Too Much Climate & Too Many Cars for China?

Tim Hughes heard about Australia devastating floods while in China and noted that the world’s largest country  – now the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases  – is seriously worried about its climate, pollution, water supplies and also its international reputation. Meanwhile, Singaporean-Australian businessman William Tien is helping write the next chapter of automotive history, with his silicon battery technology mirroring the way companies assemble computers in China for sale globally.

John Mangan in The Age (16 January 2011):

FROM an unassuming office in South Melbourne, Singaporean-Australian businessman William Tien plans to help write the next chapter of automotive history.

After a century of hopes and promises, electric cars are set finally to establish themselves as realistic alternatives to petrol-burning vehicles, and Mr Tien’s Alpha company has licensed a unique silicon-based battery technology for a Chinese-built car, the Lujo.

Australians bought 1,035,574 motor vehicles last year, – up 10.5 per cent, or 98,246 vehicles, compared with 2009.

Mr Tien, whose background is in financial services and information technology, wants a modest slice of that action. He has three Lujos scheduled to undergo Australian compliance testing at the end of February. After that, he says, the car will go on sale for less than $25,000.

It will certainly be a cheap alternative compared with other electric vehicles, including the I-MiEV by industry leader Mitsubishi, which became available last year on lease plans that cost more than $60,000. Mitsubishi has 110 cars on the road in Australia at the moment and expects to double that number this year.

Prefer a supercar? The American 212km/h Tesla Roadster went on sale here last week for $206,000. Nissan also has an electric car, the Leaf, due for release this year. EDay, a new Australian company, plans to have a $10,000 Chinese-built car with a top speed of 80km/h on the road by the middle of the year.

Blade Electronic Vehicles, based in Castlemaine, has been pulling the insides out of small Hyundais and inserting its own electric motors and batteries for four years. Founder Ross Blade and his team have sold 35 Blade Electrons to a mixture of government and private customers, and have a new model scheduled for this year, the Blade Runner, a two-seater that doubles the range from about 100 kilometres to about 200 kilometres.

An Electron costs about $45,000, or $32,000 if you lease the batteries. The new Blade Runner will cost $55,000 or $32,000 with leased batteries.

While Mr Tien promises his Chinese-built cars will be price-competitive with similarly sized conventional vehicles, Mr Blade joins established manufacturers in lamenting a lack of government support for the technology: ”Every other developed country on the planet is encouraging development of electric vehicles by offering substantial subsidies.”

Andrew McKellar, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries chief, says there is ”a legitimate role for some sort of time-limited consumer incentive” for low-emission vehicles, including electric cars.

He supports a ”cleaner-car rebate” the federal government has proposed, arguing that it should particularly target low-emission cars. ”The proposed rebate would be for $2000, which is probably on the skinny side,” he says.

Skinny indeed. Low-emission cars in France get a $6680 subsidy. US electric cars qualify for a sales tax deduction of up to $7600. Japanese cars receive a large subsidy, based on the price difference between the electric car and its nearest petrol equivalent.

After price, ”range anxiety” is the greatest issue for potential electric car owners, as recharging a battery can take eight hours.

ABC science pundit and New Inventors judge Bernie Hobbs, who bought her Blade Electron IV six months ago, is a satisfied customer. ”As a science broadcaster I’ve been banging on about the environment for the best part of 10 years. I couldn’t bear the thought of buying another petrol car.”

Her electric car drives, she says, like a small automatic. ”If you usually drive more than 100 kilometres a day, forget it. My car is not for you. But I’m usually driving, at most, 50 kilometres. You plug it in overnight, charge it up at the off-peak rate on 100 per cent green power. It’s no inconvenience until your girlfriend forgets to plug it in overnight!”

Mitsubishi corporate communications head Lenore Fletcher says ”fast chargers” that restore half a battery’s power in 15 minutes will be rolled out in South Australia this year.

”That’s going to be a whole different ball game,” she says. ”We’ll see them popping up in shopping centres and workplaces.” As for price, Ms Fletcher says the technology may well develop like other consumer electronics. ”Look at plasma TVs. Ten years ago they cost $20,000. Now you can get one for under $800.”

Mr Tien is also inspired by the consumer electronics revolution. His buying of car bodies used for a Chinese petrol-engine car and inserting of his company’s battery technology mirrors the way companies assemble computers in China for sale globally.

The inventor-businessman is excited about expanding into the vehicle industry. ”I love cars and I’m interested in anything that’s green.’

Source: www.theage.com.au

China powers ahead to cut carbon emissions by 2020

Tim Hughes in the Courier-Mail (17 January 2011):

WE have had a terrible reminder of just how disastrous weather events can be. I watched the events of last week from China, where I was attending an investment conference.

While the two might appear to be quite disconnected events, in fact I sat through four days of presentations where climate change, energy efficiency targets and reduced carbon emissions were mentioned in every single session.

What science is telling us is the frequency and severity of extreme climate events will increase as the planet warms.

China is now the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases and it is seriously worried. Worried about its climate, pollution, water supplies and also it’s international reputation.

Without waiting for the rest of the world, it has voluntarily adopted a target to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide produced per unit of GDP by 2020, by 40 to 45 per cent from 2005 levels.

But it is a demanding target and will require some very major changes in energy use in China. It is also likely to have profound impacts for Australia.

Over the past five years China has already reduced its emissions per unit of GDP by around 15 per cent. But the easy gains from closing down terribly inefficient old power stations and the like have already been had.

The new five-year plan has not yet been finalised but is expected to seek a targeted further 15 to 20 per cent improvement in carbon efficiency.

The problem is that China, like us, it is very much a coal dependent economy.

Despite having the world’s fastest growing wind, hydro and nuclear programs, none of these can be expected to significantly help China meet its target.

Rather, the most likely solution to China’s carbon problem is lying in deep coal beds in central Queensland and off WA’s North-West Shelf natural gas.

Per unit of electricity generated, gas produces roughly half the carbon dioxide of coal.

That said, the magnitude of China’s challenge is, if it was to meet its target by switching to gas, there is not enough readily available to do it.

The good news for Australia and for Queensland is, while we dominate China’s coking coal imports, we only export a relatively small amount of thermal coal to China. But when it comes to gas, we have projects in spades ready to go.

Last week’s go-ahead from Santos, following on from BG’s Curtis project, is probably just a taste of things to come.

From what I heard in Beijing, the Shell/PetroChina project cannot be far behind.

Already Gladstone is on its way to becoming an energy superpower, primarily driven by a world becoming concerned about climate risk.

Tim Hughes is a director of Value Capital Management.timvcm@bigpond.net.au

Source: www.couriermail.com.au

Prestigious Waterfront Homes Now in No-Go Zones

Some areas of Queensland are so flood-prone they should never have been built on and should be declared no-go zones, according to an international disaster expert, Professor Ed Blakely, who says extreme weather events are becoming increasingly more frequent and far more devastating. While  the Institute for Sustainable Development’s Professor George Earl says the flooding disaster underlines the need for adequate infrastructure to deal with the effects of climate change. “Areas which were prestigious in previous generations now are those very properties which are at most risk because of climate change and rising tidal waters”.

