Attaining Sustainable Urban Development Singapore-style

The next 15 to 20 years would be of immense challenge to Asia, because of the magnitude of urbanisation that is going to take place in South-east Asia, India and China, Singapore’s Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam told a forum in Washington, under the auspices of the World Bank and International Enterprise Singapore. To reinforce sustainability in Singapore, nature enthusiasts last week planted 2,570 plants, shrubs and trees in Orchard Road (pictured is Lend Lease’s 313 Somerset building) to entice butterflies to breed there. Meanwhile Finland’s Neste Oil will soon begin making low-emissions diesel at a 550 million-euro ($762 million) plant in Singapore.

Planning ‘vital’ for Asia’s growing cities:
Tharman warns breakneck pace of development could go awry without a long-term overview

Chua Chin Hon in Singapore’s Straits Times (10 October 2010):

Washington – The rapid urbanisation of Asia and the developing world could easily go awry if the breakneck pace of development is not integrated with long-term planning and best practices from around the world, Singapore’s Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has said.

Speaking at a forum here last Thursday on how Singapore’s experience in sustainable development could be replicated or customised for developing countries, he added that the challenge for Asian policymakers would be particularly pronounced, given that the urbanisation process is taking place within a relatively shorter time frame.

‘The next 15 to 20 years would be of immense challenge to Asia, because of the magnitude of urbanisation that is going to take place in South-east Asia, India and China,’ Mr Tharman said at the forum, which was jointly held by the World Bank and International Enterprise Singapore, the agency spearheading the development of Singapore’s external economic wing.

‘The task of providing reasonably high-quality, high-density living, and organising cities so as to allow for economic innovation and growth, is an immense challenge,’ he added.

Experts believe that the world will have 26 mega-cities by 2025, each with a population of more than 10 million. Many of them will be in booming Asian countries like China and India, which are undergoing rapid development.

It has been estimated that 70 per cent of the Chinese population and 46 per cent of the Indian population will live in an urban environment in the next two decades, leading to heightened pressure on resources and the need for better ways to control congestion and pollution.

Touching on Singapore’s experience in managing urbanisation over the years, Mr Tharman said the chief lesson learnt was the importance of long-term, integrated planning.

Without thorough planning, it would be hard to find a good balance between the competing and often conflicting needs for housing, transportation, industrial activity and a clean environment.

‘Planning ahead before the need becomes urgent is written into the culture of every government agency (in Singapore),’ said Mr Tharman. ‘If you don’t plan ahead, it is hard to find the right trade-offs.’

Another key feature of Singapore’s approach towards urbanisation is in letting the market decide how best to allocate scarce resources, like land and water, whenever possible.

But in areas where market forces are inadequate, such as public housing or pension funds, policymakers have to intervene in order to maintain greater societal balance, he noted.

Added Mr Tharman: ‘We are not a model of something that has reached perfection, but merely a model of constant learning and adaptation that tries to use the best ideas from around the world.’

Officials from Singapore’s Urban Redevelopment Authority and Public Utilities Board also shared their experience with about 100 World Bank officers from Asia and Africa at the conference.

More plants in Orchard Rd to attract butterfly breeding

By Lynda Hong in Channel News Asia (12 October 2010):

SINGAPORE: Nature enthusiasts on Tuesday planted 2,570 plants, shrubs and trees at Orchard Road to entice butterflies to breed there.

The patch of lush green at Penang Road Open Space, along with the 280 square metre garden on the top two floors of Orchard Central are the 14th designated butterfly sites of Singapore’s Nature Society.

The 14th designated butterfly sites of the Butterfly Trail Project is a strategic partnership project among Nature Society (Singapore), National Parks Board, Singapore Tourism Board (STB) and Orchard Road Business Association.

But enthusiasts said growing a butterfly population at 12 storeys high was a challenge.

Nature Society Singapore’s Butterfly Interest Group chairperson Gan Cheong Weei said: “They will not fly up in (an) open area because there is no shelter; no protection.

“But if there are tall trees, they will fly up. (Or) if there is enough population (there) and (if) there are host plants and flowering plants up there.

“But of course this is all nature and we try our best to bring it there and we cross our fingers (that) they will do what we want them to do”.

Source: www.wildsingapore.com

By Alex Morales and Todd White for Business Week/Bloomberg (6 October 2010):

Neste Oil Oyj will soon begin making low-emissions diesel at a 550 million-euro ($762 million) plant in Singapore, ramping up production of renewable fuels that may provide a third of earnings after 2012, a company official said.

“We’re very close to start-up,” Jarmo Honkamaa, deputy chief executive officer of Neste Oil, Finland’s only petroleum refiner, said yesterday in a telephone interview. “We’re well on time and within the budget” for the project, which uses plant and animal products as feedstock.

