, heat & energy through wall & skin

Singapore has achieved many accolades as a
liveable city, recognized for its excellent infrastructure and use of
technology, but there is a critical need to emphasize social and community
aspects, panellists pointed out at the Philips Seminar on “Future Living Spaces
in Singapore”. Philips has plenty of innovative plans for lighting and living,
as does the Laboratory for Visionary Architecture (Lava) with plans to cover
‘ugly’ buildings with a woven fabric mesh, or ‘skin’, to add more than
aesthetic appeal.  More on Sustainable
Cities 2011 coming up.

Report from Philips (3 August 2011):

Make Singapore a more sustainable, liveable
city by increasing community interaction

Singapore has achieved many accolades as a
liveable city, and is recognized for its excellent infrastructure and use of
technology, but there is a critical need to emphasize the community aspect,
panellists pointed out at the Philips Seminar on “Future Living Spaces in
Singapore”. Held on 30 July, the public seminar, organized by Philips as part
of its 60th anniversary celebrations in Singapore, attracted close to 200
participants, including tertiary students from arts and design colleges,
institutes, polytechnics, universities as well as members of green and
sustainability societies.

Panel members, comprising representatives
from Economic Development Board (EDB), Philips Design, Singapore Environment
Council (SEC), Singapore Institute of Architects (SIA) and Tsao Foundation,
discussed the macro trends of aging, climate change, sustainability and
urbanization, and their impact on future living spaces in Singapore.

Re-establishing kampong spirit, increasing
social bonding and inclusivity

A key conclusion drawn was the lack of
community interaction and social bonding in today‟s Singapore society. “With
today‟s urban flats, we boxed people up in their home, resulting in a loss of
interactivity and sense of community. We think of living spaces as only our
living room. But for future living spaces, we need to think beyond our homes.
Initiatives, such as Vertical Kampong by the National Volunteer &
Philanthropy Center, look at reviving the kampong spirit in the community we
live in by promoting the spirit of trust, helping and sharing with one
another,” said Howard Shaw, former Executive Director of SEC and Senior Vice
President, Corporate Social Responsibility, Halycon Group.

“It is time to re-establish that sense of
kampong spirit and for Singaporeans to look beyond our four walls. We have done
a lot in hardware in Singapore, but we need to do a lot more in „heartware‟,”
he continued.

Tai Lee Siang, President of Singapore
Institute of Architects (2007-2009) and Group Managing Director of Ong &
Ong Pte Ltd, elaborated further, “We used to spend a lot of time at the dining
table with parents and grandparents, but now we can‟t even fit in a proper
table at home as space is getting smaller. We need to make spaces more
innovative. Singapore is known for its excellence in embracing hardware and
technology, but the key challenge is to develop our city with a soul. We still
have a lot of work to do to build up the social and cultural aspects of our
city, while leveraging technology to help create solutions or build facilities
that can increase social bonding and inclusivity.”

Technology not the only answer

The panellists also highlighted that while
technology plays an important role, it is also about a cultural and mindset
shift. “Technology is not the answer to everything. It is but a means to a
goal, which is to improve quality of life, and hence, must be human-centered.
At Philips Design, when we conduct design probes, we always begin by looking at
people and thinking about their needs. We also take a multi-disciplinary
approach to consider different viewpoints and work creatively with people from
various fields to overcome constraints,” said Jack Mama, Creative Director of
Probes program, Philips Design.

“In envisioning future living spaces, I believe
there are many opportunities and possibilities. Our attitudes towards waste and
energy consumption have to change drastically. How can we solve the challenge
to urbanization? How can we make 40 square meters perform like 80 square
meters? Thinking and rethinking the space and how we live in that space is
critical,” Mama further elaborated. “Within the design probe projects we have
set out to address some of these issues within different future contexts and
suggest new possibilities. These projects serve as a catalyst to stimulate
debate and feedback around selected themes and in turn generate what we call
contextual insights.”