Karen Kissane in The Age (15 January 2011):

SOME areas of Queensland are so flood-prone they should never have been built on and should be declared no-go zones, with residents bought out and moved out, according to an international disaster expert.

”We shouldn’t regard this [flood] as freakish,” said Professor Ed Blakely, who ran the recovery of New Orleans after hurricane Katrina and was involved in New York’s after 9/11. ”We should assume they are going to occur because of climate change. They are becoming increasingly frequent and far more devastating.”

He warned it was also time to examine the need for Queenslanders to ”retreat from the coast” to escape rising sea levels. ”It will take 60-75 years, so we have got to start now,” he said. ”It’s very important for us to see not just this incident but the long-term trend and learn from it and plan for it.”

Professor Blakely said he had warned a conference of a flood like the current one: ”I warned people in Brisbane before hurricane Katrina that this could happen. I had all the CSIRO data that showed a flood that looked very much like the flood that happened. They scoffed.”

Professor Blakely, nick-named ”the master of disaster”, is professor of urban policy at Sydney University.

Queensland authorities have for some time been examining the state’s future under climate change, with the CSIRO predicting an increased intensity of extreme rainfall events such as the current floods.

A global rise in weather-related disasters such as the Queensland floods was confirmed by Andrew Glikson, an earth and paleoclimate scientist with the Australian National University.

”Cyclones have increased twofold over the past 20 years. Floods have increased threefold,” he said.

He said climate scientists were careful never to point to a single event as evidence of climate change but to examine medium and long-term trends. ”It’s happening now, and it’s happening faster than some of the climate-change scientists have dared to predict,” he said.

Chief executive of the Queensland Local Government Association, Greg Hallam, agreed many people were living in areas that should not have been settled. ”There are councils that certainly would like to remove housing but can’t. It’s such an expensive business, beyond councils’ means.

”Councils don’t build on flood plains now, but where people have got a use right, that’s a legal right to build. Councils can’t stop them. The state has to legislate to take away people’s planning permits, or the Commonwealth has to fund [a buyback]. I think this epoch event will raise all sorts of issues about how we do all sorts of things.”

Given the rising sea levels forecast under climate change, a retreat from Queensland’s coastline was the best thing to do ”because we can’t afford to defend every inch of the coast”, said Catherine Lovelock, professor of biological science at the University of Queensland and a contributor to that state’s Climate Adaptation Initiative.

She said engineering defences such as sea walls and levees were expensive and not always successful. ”If you can’t defend a suburb or town, logically you would say that you should let them go.

”Planned withdrawal is one idea but it has to be thought through very, very carefully …

”Which government is going to stick their neck out and say, ‘I’m sorry, all of you in Graceville, you are going to have to walk away from your properties that are worth around $300,000 each?”’

Source: www.theage.com.au

By Charmaine Kane for ABC (17 January 2011):

An economist on Queensland’s Gold Coast says the Brisbane floods have highlighted the challenges that can confront waterfront property owners.

Riverfront homes were among the thousands of properties inundated in south-east Queensland last week.

Around 180 real estate professionals from around the world are discussing the impact of climate change on property developments at a conference at Bond University this week.

The director of the Institute for Sustainable Development at Bond University, Professor George Earl, says the disaster underlines the need for adequate infrastructure to deal with the effects of climate change.

“Areas which were prestigious in previous generations now are those very properties which are at most risk because of climate change and rising tidal waters etc,” he said.

“I don’t think they will become less desirable or even less valuable – I think what it will do is heighten the emphasis on sustainable infrastructure.

“There are some areas which have gone under in the last few days up in Brisbane which are quite OK to be built on.

“It is just that in fact we have to understand the infrastructure that’s needed not to protect just them, but the city in general has to be upgraded.

“We have to do more significant work in terms of understanding the issues of climate change on real estate.”

However, he says last week’s floods will not cause long-term damage to Brisbane property values.

Professor Earl says the damage will not make south-east Queensland any less desirable to home-buyers or dramatically reduce prices.

“In the short-term, it will probably stagnate them and probably make them go back somewhat,” he said.

“But I think that as we start handling better the issues of climate change and real estate and urban planning, Brisbane and the Gold Coast will still be beautiful places to live.

Source: www.abc.net.au

End the Blame Game and Work Together on Solutions

A binding global climate treaty might be a long way off but what is needed is less finger-pointing and more readiness to cooperate in ensuring that effective action is taken. So says Singapore Ambassador at large and climate change negotiator Chew Tai Soo: “Technology is available for developing countries to achieve sustainable economic development. Less pollutive means of power generation are possible today with renewable energy and nuclear power, especially if financing and technology transfer from developed countries are made available.”

By Chew Tai Soo, For The Straits Times (14 January 2011):

Despite few renewable energy alternatives, Singapore is showing its green commitment by pledging to reduce its emissions by 16 per cent by 2020.

At a chance meeting recently with some friends from academia and non-governmental organisations, I was quizzed on aspects relating to climate change negotiations when they discovered I had participated at the recent conference in Cancun.

The discussion revealed much misunderstanding over climate change issues, centring on the role of developed and developing countries and the latter’s right to development.

Climate change and global warming are pressing problems for all countries. The reversal of global warming can come about only through international cooperation involving emission reductions by all – and this regrettably has proven difficult to achieve.

There is an economic cost to curbing emissions. Developing countries point inevitably to their pressing need for growth and a better life for their people.

And while the European Union, Japan and other developed countries have, since 1997, taken the lead in reducing their emissions under the Kyoto Protocol, these same countries are unwilling to take on new commitments without the United States and large developing countries doing the same.

The US, meanwhile, has taken the position that it will not take on binding legal commitments unless the major developing countries, such as India and China, do likewise.

That a binding global treaty is still a long way off does not bode well for the environment. What is needed is less finger-pointing and more readiness to cooperate in ensuring that effective action is taken.

This will require developed countries to accept their ‘historical responsibilities’ and to ‘take the lead in combating climate change and the adverse effects thereof’. Developing countries, on their part, should undertake commitments in accordance with the principle of ‘their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’. The battle cannot be joined without the effort of all countries.

Do China and India and other developing countries have the right to development? The short answer is: Yes.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change recognises the ‘legitimate priority needs of developing countries for the achievement of sustainable economic growth and the eradication of poverty’. Furthermore, the developing world can do this without repeating the excesses of the West in its own industrial development, leading to the substantial concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Technology is available for developing countries to achieve sustainable economic development. Less pollutive means of power generation are possible today with renewable energy and nuclear power, especially if financing and technology transfer from developed countries are made available, as called for in the Convention.