Neste is investing more than 1 billion euros together in the Singapore plant and a second one to open in Rotterdam next year as it banks on government mandates in Europe and North America to boost sales of “clean” diesel, which pollutes less than petroleum-based diesel fuel.

After 2012, biofuels may contribute a third of Espoo-based Neste’s earnings before interest and tax, or Ebit, Honkamaa said. “The renewable fuels business has this year not contributed anything to the bottom line, because it has been negative numbers,” he said.

Honkamaa’s estimate is reasonable and represents a return on investment of about 15 percent in 2013, Antti Koskivuori, an analyst at Evli Bank in Helsinki with a “reduce” rating on the stock, said in an interview.

“They’re expecting the difference in price between renewable diesel and palm oil to be similar on average to where it´s been in the past three to five years,” Koskivuori said.

Most of the raw materials for the Singapore plant — initially palm oil and later also animal fats — have been contracted already, with a mixture of 2- to 3-year, 1-year and 3-month agreements reached, the executive said, declining to name the providers. A similar mix of sales agreements for the finished product is set, he said.

‘Gradual Ramp-Up’

“It will be a gradual ramp-up of production,” Honkamaa said. “In the first month we’ll get to around half of maximum capacity, and in the second month we will be getting close to the full capacity” of 800,000 metric tons a year. Honkamaa declined to say what date production will begin.

The plant in Rotterdam, which will have the same volume as the Singapore refinery, is on course to open “by next summer” and will come in “some tens of millions of euros below” its original price tag of 670 million euros, he said.

The markets first will be mainly in Europe and then in North America, Honkamaa said. “We may have some deliveries this year but significant volumes will come next year.”

Going forward, Honkamaa said he expects markets in Asia to grow as well as California.

“We are talking with some of the players in the Asian market. Japan is an interesting market, maybe South Korea,” he said. “We’d love to see some volume staying in Singapore, and in the longer term China is interesting.”

Source: www.businessweek.com

Carbon Expo Launch for SpectrumCredit and Carbon Market Institute

Climate Friendly announced at the Carbon Expo that it has established SpectrumCredit, which  makes it easy to support multiple offset projects overseas, including a biomass project in Thailand, a fuel-switching project in Brazil, an energy efficiency initiative in Cambodia, landfill gas recovery in China and renewable energy in India. Meanwhile, the Victorian Government is supporting the establishment of the new Carbon Market Institute in Melbourne.

Reports from Carbon Expo, Melbourne (13 October 2010):

VICTORIA TO HOST CARBON MARKET INSTITUTE

Victoria will become home to the national Carbon Market Institute thanks to a $3.5 million contribution from the Brumby Labor Government.

Financial Services Minister John Lenders said the new initiative would give Melbourne the advantage to become a major centre for carbon market business in the Asia-Pacific region.

Speaking at Carbon Expo Australasia 2010 today, Mr Lenders said the funding would be used to establish a national Carbon Market Institute to help Australian businesses with the implementation of climate-related markets.

“The Brumby Labor Government is leading Australia in tackling climate change and helping businesses prepare for a carbon constrained future,” Mr Lenders said.

“The new institute will help businesses develop and implement new ways to cut their carbon emissions effectively.

“By taking action now we are positioning Victorian industry to capitalise on the sustainable opportunities being created as the world prepares for the realities of climate change. While we support an emissions trading scheme we recognise that it is just one of a number of mechanisms that Australia may eventually adopt to facilitate carbon reduction.

“Accordingly the Institute will stand ready to help industry capture the opportunities and manage the liabilities, whatever climate change policies are eventually passed by the Commonwealth Parliament.”

The Institute will be an independent, not for profit organisation established in partnership with the Asia-Pacific Emissions Trading Forum. It will be located in VECCI’s East Melbourne headquarters.

It will provide Australian industry with business networking, research and market analysis, education and training, professional standards and accreditation and international engagement. It will also boost local jobs.

“We are home to the majority of Australian companies that will need to comply with a price on carbon and we are also home of the Australian Energy Market Operator and a centre for Australian energy markets,” Mr Lenders said.

Mr Lenders said the new Institute would build further on Victoria’s leadership in climate change action.

“The Victorian Climate Change White Paper launched earlier this year puts us at the forefront of Australian action to combat global warming and sets a new target to cut greenhouse emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020,” he said.

The new Institute is expected to be operational by January 2011, but is already taking expressions of interest in memberships through the Asia-Pacific Emissions Trading Forum.

Source: www.aetf.net.au

Climate Friendly Release (14 October 2010):

Climate change: Australians aren’t waiting for government action

As our government flounders and the carbon scheme debate goes round in circles, more and more companies and individuals in Australia are taking voluntary action to combat climate change.