Challenge of climate change

Climate change is also a challenge for any
city that strives to be sustainable and liveable. The threat of climate change
will continue to have significant impact on the physical, biological and human
systems around the world. According to the World Meteorological Organization,
the 1990s was the warmest decade, and the 1900s was the warmest century during
the last 1,000 years.

“Over the last forty years, the government
has been dealing with challenges relating to limitations on land, water and
other resources. We have developed innovative urban solutions which we can
offer to the world. Today, we need to design our buildings to be much more
energy efficient, as dealing with climate change and environmental
sustainability will be the key challenge this century. In Singapore as well as
globally, we need to accept that at some point, there are physical limits to
growth. The Earth has a finite carrying capacity. We need to look at how we can
create prosperity without necessarily having high growth rates. Prosperity
without growth doesn‟t imply stagnation or lack of progress. It just means we
channel more efforts towards achieving outcomes that may be difficult to
measure, but which are increasingly important, e.g. creating more liveable
spaces, improving the quality of human relationships and improving income
equality,” said Toh Wee Khiang, Executive Director of Human Capital and
Building & Infrastructure Solutions Divisions, Singapore EDB.

A city for all ages

At the same time, Singapore is also grappling
with the challenges of a rapidly aging population. By 2030, one in five
residents will be 65 years or older. By 2050, Singapore‟s median age will be
54, similar to Japan and Italy, making it one of the demographically oldest
countries in the world.

Dr. Mary Ann Tsao, President and Founding
Director of the Tsao Foundation, added her perspective in relation to the
elderly population. “Singapore is a remarkable city, but I am not sure if we
are a city of all ages, especially for the elderly. People are living longer
now, and thus a liveable city has to be a city for all ages, to be inclusive,
to allow and invite participation from all citizens in all aspects of life.
Technology can play a role in enabling connectivity between people, and with
nature. We need to re-look at how we plan public spaces, make them accessible,
and at the same time, improve the flow of information, amongst people in the
community, young and old, be it within or outside of homes.”

Building a sustainable, liveable city and
forging a new identity

The panellists also pointed out unique
challenges faced by Singapore in building a sustainable, liveable city. An
interesting point raised by Howard Shaw was that Singapore would need to look
at food security, beyond water and energy security. “Currently, only 1% of land
in Singapore is used for food production. There is an opportunity to look into
vertical farming and food producing units, such as using our HDB flats, near
our living spaces within our city,” added Shaw.

Tai also highlighted how Singapore is unique
when compared to other bigger countries. “The issue of identity for Singapore
needs to be approached differently from bigger countries where the ratio
distribution of demographics is very different. Singapore has a population that
is made up of both citizens and foreigners – how do we forge a new identity
that is not purely based on citizenship, but instead create a community to make
everyone feel that they belong here? We need to re-look at Singapore as a new
kind of city-state, as an economic and technology hub with global citizens
housed within a small island of less than 700 square kilometres sharing a
common goal.”

Making cities liveable or making liveable
cities cannot be achieved without the help and the support of the communities
and the inhabitants of the cities.

“Through this seminar, we hope to raise
awareness and inspire the public, in particular the students, to think about
future living spaces in Singapore – rethinking how we plan physical space, as
well as social spaces, whether it‟s through design, technology or a
multi-disciplinary approach to build community and make Singapore a more
livable city for people of all ages, said Wong Lup Wai, Country Manager of
Philips Singapore. “Innovation centred around human needs is the key to improve
people‟s health and well-being and to help secure the long-term future of our
city. And we hope to see some inspiring and creative ideas from our students
through Philips Singapore‟s „Future Living Spaces‟ contest.”

The contest is open to all tertiary students
from 29 July to 19 September, and the video contest entries will be made
available for public voting online till 23 September. The top 20 entries will
be identified by the highest number of votes. The judges will then pick the
best idea as well as the most inspiring and most innovative ideas, from this
list. The top 3 winners and the top entries, will win $10,000 worth of cash and
products in prizes.