The blame game among the different countries has made progress in this area elusive. One recurrent issue is that developed countries, having exported dirty industries to developing ones in the first instance, are now asking the latter to reduce the resultant pollution from such investments.

On their part, developed countries are quick to stress that the strict environmental laws in the West make for more costly production of materials, such as cement, and the absence of such laws in developing countries works like a magnet in the relocation of pollutive industries.

To stop the haemorrhaging of jobs, developed countries have proposed a border tax on exports from developing countries that do not meet international environmental standards. However, such tax measures will have other negative consequences on many developing countries.

Some large developing countries have proposed the idea of ‘equitable access to carbon space’ based on per capita emissions – in other words, their right to increase their per capita emissions to comparable levels attained by developed countries. This approach is not viable as it would lead to an exponential increase of carbon in the atmosphere.

Let me end with a few words about Singapore, as it has been apparent that our unique circumstances have not been fully appreciated. We are a city state with no hinterland. Our economic success and high per capita gross domestic product tend to obscure our limitations as a small country.

Singapore emits only 0.2 per cent of the global total of carbon dioxide. Even if it were possible to stop all carbon emissions here, it would not make a difference if others do nothing. Our small population and physical size make comparisons of Singapore and its emissions on a per capita basis with other countries potentially unfair.

It might be better to compare ourselves to cities such as Tokyo or London. And yet such a comparison would not be justifiable either. Unlike London, for example, which has been able to move its industries to other parts of Britain, we are limited by our 700-odd sq km of land. An even more severe limitation is that we have very few options in pursuing renewable energy sources.

Singapore is what the Convention recognises as an alternative energy disadvantaged country, dependent on fossil fuels. In our efforts to mitigate global warming, our smallness determines much of what we can do.

Despite our unique circumstances, Singapore has pledged to reduce its emissions by 16 per cent below business as usual by 2020, contingent on a legally binding agreement in which all countries implement their commitments in good faith. This is a tough target for Singapore and there will be economic and social costs to pay. But it shows our seriousness in joining the global fight against global warming.

To succeed in reducing global warming, all countries, both developed and developing, have to make a contribution.

The writer, an Ambassador-at-Large for Singapore, is the country’s former chief negotiator for climate change.

Source: www.admpreview.straitstimes.com

Green with Envy: Korean Credit Card Reward for a Low Carbon Lifestyle

There’s a new Government led program in South Korea that offers “green credits” for consumers who embrace a low-carbon lifestyle. Credit cards have become more than a purchasing tool in South Korea, offering discounts on movies or food and freebies. Now energy consumption incentives are added to that list. All part of a drive to reduce the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30% from projected levels by 2020.

By Ju-min Park for Reuters (11 January 2011):

Kim Yong-sook is an idealist who longs for a greener lifestyle, which means walking more and wasting less. But she never dreamed that her credit card could help save the planet.

The 59-year-old stay-at-home mother is one of many set to take advantage of a new program in South Korea that will offer “green credits” for consumers who embrace a low-carbon lifestyle. Credit cards have become more than a purchasing tool in South Korea, offering discounts on movies or food and freebies. Now a new government program will add energy consumption incentives to that list.

Indeed, according to a new 2011 policy plan announced by the Ministry of Environment, buying eco-friendly products or living green in ways such as taking public transit by using a so-called green credit card, will be good both for the environment and your wallet. The credits can be redeemed for cash or be used to lower utility bills.

“Accumulating green credits does not sound bothersome at all,” said Kim.

The combination of credit and green consumerism, the ministry said, is part of a drive to reduce the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent from projected levels by 2020.

“You can earn bonus points in daily life when you buy a carbon-less labeling detergent or collect used batteries,” said Hwang Suk-tae, a senior official at the Climate Change Cooperation division at the ministry.

Just saying no to a paper cup at coffee shops can add to carbon points, as the government terms them, which then can turn into cash rebates.

“We have a chance to change the current mantra that living green is tough to achieve,” said Hong Sung-pyo, head of the Korea Green Purchasing Network.

He added that the official government Ministry campaign to craft a new spending method for green living had high prospects for success, instead of private companies that may regard this as a marketing opportunity.

Others had mixed feelings about the plan.

MIXED FEELINGS

“I am not sure how big this green credit card project will grown, and some can criticize this for encouraging spending,” said Choi Ye-yong, director at the Asian Citizen’s Center for Environment and Health, Korea Federation for Environmental Movements.

“I also think that the more incentives become available, the more people will join. But it may provide momentum to induce us to take action.”

The national government is not the only one getting into the act.

Seoul is launching an eco-mileage credit card this month, allowing participants to get discount coupons toward the purchase of hybrid cars and eco-friendly appliances in return for conserving electricity and water, with both Samsung Electronics and Hyundai Motor also taking part.

Ms Kim, the housewife, is planning to sign up for a green credit card when it is available, hoping to help make her pursuit of a greener life a reality.

“I hope this will not end up being just one of the government’s verbal campaigns, because it is hard to live green and spend at the same time,” she said, adding that she worried the card could actually damage the environment by encouraging consumption.

Source: www.reuters.com

One in 20 Year Events as Climate Shifts with Rising Sea Temperatures 

There’s a growing risk that events of this type (floods in Australia, Brazil and Sri Lanka) will become more frequent as the climate warms, says Prof Will Steffen says. What were one-in-100-year events would become a one-in-20 or one-in-30-year event as the climate shifts. While Michael Richardson points out that the worldwide warming trend increases the likelihood of extreme weather events such as heat waves, droughts and floods. In addition to being the hottest year ever, last year was also the wettest on record. A hotter world causes more evaporation from land and oceans. A warmer atmosphere holds and releases more water, which can mean more violent storms and bigger floods.

NZ Herald (13 January 2011):

Experts blame a combination of a La Nina weather pattern and global warming for the magnitude of the Queensland flood disaster.

One scientist warns the catastrophe is only the start of things to come, saying what are described now as one-in-100-year floods could arrive every 20 years.

The La Nina effect, the inverse of the drought-inducing El Nino effect, results in higher than average sea temperatures in the Pacific Ocean leading to heavy rain.

Professor Will Steffen, executive director of the Australian National University’s (ANU) Climate Change Institute, says it is likely the floods are climate change related.

“What we can say about the Queensland floods is there is a strong La Nina, which tends to give this heavy rainfall, but in addition to that there are very high sea surface temperatures.”

Professor Matthew England, joint director of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW, says the temperatures are the highest ever recorded.

Rising sea temperatures, especially in northern Australia, are a key part of the climate system, says Prof England.

“Climate change has seen a warming of waters globally, and the waters north of Australia are an important part of the climate system for Australia’s monsoon rains.

“They are at their warmest ever measured and we cannot exclude climate change from contributing to this warmth, (and) if it is very warm there this enhances evaporation into the atmosphere, creating moist air.”