From 2003 to 2009 the global voluntary market grew at 58% compound annually – making it one of the fastest growing industries in the world.

“The point is people want to get started, and they are. Our government is stagnating on plans for a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) and cannot agree on a carbon price, meanwhile climate change is happening today.” says Freddy Sharpe, CEO of Climate Friendly^TM.

The truth is that the market is right out in front of government. Whilst some people are still debating whether human created climate change is real, a rapidly growing number of businesses and individuals have already worked out their carbon footprint, started making reductions and offset the rest.

For these people, the conversation is no longer about whether it’s real, or if carbon offsetting is a means to achieving a genuine emissions reduction, the question has become: ‘Which offsetting project should I choose?’

There is a growing demand for choice of carbon offset projects. Businesses want to connect with the projects and to be able to tell their customers and staff the story of how they are helping. It’s equally meaningful to individuals.

SpectrumCredit, launched at Carbon Expo Australasia yesterday, is a world first offering that meets this demand. SpectrumCredit was developed by Sydney based company Climate Friendly^TM and allows anyone to offset their carbon footprint with a combination of clean energy technologies from five best-practice projects sourced from five countries, with purchases as small as a single tonne of C02 equivalent.

“Our clients want to support a range of technologies that collectively have the potential to address global warming,” says Sharpe. “No one technology or country can address global warming single-handedly. It’s going to take a combination of technologies in place around the world.”

SpectrumCredit makes it easy to support a biomass project in Thailand, a fuel-switching project in Brazil, an energy efficiency initiative in Cambodia, landfill gas recovery in China and renewable energy in India – all at the same time.

Source: www.climatefriendly.com

Insight, Conscious, Capture & Trade: No Longer Business as Usual

Perth-based tree planting business Carbon Conscious has struck a deal to supply 10,000 carbon offset units to Perenia and Intelligent Pathways has been chosen by the Victorian Government to deliver an end-to-end Environmental Data Management System (EDMS). Meanwhile, the Australian government has announced the first round of grants from the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute, with two Australian projects to share $4.3 million in funds and Westpac has signed a deal to provide transactional banking services and the financial infrastructure to the newly established Carbon TradeXchange.

From Intelligent Pathways:

 Intelligent Pathways has been chosen by the Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) to deliver an end-to-end Environmental Data Management System (EDMS) for the whole of Victorian government operations.

Due to the complexity of collecting and interpreting environmental data from multiple suppliers, the DSE is experiencing challenges in the following areas:

 Data management effort

 Data timeliness

 Data availability

 Level of detail of data

 Data completeness

 Reporting consistency

The EDMS will provide visibility of emissions of all departments and agencies, accuracy of data and standardised reporting. The EDMS will help relieve the burden of data management and reporting and redirect resources to analysis and action.

Intelligent Pathways is delivering an integrated solution for DSE’s EDMS that tailors our existing environmental products:

Carbon Insight – GHG inventory which is used to manage the environmental reporting structures and convert raw emissions data into the various reporting formats.

EDEN (Environmental Data Exchange Network) – Our Exchange Network which is used to capture and validate usage data from the complete network of suppliers.

Carbon Insight is a conversion, planning and reporting platform that draws data from various channels including data entry, scanned images and electronic data feeds. Reports can be generated in various formats as required for regulatory reporting and other stakeholder engagement. For DSE, this will include reporting for NGER, EREP, Watermap and FRD 24.

EDEN is an innovative and efficient way of managing the movement of data between suppliers and consumers. For DSE, this Exchange will manage data in the Energy, Waste, Water & Transport channels. EDEN provides the mechanisms through which the completeness and timeliness of the data is managed, and allows for rapid participation in the network by all participants in the supply chain. Ultimately, it drives the adoption of standards in both the transfer and the definition of environmental data.

Intelligent Pathways is an Australian owned technology company specialising in enterprise systems integration and software engineering in the areas of environmental management, fleet and logistics. We have a successful track record in the delivery of large scale, mission critical systems for government and medium-to-large organisations.

Source: www.carboninsight.com.au

In Climate Spectator (13 October 2010):

The Australian government has announced the first round of grants from the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute, with two Australian projects to share $4.3 million in funds, but the bulk of money to go to projects in the US and Europe. The $100 million institute is almost entirely funded by Australian government money, although it did receive its first $500,000 from the US government earlier this month.

Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson sees CCS as critical for the long-term future of coal, and believes that Australia, with more than 80 per cent of its stationary energy coming from coal and as the world’s largest exporter of the commodity, has a special interest in seeing CCS brought to the market. There is, however, great debate about the ability of CCS to compete with other lower-cost technologies – such as algae and other biosequestration – that could achieve an equal amount of abatement in an international market.