For more information about the contest,
please visit http://

About Royal Philips Electronics

Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands
(NYSE: PHG, AEX: PHI) is a diversified health and well-being company, focused
on improving people‟s lives through timely innovations. As a world leader in
healthcare, lifestyle and lighting, Philips integrates technologies and design
into people-centric solutions, based on fundamental customer insights and the
brand promise of “sense and simplicity.” Headquartered in the Netherlands,
Philips employs about 117,000 employees with sales and services in more than
100 countries worldwide. With sales of EUR 22.3 billion in 2010, the company is
a market leader in cardiac care, acute care and home healthcare, energy
efficient lighting solutions and new lighting applications, as well as
lifestyle products for personal well-being and pleasure with strong leadership
positions in male shaving and grooming, portable entertainment and oral
healthcare.

Source: www.philips.com.sg/futurelivingspaces

Architect proposes eco-friendly, lightweight
mesh to modify facade

By Jonathan Pearlman for The Straits Times (1
August 2011):

On a busy Sydney street just outside the central
business district stands a lone, dark-brown 27-storey tower that almost seems
to defiantly welcome its reputation as the city’s ugliest building.

The main building of the University of
Technology, Sydney (UTS), has repeatedly been named as the city’s worst by
experts and in online polls, partly because it is so conspicuous. If it had
been built a little to the east, it might have gone unnoticed in the city’s
cluster of skyscrapers.

Instead, the stark, Brutalist-style 120m-tall
tower stands out at the beginning of Broadway, just as the skyline flattens
out.

The building, or ‘slat-stack’, is so
notorious that it has spawned lapel pins and T-shirts. Former UTS
vice-chancellor Gus Guthrie characterised it with a quip: ‘We have a tower, but
no one could claim it was an ivory one.’

It has even been criticised by one of the
world’s best-known architects, Mr Frank Gehry, who was hired recently by the
university to build a new business school. He could not conceal his distaste
for its infamous central tower.

Adding to the insults, the building was
completed in 1979, making it one of the city’s first big projects after the
completion of the iconic Sydney Opera House, an architectural wonder that has
been honoured with a spot on the Unesco World Heritage List.

The question, then, is what to do with such a
celebrated eyesore. The multinational firm Laboratory for Visionary
Architecture (Lava) believes it has the answer: cover it up.

Mr Chris Bosse, a director of the firm, which
has branches in Sydney, Shanghai and Stuttgart, has proposed applying his
pioneering, environmentally friendly concept of lightweight architecture.

The plan would involve covering the tower in
a woven fabric mesh, or ‘skin’ – and it could even have ramifications for
Singapore in the future.

The skin would not only replace the infamous
stark brown slats with a glowing, soft facade of composite textile mesh, but
would also include a range of environmental functions, such as collecting
rainwater at the base and trapping air to reduce the energy use of the tower.

The tinted windows of the building are now
sealed. But the skin would allow the windows to be opened to let in light and
air, reducing the need for electric lighting and air-conditioning.

It could also function as a screen at night -
an effect created by implanting solar cells into the fabric that can generate
enough power to beam images or messages.

‘Every city in the world has these buildings
that were built in the 1960s and 1970s and are coming to the end of their
aesthetic and technological lifespan,’ Mr Bosse said. ‘The buildings are
outdated and are not changing. The question is what to do with them. We want to
wrap the tower in a skin and turn it into something new.’

Mr Bosse, who studied at the Institute for
Lightweight Structures and Conceptual Design in Stuttgart, said this would not
only update the building aesthetically but also enable the tower to be
naturally inducted and lit.

‘Energy collected during the day can be
converted to light and electricity,’ he said. ‘We want to build with less
materials, less cost and less of a carbon footprint.’