Prof Steffen agrees the temperature rise is a climate change phenomenon.

Sea temperatures have been rising for years, he says.

He cites a study in the US that looks at rainfall in a heavily saturated area over the past 100 years.

“(In the study) there’s been a significant increase (in rain in the area) since 1980 consistent with a strong warming,” Prof Steffen says.

The study shows the the effects of warming will make flooding of the type that has devastated parts of Queensland more common.

“There’s definitely a risk and a growing risk that events of this type will become more frequent as the climate warms,” Prof Steffen says.

“One-in-100-year events would become a one-in-20 or one-in-30-year event as the climate shifts … we say with some confidence they are becoming more frequent and they will become more frequent in future.”

Prof England says that climate change projections point to extreme weather becoming more common, but it is hard to know how much flooding Australia could get.

“Climate change projections are pointing to more frequent extreme events, that’s to say more flooding events, more droughts and fires, but whether Australia as a nation sees many more flooding events or not is still a little bit more complex to pin down,” he says.

But not all experts agree that global warming is a factor.

Environmental science Professor Neville Nicholls from Monash University believes the Queensland floods are not due to climate change but purely a result of La Nina.

“The main reason we’re seeing this heavy rain is just this incredibly strong La Nina, and that’s almost certainly a natural part of climate variability,” he says.

Prof Nicholls says the evidence is inconclusive about the effect of global warming on the La Nina phenomenon.

“The question is, is it exacerbated by climate change or global warming? At the moment, we just can’t say. No one has done the studies yet,” he says.

“You would have to think the warming we’ve seen – about half a degree in the last 30 or 40 years – should have had some influence on this event, but we can’t tell you reliably or credibly what that influence is.”

Source: www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news

Michael Richardson for the Straits Times (17 January 2011):

GENERATIONS of Australians have learnt that their island-continent is a land of alternating droughts and floods. Recent prolonged rain and devastating flooding across north-eastern Australia, particularly in the state of Queensland, have underscored this heartbreaking cycle.

Weather experts have said the immediate cause is natural, attributing it to periodic fluctuations in the sea surface temperature of the central Pacific Ocean along the equator and in the air pressure of the atmosphere above.

Known as the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (Enso), it affects weather patterns in many parts of the Pacific, including Australia and South-east Asia.

Enso has two extreme phases in its typical see-saw every three to eight years. One, El Nino, is associated with hotter-than-normal temperatures and diminished rainfall. The other, La Nina, usually brings above-average wet weather and lower temperatures.

The Australian government’s Bureau of Meteorology said earlier this month that the La Nina phase bringing the deluge to north-eastern Australia was the strongest since at least the mid-1970s. As a result, the country had its third wettest year on record last year.

Indonesia’s Meteorological Office reported last week that rain across the far-flung island-nation would continue until June. It said the dry season, which normally starts in April and lasts until October, would start only in July.

Meanwhile, Brazil and Sri Lanka have been hit by unusually heavy and damaging downpours, just as northern Europe and much of the United States felt the bite of abnormally frigid winter weather.

Despite these bursts of wet and cold weather, two leading US climate agencies said last Wednesday that the average land and sea surface temperature last year tied with 2005 as the warmest on record, since data collection started in 1880. The global temperature was 0.62 deg C above the 20th-century average.

Attributed by many scientists to the growing release of carbon dioxide, methane and other global warming gases from human activity into the atmo-sphere, this temperature rise is happening at the same time as the natural Enso cycle.

Dr James Hansen, director of one of the US climate agencies, said the average global temperature in the past decade increased as fast as during the previous two decades, despite year-to-year fluctuations associated with Enso.

A summary on the state of the Australian climate published last year by the Meteorological Bureau and the CSIRO, Australia’s leading scientific research organisation, said that in the past 50 years, the mean temperature in Australia had risen by about 0.7 deg C and was projected to increase further, by 0.6 to 1.5 deg C, by 2030.

It added that if global greenhouse gas emissions continued to grow at business-as-usual rates, the country could be 2.2 to 5 deg C hotter by 2070.

Scientists said the worldwide warming trend increases the likelihood of extreme weather events such as heat waves, droughts and floods. In addition to being the hottest year ever, last year was also the wettest on record.

A hotter world causes more evaporation from land and oceans. A warmer atmosphere holds and releases more water, which can mean more violent storms and bigger floods.

The equatorial expanse of the Pacific Ocean, which is far larger than the Indian and Atlantic oceans, is critical to the development of Enso.

During La Nina, trade winds blowing towards the west bring moist air to northern Australia and Indonesia. Heated by the tropical sun and warm water, the air rises to create towering bulbous clouds and heavy rainfall.

The question that must concern South-east Asia is whether man-made global warming from burning fossil fuels and clearing forests is intensifying natural weather patterns like Enso and, if so, how?

It is clear that if an exceptionally dry El Nino phase occurs against the backdrop of long-term man-made global warming, one will make the other even hotter. This happened in Indonesia in 1997 and 1998 during the Asian financial crisis, when forest fires spread haze pollution across South-east Asia.

Some scientists also think there is a link between the rising global sea temperature and the strength of Enso cycles.

The annual climate statement by the Australian Meteorological Bureau, issued on Jan 5, noted that sea surface temperatures in the Australian region last year were the warmest on record, 0.54 deg C above the 1961 to 1990 average. The past decade was also the warmest on record for sea surface temperatures.

The statement added that ‘very warm sea surface temperatures contri-buted to the record rainfall and very high humidity across eastern Australia during winter and spring’.

Echoing the scientific panel advising the United Nations on climate change, the Meteorological Bureau-CSIRO assessment for last year said that there was a greater than 90 per cent certainty that an increase in greenhouse gas emissions has caused most of the global warming since the mid-20th century.

If those who believe that man-made global warming gases are intensifying extreme Enso weather are right, the devastation in Australia is a warning that we alter the climate at our peril.

The writer is a visiting senior research fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

Source: www.wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com

Green Business Boost Through Innovation & Sustainability

GreenWise in the United Kingdom polled 25 firms, NGOs, business groups and commentators for their views on the outlook for the low carbon economy and green business in 2011 and most said the conditions were right for real progress on reducing carbon emissions and placing sustainability at the heart of business. Jon Bentley, of IBM Global Business Services, was optimistic because major corporations were “returning their attention to issues of sustainability, boosting the market for innovative low carbon solutions”. Meanwhile, investment in infrastructure by countries such as China was creating markets for innovative solutions.

By Louise Bateman, GreenWise, part of the Guardian Sustainable Business Network in UK (13 January 2011):

GreenWise polled 25 firms, NGOs, business groups and commentators for their views on the outlook for the low carbon economy and green business in 2011.

While some said it would be a year of mixed fortunes, most said the conditions were right for real progress on reducing carbon emissions and placing sustainability at the heart of business. There was also optimism expressed about the growing commercial opportunities in the market for green goods and services and the greater part businesses will start playing in protecting the world’s ecosystems.

Green policy

On the international front, most felt hopeful that a global climate deal would come about following better than expected progress in Cancun, while at home Government policy around electricity market reform, the Green Deal, Feed-in Tariffs and the Renewable Heat Incentive, were viewed as key measures in 2011 for establishing a low carbon economy.

But the jury is still out on whether the Coalition Government will deliver on its promises to be the “greenest government ever”. And there is uncertainty about how recovery from recession, sovereign debt and the UK planning system will affect investment in the low carbon economy in 2011.

Big business

The mood was particularly positive among big business. Paul Turner, head of Sustainable Development, Lloyds Banking Group, said 2011 would be “a good year for the green economy” because of “commodity prices”, which would make businesses “look hard at how operational efficiencies can be made”.

He said, the Carbon Reduction Commitment “which for many businesses now stands for ‘costly, really costly’, is driving efficiency and the Feed-in Tariff is driving innovation. The Green Deal and the Green Investment Bank will also see further development this year. All of these bode well for the ‘green’ economy.”

Jon Bentley, Smarter Energy lead, IBM Global Business Services UK & Ireland, was “optimistic” about 2011 because major corporations were “returning their attention to issues of sustainability, boosting the market for innovative low carbon solutions”. Meanwhile, investment in infrastructure by countries such as China was creating markets for innovative solutions, which would “create a powerful set of new competitors seeking to export domestic solutions”.

Tom Delay, chief executive of the Carbon Trust, added: “We are at a turning point where business is moving from a debate about whether or not the green economy offers opportunity, to an all-out race for competitive advantage in the growing markets for green products and services.”

Environmental footprint

There was a sense, too, that ‘early movers’ in 2010 had set the foundations for greater environmental responsibility by the business community in 2011.

“Last year, all kinds of multinationals started to look beyond their lesser direct carbon emissions at the greater impacts up and downstream of operations,” said Dax Lovegrove, head of Business & Industry at WWF. “We saw the likes of Unilever, Wal-Mart and Tesco set bold ambitions for reducing significant emissions from supply chains and customers at the point of using products.”

But such positiveness was tempered by caution, particularly when it came to policy-making and investment.

“Government changes to the planning system could delay investment needed in our low carbon energy infrastructure,” warned Rhian Kelly, head of Climate Change at CBI.

View the full breakdown of answers here.

http://www.greenwisebusiness.co.uk/news/greenwise-poll-will-2011-be-significant-for-green-business-2039.aspx

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

WWF & Coca Cola Singing  in Perfect Harmony on Sustainability

Coca Cola is planning to break its silence on its corporate social responsibility, and in 2011 it will say more – and do more – that just “get the world to sing in perfect harmony”. Last year, the company gave WWF Canada $500,000 to aid in freshwater preservation, protection of polar bears, and to sponsor the organization’s Earth Hour initiative, part of a worldwide partnership worth $20-million annually.

Simon Houpt for CTV, Canada’s largest private broadcaster (13 January 2011):

It’s not often that a company with an annual marketing budget of $1-billion thinks of itself as a shrinking corporate violet. Coke after all, is known for its global ad campaigns: efforts that literally change the face of Christmas, or that teach the world to sing in perfect harmony.

Last year at this time, the company’s Canadian division was tying the country together with a 45,000-kilometre Olympic torch relay that stretched across more than 1,000 communities. If it doesn’t thump its chest, it doesn’t have a brand value estimated by Interbrand to be worth more than $70-billion (U.S.).

Yet there was Nikos Koumettis, the president of Coca-Cola Ltd. Canada, saying of the company’s corporate social responsibility initiatives: “Concerning CSR, we were silent.” Other companies, meanwhile, were stealing the limelight.

This struck Coke executives as unfair. “As a company culture, we were and still are, I think, a company that prefers to do a lot of stuff rather that talk about it,” Mr. Koumettis said. “For 10 years now we were doing a lot of things relating to the environment. But the awareness of all those things was close to zero.”

“A lot of other companies – the way we feel at least – were doing much less than us, talking much more.”

If that’s true, then you can mark 2011 as the year Coke breaks its silence. Next month, Coca-Cola Canada will kick off the beginning of a long-term campaign that represents what executives are calling a “significant investment” in marketing their environmental bona fides.

Last month, the company convened a roundtable discussion on sustainable partnerships at its largest Canadian facility in Brampton, Ontario, hosted by Toronto news anchor Anne Mroczkowski and attended by more than 60 business leaders, politicians and non-profit executives, including the local MP Ruby Dhalla, Ontario Minister of Natural Resources Linda Jeffrey and Ontario Minister of Transportation Kathleen Wynne.

But while Coke executives participated, the event was designed to allow the company to bask in the reflected light of non-profit organizations benefiting from its munificence. Gerald Butts, the president and CEO of World Wildlife Fund Canada, praised Coke’s commitment to not just change its business practices, but influence others in the process.

Last year, the company gave WWF Canada $500,000 to aid in freshwater preservation, protection of polar bears, and to sponsor the organization’s Earth Hour initiative, part of a worldwide partnership worth $20-million annually. While the WWF has Coke’s ear on sustainability and wildlife issues, it also benefits from the beverage giant’s advice on marketing expertise.

“Coke is the No. 1 purchaser of aluminum on the face of the earth – which is one of the most carbon-intensive commodities,” noted Mr. Butts. “The No. 1 purchaser of sugar cane. The No. 3 purchaser of citrus. The second-largest purchaser of glass, and the fifth-largest purchaser of coffee.

“We could spend 50 years lobbying 75 national governments to change the regulatory framework for the way these commodities are grown and produced. Or these folks at Coke could make a decision that they’re not going to purchase anything that isn’t grown or produced in a certain way – and the whole global supply chain changes overnight. And that in a nutshell is why we’re in a partnership.”

“Coke is literally more important, when it comes to sustainability, than the United Nations.”

By 2020, Coke has committed to reclaiming and recycling the equivalent of all of the packaging it uses around the world. It has also committed to adding back into water systems an equivalent of all the fresh water it extracts during production of its beverages.

In Canada, both of those goals are likely achievable within that time frame, if challenging: Recycling efforts here are far more integrated into society and local infrastructure than south of the border – never mind in less developed countries.

“Canadians, from all the research we have, are much more environmentally sensitive than other countries,” said Mr. Koumettis, in explaining why the company used Canada as the launching pad for its PlantBottle, a completely recyclable bottle that has a smaller carbon footprint in part because it is made of up to 30 per cent plant-based material.

“Seventy-five per cent of Canadians versus 45 per cent of Americans recycle plastic bottles, 73 per cent of Canadians versus 50 per cent believe excessive packaging fills up excess landfills, and 77 per cent of Canadians versus 27 per cent of Americans are concerned about global warming and climate change,” he said.