He was a designer of Beijing’s Water Cube -
the award-winning aquatics centre built for the 2008 Olympics. He said Lava’s
aim is to learn from nature and apply it to engineering and architecture.

‘We look to the structures of leaves and
spider webs and coral reefs and we always see lightweight structures which are
very beautiful,’ he said. ‘We are trying to make architecture more lightweight
and more beautiful.’

Mr Bosse noted that traditionally, the facade
of buildings do not react to the environment. ‘They are built to shut out the
environment, for the worst case scenario – rain or the cold,’ he said. ‘We want
to create concepts in which buildings breathe naturally and let sunlight in.’

He said the cost of installing a skin on a
building would be about 10 per cent to 15 per cent of the cost of rebuilding it
from scratch.

In the case of the UTS Tower, a skin would
take about three months to install and would cost about A$15 million (S$20 million).
It could be fitted to the tower without affecting the functioning of the
building.

UTS vice-chancellor Ross Milbourne believes
the skin proposal is probably the best way to modify the tower. But the refit
would be several years away, as the university is already spending A$1 billion
on refurbishments to buildings including the Dr Chau Chak Wing Building, the
first building in Australia designed by Mr Gehry.

Meanwhile, Mr Bosse has spotted other
potential sites for his skin. He is in discussions with Sydney about covering
the city’s ugliest carpark, a 1961 concrete block in Goulburn Street, near
Chinatown.

He also believes the skin could fit in
‘beautifully’ in Singapore. He recently returned from a research visit and last
year exhibited a work titled Digital Origami Tigers at i Light Marina Bay, a
sustainable light art festival in the Republic.

‘Singapore is a new city but the first
generation of buildings were built in a simple fashion,’ he said.

‘In Asia, they tend to pull buildings down
and rebuild them. It comes at a cost… Singapore really values the arts and
invention. It is also a city of lights. The skin concept could blend in
beautifully.’

Source: www.stqaprev.asia1.com.sg

Let’s not talk about the war – or climate
change!

Climate change advocates haven’t had much to
celebrate recently, but New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s announcement
last week that he was giving $50 million to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal
campaign marked a real win. So writes Bryan Walsh in Time Science.

Yet when he (Walsh) spoke to Bloomberg before
his donation became public, climate change wasn’t foremost on his mind. He saw
coal pollution first and foremost as a public health issue, one that is
directly hurting Americans through higher rates of asthma and heart disease.

If we’re smart, this approach might be the
new way to attack climate change: by identifying actions that can provide a
wealth of benefits — including on carbon emissions — rather than simply
focusing on global warming alone. That’s the message of a new paper called
“Climate Pragmatism” that’s being published today by a bipartisan range
of thinkers on energy and climate issues. Read More

Fighting Climate Change by Not Focusing on
Climate Change

By Bryan Walsh in Time Science (26 July
2011):

Climate change advocates haven’t had much to
celebrate recently, but New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s announcement
last week that he was giving $50 million to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal
campaign marked a real win. The Sierra Club — the nation’s largest
environmental group — has successfully stopped more than 150 proposed coal
plants from being built over the past decade through the campaign. Bloomberg’s
money — and perhaps more importantly, the imprimatur of one of the richest and
most influential people in the country — will enable the Sierra Club to bring
its war on coal to a new level, preventing untold millions of tons of
greenhouse gas emissions from warming the planet.

Yet when I spoke to Bloomberg before his
donation became public, climate change wasn’t foremost on his mind. He saw coal
pollution first and foremost as a public health issue, one that is directly
hurting Americans through higher rates of asthma and heart disease. He was
certainly worried about the greenhouse gases those coal plants were spewing —
coal is responsible for about 20% of global carbon emissions — but what really
motivated him were the mercury emissions, the particulates, the arsenic and all
the other conventional poisons created by burning coal. “Coal kills every
day,” Bloomberg told me. “It’s a dirty fuel.” So it is with the
Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, which has succeeded more by motivating
individual communities over the local health effects of coal pollution than by
appealing to the broader risks of global warming.(See why Bloomberg pledged $50
million to fight the coal industry.)