In Canada, Coke is working with the WWF to protect and repair sensitive water systems, such as the Skeena Watershed in northern British Columbia. The company currently has water strategies in 86 countries, including India, where its efforts include widespread rain collection: an innovative move, but not a solution. Which is one reason executives admit they don’t yet know the pathway to their goals.

But a tour through the Brampton plant shows a company that’s reshaping its business practices with concerns for sustainability at the core. Down on the factory floor, a chart tracks the progress made over the last 12 months in recycling the materials (plastic, cardboard, aluminum, wood, metal) that come into the plant, how much ends up in landfill, and the factory’s water usage ratio (that is, how many litres of water it takes to make a litre of product). Recycling now regularly flirts with the 99-per-cent mark; its water ratio continues to fall.

Despite the fact that Coke is only (at least by its own estimation) really just beginning to market its sustainability initiatives, the company says its key measures are improving, most notably with a “double digit” increase among its key youth demographic in what it calls “brand trust.”

“I think for a business to ignore what is important to a community they operate in ultimately will not put them in a good place,” says Kevin Warren, the president of Coca-Cola Refreshments Canada. “Communicating to people how they can make a difference, and how we can make a difference, will be good for the community, but will be good for our business as well.

Source: www.ctv.ca

World Water Day is a Carbon & Conservation Story Worth Telling

Water footprint, like carbon footprint, is by no means a perfect measure.  But its usefulness is in educating the general public and broadening their view about the impact their choices and behaviour have on a finite resource like water. People can effect change over time, as we are beginning to see with the concept of carbon footprint, says Dan McCarthy, president and chief executive officer of Black & Veatch’s global water business. Singapore is going all out to promote World Water Day, coinciding with World Storytelling Day, being celebrated on 20 March this year.

Small steps to shrink Singapore’s water footprint

Dan McCarthy in The Straits Times (8 January 2011):

THE world’s environment is under pressure. Climate change and the increasing demand for resources are placing life on our planet at risk. High-level debates at Cancun are one thing, but can each of us make a difference the next time we order chicken rice, or say, beef noodles?

The answer is probably yes. The choice of what you eat can make an impression on what is described as your ‘water footprint’.

We are already familiar with the concept of ‘carbon footprint’. Singaporeans increasingly buy environmentally friendly products such as energy-saving light bulbs, which lower our carbon footprint as well as save us money.

But how conscious are we about conserving our limited water supply? Singaporeans, as a people, are arguably more conscious than most.

With relatively little land to collect rainwater and no natural aquifers, Singapore’s founding fathers strove hard for water independence. Their consciousness of water as a precious resource rippled through society. Monthly water utility statements show graphs indicating the volume of water consumed, so households can take action to conserve water.

The Clean and Green Singapore campaign is another example. Speaking at the launch of the campaign last November, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong encouraged citizens and businesses to defend their environment as they would defend their country.

Every day, each Singaporean uses on average 155 litres of water, and there are plans in place to cut this figure to 147 litres by 2020. These figures include the water we drink, as well as other domestic indirect uses, from bathing to washing our clothes. But it does not reflect our total water footprint, including what is termed virtual (or embedded) water.

Most of the water that the world uses is in fact consumed by industries and agriculture, not by households. The concepts of water footprint and virtual water acknowledge our direct use, but also help us begin to understand our indirect consumption of water. Most of the water we consume indirectly goes into making the goods we use, rather than being physically contained in the final products.

For example, the production of 1kg of wheat consumes about 1,300 litres of water, but the production of 1kg of beef requires about 15,500 litres of water. In comparison, the water footprint of chicken is only about 3,900 litres a kg of meat.

The virtual water content of manufactured products as well as some services can also be measured. On average, it takes about 400,000 litres of water to produce a typical passenger car, while it has been estimated that one Google search would consume one-tenth of a teaspoon of water.

Water footprint, like carbon footprint, is by no means a perfect measure. It glosses over significant issues such as the availability of water at the site of its consumption, and how this should be reflected in the price a consumer eventually pays for a product.

Still, the value of the concept lies in its usefulness in educating the general public and broadening their view about the impact their choices and behaviour have on a finite resource like water. Armed with this knowledge, people can effect change over time, as we are beginning to see with the concept of carbon footprint.

So should you become a vegetarian or limit your consumption of red meat? This is not a matter I would preach about, but I would argue that people should be aware of how their choices can have an impact on the environment. What I would encourage are simple steps to encourage wise water use.

Limiting our time taking a shower, washing a full load of clothes, and even less obvious methods such as not littering our drains will translate into wasting less of our precious water resource. In terms of indirect use, there is little agricultural production in Singapore, but businesses can play their part by implementing water efficiency management plans.

If we start small, we can work towards solving broader water scarcity issues and ultimately reducing our water footprint.

The writer is president and chief executive officer of Black & Veatch’s global water business.

Source:  www.wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com

World Storytelling Day and World Water Day in Singapore 20 March 2011

To coincide with World Storytelling Day and World Water Day (being celebrated on 20 March in Singapore), Roger Jenkins – storyteller, actor, director and writer – is organising storytelling performance called WATER WOR(L)DS, supported by the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) and being promoted by Sustain Ability Showcase Asia (SASA).

Water Wor(l)ds 

8pm   NTUC Auditorium
8th floor, NTUC Centre, 1 Marina Boulevard 
Admission by Donation All proceeds to be collected by the Singapore Environment Council  for an ASEAN potable water project
Join Roger, Chuah Ai Lin, Dolly Leow, and young storytellers from CHIJ Toa Payoh Secondary ELDDS and Jurong West Primary as they share a fascinating collection of traditional folktales from around the world.  Gillian Tan will also sing songs on the theme of water.  All performers are volunteering their services.

This beautiful Auditorium has a stunning view of the new Marina Bay Reservoir which at night is truly spectacular!  It seats 550 but to make sure of your seats please email Roger Jenkins – rogerstoryteller@gmail.com – to reserve them.  Do note that, to ensure accountability of fund collection, your donation will only be taken at the door under SEC supervision.  

The international observance of World Water Day is an initiative that grew out of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro.

The United Nations General Assembly designated 22 March of each year as the World Day for Water by adopting a resolution.This world day for water was to be observed starting in 1993, in conformity with the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development contained in chapter 18 (Fresh Water Resources) of Agenda 21.

States were invited to devote the Day to implement the UN recommendations and set up concrete activities as deemed appropriate in the national context.

The Subcommittee welcomes the assistance offered by IRC International Water and Sanitation Centre to contribute to an information network centre in support of the observance of the Day by Governments, as required.

Source: www.worldwaterday.org and www.rogerjenkins.com.sg

Wharton Social Impact: Business is Making Sustainability Mainstream

“Sustainability has become more mainstream now,” says Eliza Eubank, assistant vice president for the environmental and social risk management department at Citigroup. “It is not just something that the do-gooder environmentalist cares about. It is something that is on the priority list of CEOs.”  This came out of the recent Wharton Social Impact conference in the US. In fact, for savvy companies, a strategy built around sustainability can be a critical advantage, Boston Consulting Group senior partner Martin Reeves pointed out.

From  Knowledge@Wharton (19 January 2011):

If building a sustainable enterprise was a fashionable trend five years ago, today it is a business imperative. Forward-looking corporations have figured out that a focus on environmental, social and governmental (ESG) factors is not just a bid to burnish their image, but rather it is a necessity in today’s marketplace. And if done well, it is a true competitive advantage.

A panel of senior executives from consulting, banking and the chemical industries sat down to debate and discuss this critical shift during the recent Wharton Social Impact conference.

The panel, “Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility: Is ESG the New CSR?” included participants from a variety of backgrounds and experience. Still, all were in agreement that what was a somewhat nebulous (but fashionable) movement five or 10 years ago has become a focused, integrated way of doing business at many firms.

“Sustainability has become more mainstream now,” said Eliza Eubank, assistant vice president for the environmental and social risk management department at Citigroup. “It is not just something that the do-gooder environmentalist cares about. It is something that is on the priority list of CEOs.” Stephane N’Diaye, senior manager of strategy-sustainability at consulting firm Accenture, echoed that view. The progress over the last several years in sustainability efforts, he noted, stems from “where it stands on the CEO’s agenda.”

In fact, for savvy companies, a strategy built around sustainability can be a critical advantage, Boston Consulting Group senior partner Martin Reeves pointed out. Even when government action puts more burdens on business, Reeves said there can be an upside. When you change the rules of the game, you “are putting a floor on certain behaviors [and] raising barriers to entry.” Case in point: the establishment of the Food and Drug Administration, which Reeves contended “essentially took a snake oil industry and turned it into an industry with very strict scientific standards.”

Certainly a focus on sustainability has changed the way many big firms operate on a daily basis. Citigroup’s Eubank pointed to the firm’s work in financing projects such as oil and gas pipelines. The bank requires borrowers for those types of projects to meet certain environmental and social guidelines.

 ”We work with our sponsors who are developing these projects to make sure they have consulted the local community, that they are using adequate pollution control technology, and that they have good environmental and health and safety standards for their workers,” Eubank said. There are real repercussions for failing to meet those standards. “We agree on an environmental action plan, which is a formal to-do list that the company needs to follow in order to bring their operation into compliance with international standards. It actually becomes an event of default if they stop complying with the environmental standards that we require of them.”

According to Eubank, the motivation for this push comes from practical concerns. For one thing, the loans are repaid when the project becomes operational and starts generating cash. So if the project sponsor has done a poor job of building local support for a pipeline, for example, there is a risk that someone will sabotage the project, potentially delaying the repayment to Citigroup.

In addition, if lenders like Citigroup fail to police their borrowers, they run the risk that their own brand becomes tarnished. The reason: Over the last decade, environmental groups began focusing their campaigns on the companies financing controversial projects. “You don’t want to be on the front page of The New York Times [with a headline] saying ‘Citigroup financed some mine and this mine spilled cyanide into the local river and poisoned the drinking water for all the villages downstream,’” Eubank noted.

Accenture’s N’Diaye said that concern about reputational risk is widespread. According to a 2010 survey of more than 750 CEOs by Accenture and the United Nations Global Compact, 93% viewed sustainability as important to their future success, while 72% said “strengthening [the] brand, trust and motivation” was the biggest driver of their action on sustainability issues.

In fact, the right sustainability formula can transform a brand. N’Diaye pointed to the Swedish burger chain Max Hamburgerrestauranger AB. In 2007, the company, in response to evidence that the meat industry was a key contributor to greenhouse gas emissions, overhauled its business. The chain measured the climate impact of its food from the farm to the restaurant and printed that information on its labels.

In addition, the firm shifted to wind energy and has supported reforestation projects in places like Uganda. The result: Between 2007 and 2009, an independent survey found customer loyalty for the chain spiked 27%, mostly driven by its sustainability blitz.

“Here is a company that in the downturn has invested pretty heavily in environmental sustainability, in social sustainability and in paying attention to the consumer and making bold choices,” N’Diaye said. “With all of those programs, they still manage to keep growing revenues.”

Growing Green

Despite these success stories, however, the science of understanding how such social and environmental programs drive consumer behavior remains an inexact one. “We don’t have the right metrics,” N’Diaye noted. “We haven’t done a good job of tying sustainability performance with business performance. We need to better understand the consumer and see how sustainability can drive the purchase decision. About 75% of people would say, ‘All things being equal, I would buy green’. How you translate that into an actual purchase decision … is something else.”

Beyond brand protection, however, there are some very tangible benefits to these practices, as panelists made clear. Catherine Hunt, R&D director of external science and technology for Dow Chemical, said sustainable business practices can drive profitability. “If you use less energy, that affects your bottom line. If you generate less waste and, particularly in the chemical industry, [if] you don’t have to get rid of chemical waste, you improve your bottom line.”

Indeed, for companies like Dow that are actually developing green products, finding a showcase for those efforts can enhance their brands while expanding their markets. Dow’s Hunt highlighted her company’s co-sponsorship of RetroFIT Philly’s “Coolest Block” contest, in which Philadelphia neighborhoods competed to win an energy efficiency overhaul of their homes, including installation of a “cool roof” using Dow technology.

“The Dow Chemical Company Foundation funded this,” Hunt stated. “And I was asked ‘If you paid, what is sustainable about that?’ But it is about education. If you don’t know what it means to have a cool roof, and what a difference that makes to your neighborhood, you are not going to do it.”

For other companies, the benefits to their business may be less obvious but no less critical. According to Boston Consulting Group’s Reeves, one of the biggest challenges for his industry is finding and retaining the right employees. That talent pool is a product of the education system in this country, which Reeves noted “is not in a great state.”

That is why BCG has partnered with Chicago Public Schools, which teaches some 400,000 children, in an effort to boost performance and cut the dropout rate. The firm put its consulting expertise to work, analyzing what was wrong with the Chicago system, where, for every 100 freshman high school students, a scant six go on to graduate college. The project resulted in new efforts, including a scorecard for parents of high school students and new, intensive support for math, science and English teachers in struggling schools.

More recently, Reeves was part of a team using a logistic regression model to understand what was causing the unacceptably high rate of high school shootings. “We are applying analytical, business approaches to a social problem,” Reeves said. “Some of this is not about new ideas, but it is about applying existing ideas and clear thinking to places where that has been absent.”

And when it comes to borrowing good ideas on sustainability, the panel made it clear that innovation can come from surprising sources. Citigroup’s Eubank pointed out that Chinese banking regulators have required banks in that country to take a look at the environmental impact of their lending activities.