If we’re smart, this approach might be the
new way to attack climate change: by identifying actions that can provide a
wealth of benefits — including on carbon emissions — rather than simply
focusing on global warming alone. That’s the message of a new paper called
“Climate Pragmatism” that’s being published today by a bipartisan
range of thinkers on energy and climate issues. The best way to deal with
climate change, as it turns out, is not to deal directly with climate change.
As the authors write: “Policymakers today are likely to make the most
progress to the degree that they refrain from centrally justifying energy
innovation, resilience to extreme weather and pollution reduction as ‘climate
policy.’”

It sounds a bit confusing — if we’re going to
deal with climate change, why not just directly deal with climate change? The
answer is simple: we can’t, or at least, we refuse to. Over the past several
years, even as the scientific case on manmade climate change has gotten
stronger, the international system has failed again and again to reduce carbon
emissions. The effort to produce a global carbon deal failed decisively in
Copenhagen in 2009. In the U.S., a carbon cap-and-trade bill died in the Senate
a year ago, and there’s little chance it will be revived. Even Europe — home to
the governments and citizens that seem to care about climate change the most —
has gradually scaled back its ambitions on reducing carbon as the cost and
complexity of those policies has become clearer.

The failure of the global deal is an
inevitable consequence of what Roger Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental
science at the University of Colorado and one of the authors of the
“Climate Pragmatism” paper, calls “the iron law of climate
policy.” Any climate policy that is viewed as obstructing economic
progress will fail — especially in large developing countries that are counting
on rapid economic growth to lift citizens out of poverty. Take China, for
example — while the country has emerged as a world leader in terms of clean
energy investment, its leaders remain reluctant to sign onto any kind of
meaningful carbon reductions. The economy comes first, with renewables
supplying just a tiny portion of China’s overall energy mix. Coal is and will
be far more important, with coal imports in China and India slated to grow 78%
in 2011.

This means any global carbon cap that would
raise the price of fossil fuels significantly simply won’t fly, in China or for
that matter, in the U.S. But that doesn’t mean there’s zero willingness to
consider the environmental or health perspectives of the energy we use. The
developed world has vastly reduced air pollution over the past several decades
through ever-tougher regulations on conventional pollutants like soot and acid
rain causing sulfur dioxide. These are rules that, despite constant industry
opposition, remain broadly popular among the public — much more popular than
carbon regulations — because the benefit is visible, immediate and personal.

Developing countries will be no different.
Conventional air pollution is a tremendous threat to Chinese growth and public
health, as anyone who watched the Beijing Olympics in 2008 knows. Air and water
pollution costs China an estimated 4.3% of its GDP each year, and globally, air
pollution contributes to an estimated 3 million deaths a year. Any policies or
efforts that divert investment from the dirtiest sources — as the Sierra Club
is doing with its Beyond Coal campaign — towards cleaner alternatives like
natural gas and renewables will benefit public health, while helping the
climate as well.

One target should be black carbon — a fancy
word for soot — which not only causes serious respiratory problems but also
contributes disproportionately to the warming of the atmosphere and especially
high-altitude snow cover. (Black carbon can actually settle on white ice,
darkening it and causing it to absorb more sunlight and melt faster.) Unlike
carbon dioxide, black carbon is relatively easy to control with better engines
and cleaner fuels, and tackling the pollutant pays off immediately for health
and the climate as well. It’s even bipartisan: in 2009 the staunchly Democratic
senators John Kerry and Barbara Boxer joined with the Republican climate change
skeptic James Inhofe to co-sponsor an effort to investigate ways to reduce
black carbon.