“The Chinese Banking Regulatory Commission came down with a mandate that all banks in China need to start developing environmental policies,” Eubank said. “There is actually a black list of about 200 companies in China that banks are not allowed to finance because they are too polluting.” A representative from the Commission visited with Citigroup executives last summer and talked to them about the policy.

Among the panel’s key messages was that the need to address ESG issues will only intensify over time, in part because the next generation of business leaders is demanding it. One of the audiences most keenly interested in the report Citigroup puts out annually on its sustainability record, Eubank noted, is the company’s recruiting operation.

“Students these days are much more environmentally aware, and they want to know what a company’s sustainability policies are,” Eubank said. “Bankers want to know that they are working for a company that is being responsible.”

Source: www.knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu

Singapore Launches Eco Food Courts & Envirofriendly Gets Down to Work

An obsession with food and a growing desire to do more for the environment has led to the establishment of a new certification standard for food courts, introduced by the Singapore Environment Council. Meanwhile Australia’s innovative liquid waste solution, Envirofriendly is getting down to work in Singapore at two Sentosa resorts and in the Environment Building.

Singapore Environment Council (19 January 2011):

Singapore, 19 January 2011 – Food courts are undeniably the most popular and ubiquitous communal spaces in Singapore. Their operations generate huge amounts of waste and consume massive amounts of energy and water every day. To address these environmental challenges, the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) today launched the Eco-Foodcourt certification to facilitate the adoption of environmentally sustainable practices among local foodcourt operators.

“It was reported last year that Singapore saw an alarming increase of 31 percent of waste generated since 2000, with food waste as one of the top five waste types. A natural choice was to focus on foodcourts as they are a great avenue to not only reduce waste but also to save resources. Foodcourts are a great platform for outreach on conservation and recycling because they are a big part of our culture in food-loving Singapore,” said Mr Howard Shaw, SEC Executive Director.

The Eco-Foodcourt certification assesses the environmental management system in a foodcourt. It addresses the key components of a food court’s environmental policies, air quality, the twin resource of water and energy management, as well as waste management.

One of the mandatory requirements for attainment of the Eco-Foodcourt status is the non-usage of Styrofoam packaging as a takeaway option for customers. This is a tough stance taken by SEC to promote the reduction of the harmful impact on our environment and to introduce environmentally preferable options such as biodegradable packaging.

Guest-of-Honour, Dr Amy Khor, Minister of State, Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, unveiled Singapore’s first Eco-Foodcourt, The Deck at Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences (FASS), at the National University of Singapore (NUS). The NUS is the first educational institution to be awarded this certification. Also receiving this award at the launch was the Kopitiam @City Square Mall from the commercial food and beverage (F&B) sector.

“We are pleased to be awarded the Singapore Environment Council’s Eco-Foodcourt Certification which recognises the environmentally sustainable practices implemented at the The Deck at FASS. As the University continues to strive for positive solutions to pressing environmental problems, the adoption of these sustainable initiatives reduces the environmental impact of canteen operations. In our campus, while waste materials such as plastics, cardboard boxes, aluminum cans, cooked oil and food waste are recycled, promotional campaigns on bringing your own lunch boxes for takeaways and using fewer plastic bags drive home the message of being environmentally responsible,” said Mr Joseph P Mullinix, Deputy President (Administration), National University of Singapore.

Examples of environmentally sustainable practices implemented at the The Deck (NUS Arts Canteen) include organic food recycling, recycling of cooking oil, use of eco-friendly Microwave Packaging food boxes, use of reusable boxes and promotion of meat-free meals. Some of these practices are also adopted at other NUS canteens.

Kopitiam’s Corporate Communications Manager, Ms Goh Wee Ling, shared about the impact of going for the Eco-Foodcourt certification, “As we went about raising the awareness of our tenants on environmental sustainability, they began to see the importance of adopting practices friendly to the environment. A big bonus to the tenants for being environmentally responsible was the realisation that they were reducing their operating expenses when they managed the use of energy and water wisely. Kopitiam is happy to partner SEC in their mission to reach out to more people with the important message of being eco-conscious.”

At this event, the SEC also took the opportunity to launch its new logo. SEC has, in the last 15 years, grown from a small non-governmental organisation (NGO) that provides environmental outreach and education to businesses and the community to become an authority in the endorsement of environmental standards and the promotion of best practices. The new logo represents both its current role in highlighting environmental sustainability issues to the community, and reflects its ongoing role as an expert in framing new opportunities that others may not see.

Source: www.sec.org.sg

Envirofriendly Makes its Mark in Singapore

By Ken Hickson

Envirofriendly – the innovative liquid waste solution from Brisbane, Australia – is being introduced into Singapore and is already on trial at two resorts on Sentosa Island and in the Environment Building in Scotts Road.

Neil Christie, the inventor and owner of the microbial water saving and waste management process, was in Singapore early in January, along with Maree Norton Managing Director of Envirofriendly Product Distribution, to get the trials under way.

This followed exploratory work and market development by Sustain Ability Showcase Asia in Singapore, including gaining approval from Public Utilities Board (PUB) and National Environment Agency (NEA) for trials to be undertaken.

The Environment Building, where trials using Urinalkleen are underway in bathrooms on two floors, also houses the Ministry of Environment & Water Resources, as well as offices of the PUB and NEA.

Neil Christie has also checked out the building’s grease trap to see how its performance can be improved. The building has already set very high standards in environmental management, winning regional awards after a major retrofit, for energy efficiency, water and waste management.

On Sentosa, trials using two products – UrinalKleen and Drainsolv – are underway at the Siloso Beach Resort, which is owned by a dedicated and far sighted environmental enthusiast Ng Swee Hwa and managed by his son, Kelvin Ng. The boutique resort is the winner of many environmental awards.

Drainsolv is also being put to the test at the nearby Rasa Sentosa, a member of the Shangri-La group of hotels and resorts. As this resort has only just re-opened after many months of renovation, the Envirofriendly product will be seen at work through all the resorts nine kitchens to reduce water use and manage the waste going into the grease traps.

This Envirofriendly product works to eliminate odour causing bacteria and speeds up the breakdown of waste in sinks, drains, pipe work and greasetraps. It can also significantly reduce the frequency of costly evacuation of grease traps.

It is too early to tell from the trials at Rasa Sentosa as the resort has only just re-opened (19 January), but early observations of the use of Envirofriendly at Siloso and the Environment Building indicate it is working to plan and producing the improvements expected.

UrinalKleen ensures the effective operation of both waterless and flushing urinals in bathrooms, significantly reducing water use, breaking down waste that causes blockages and also removing lingering unpleasant odours.

Ken Hickson is based in Singapore as Founder Chairman and CEO of Sustain Ability Showcase Asia, which represents a number of businesses (products, processes and services) in Asia Pacific. For further information on Envirofriendly products and their application in Singapore and Asia, please contact Ken Hickson – kenhickson@sustain-ability-showcase.com