At the same time — especially for developing
countries — those alternatives need to be economically viable. The
“Climate Pragmatism” paper explodes a myth that’s held by many
greens: that energy is too cheap. For most of the world, the opposite is true,
which is why more than 1.4 billion people lack virtually any access to
electricity. That’s an astounding figure, but one that rarely gets the
attention it deserves. Lack of electricity impacts public health — try running
a modern hospital without any power — and retards economic growth. If we want
developing nations to be better prepared to deal with the effects of climate
change — or just about any other threat — we need to get them wired.(See the
effects that climate chnage will have on Thailand.)

The challenge will to develop low-carbon
alternatives that can compete with fossil fuels on price. (Subsidies are
limited — already, even ultra-green countries like Germany are cutting back aid
for renewable power because of the rising price tag.) In some places and some
conditions, renewables are already winning — for example, in rural areas of
Cameroon, where I’m currently traveling, it’s often cheaper to support off the
grid solar than run power lines to remote villages. But if alternatives are
going to win they need to get a lot cheaper and a lot more efficient, and
that’s going to require vast increases in the amount of basic R&D spent on
energy. The American Energy Innovation Council — a heavyweight lobbying group
that includes Bill Gates — has suggested that the U.S. should increase funding
for energy research around $3 billion a year to at least $15 billion annually.
Some of that money could come from a small price on carbon, just as the federal
gasoline tax raises money for highway construction and maintenance.

Lastly there’s the pressing need to adapt to
climate change. It seems like a no-brainer, but we need to think a little
harder about what adaptation actually means. Thanks in part to years of UN
negotiations, there’s an assumption that we can actually separate adapting to
climate change from preparing for any natural disaster or extreme weather. In
reality, though, separating the two is nearly impossible — we still can’t
assign blame for specific weather events — and absolutely pointless. The
climate adaptation assistance that rich nations are sending to the developing
world is almost totally drawn from the existing budget for foreign aid.(See how
climate change is whittling down the world’s species.)

A hurricane will create havoc for an
unprepared population whether the storm has been strengthened by carbon
emissions or not. Countries need to be prepared for all the stresses the future
will bring — from extreme weather to higher energy prices to infectious
disease. The watchword should be resilience — creating societies that can
bounce back from anything — and the best way to do that is through continued
economic development. A rich country will be better prepared for climate change
than a poor country just about every time.

Most of the proposals put forth in the
“Climate Pragmatism” paper aren’t new — which in some ways is their
virtue. Nationally and internationally, climate politics are deadlocked, even
as carbon emissions keep rising and the most of the U.S. sweats through a
summer that feels like a trailer for global warming to come. What’s needed in
this long hot season is an oblique approach to climate change, one that
sidesteps the roadblocks by taking advantage of popular, no-regrets actions
that are worth doing even if global warming wasn’t real. It’s not as simple or
as elegant as one global deal — but it might actually work.

Has “China Sky” helped slow global
warming?

Source: www.time.com

Peace by any other name

Despite the difficulty of getting the right
words to appeal to all, the UN Security Council admitted that global security
and peace are threatened by climate change. If that’s not enough, we get some
helpful reminders by the UK’s former chief scientist that most countries are
not doing half enough to deal with emissions of greenhouse gases. There are some
messages about the role of coal and trees, as well as some tips on careful carbon
accounting and an update on Australia’s carbon tax go-slow. Not many international
airlines go along with Europe’s aviation emission controls, while Japan is
seeing economic and health impacts from its energy reduction measures. There’s
news about the Climate Change & Business conference coming up in New
Zealand and Sustainable Cities event on the way to Singapore, plus reports from
the World Leadership Conference and the Clean Technology Investment event. Sustainability
and environment winners take a bow in Singapore and Australia, with Veolia figuring
prominently. Dr James Barnard sets out his water and waste award winning ways,
while we get a little distracted by ramifications of the media hacking business
in the UK. Of course, we know how essential bees are, but elephants are also learning
to take account of the sting in the tail. And this is your last chance (30
July) to get your nominations in for the 100 Global Sustain Ability Leaders list.
– Ken Hickson