The six winners were chosen from more than 50 applications, with two projects selected from Australia, two in the US and two in Europe (Holland and Romania). The Australian winners included CarbonNet in the Latrobe Valley, which will receive a total of $2.5 million for work on developing a “hub concept” and on a technical framework for the measurement, monitoring and validation of stored CO2.

In Queensland, the Callide Oxyfuel Project may receive $1.83 million in funding to support an injection test of CO2 into a potential storage site in various locations in south east Queensland, although terms have not been finalised. The other overseas projects include research into transport options for CO2, transporting captured CO2 via existing natural gas pipelines and storing it in saline aquifers, a concept study into a new 600MW coal-fired power station in the US with 85-90 per cent capture, and on a US power plant retrofit.

Westpac supports CTX

Westpac has signed a deal to provide transactional banking services and the financial infrastructure to the newly established Carbon TradeXchange, the first carbon trading exchange for companies or individuals looking to participate in the voluntary carbon market. CTX is being launched in Australia by Wayne Sharpe, the Gold Coast-based founder of Bartercard, and is looking to tap into what Sharpe believes will be a multi-billion dollar global voluntary carbon market and bigger than the compliance market.

Sharpe’s team has developed the software for the exchange, which he says will be the first in the world to specialise in voluntary markets, and will rely on Westpac to provide the financial infrastructure to facilitate the trading. Westpac’s head of forex, commodities and carbon and energy trading, Paul Verschuer, says the deal forms a key part of the bank’s suite of offerings in the low-carbon sector, including financing for renewable energy and energy efficiency investments.

Source: www.climatespectator.com.au

Reported in The West Australian (12 October 2010):

Perth-based tree planting business Carbon Conscious has struck a deal to supply 10,000 carbon offset units to international carbon solution provider Perenia.

Carbon Conscious will plant 50,000 to 70,000 mallee eucalypt trees on marginal WA farming land to deliver the units, known as Assigned Amount Units (AAU), to Perenia.

The units will be priced at $16 each, valuing the deal at $160,000

Perenia is owned by Japanese trading house Mitsui & Co, Pacific Hydro and Snowy Mountains Engineering.

Trees planted under the scheme store carbon for a 30 year period.

At 11.35am Carbon Conscious shares were flat at 11.5¢.

Source: www.au.news.yahoo.com

New Eco City Takes Cues From Human Nervous System 

A green city that has a brain and will thrive by eating its trash. That’s the story in the latest issue of the New Scientist about the new eco city of PlanIT Valley in Northern Portugal. The central computer of the city will act like a brain, regulating water use and energy consumption. Various eco-cities are in the pipeline, but this could be the first to be fully built – by 2015 – and could open its doors as early as next year.

By Helen Knight in New Scientist (11 October 2010):

An eco-city in Portugal that its makers are aiming to build by 2015 takes its cues from the nervous system

IF TODAY’S cities were living things, they would be monsters, guilty of guzzling 75 per cent of the world’s natural resources consumed each year.

Now a more benign urban creature is set to emerge. The planned city of PlanIT Valley, on the outskirts of Paredes in northern Portugal (see map), is aiming to be an environmentally sustainable city. And, just like an organism, it will have a brain: a central computer that regulates everything from its water use to energy consumption.

The central computer of the city will act like a brain, regulating water use and energy consumption

Various eco-cities are in the pipeline, but this could be the first to be fully built – by 2015 – and could open its doors as early as next year. While Masdar City in Abu Dhabi welcomed its first inhabitants this month, it will not be completed until at least 2020. And the development of Dongtan near Shanghai in China has not even got off the ground yet, following financial and political difficulties.

Like other sustainable cities, PlanIT Valley will treat its own water and tap renewable energy. Buildings will also have plant-covered roofs, which will reduce local temperature through evapotranspiration, as well as absorbing rainwater and pollutants.

Yet that is where the similarities with other eco-cities end, according to its makers Living PlanIT based in Paredes. For a start, PlanIT Valley will be built closer to existing transport links than the likes of Masdar. More significantly, its “brain” will use data collected from a network of sensors akin to a nervous system to control the city’s power generation, water and waste treatment (see “Brains and nervous system”). It’s a kind of “urban metabolism”, says Steven Lewis, chief executive of Living PlanIT.

While this network of sensors sounds expensive, the cost of installing it will be offset by using more efficient building techniques. “Because we have reduced the cost of the building, we can spend a bit more on the technology,” says Lewis. For example, software used to design cars and aircraft was used to create the architectural plans.

What’s more, the buildings are being prefabricated so that when construction begins at the end of 2010 it should be cheaper and quicker. The hexagonal shape of the buildings was chosen to make efficient use of space.

The city’s technologies could be retrofitted to existing towns. This would be a good idea, says Simon Joss of the University of Westminster in London. Still, he adds that the 2015 completion date may be optimistic, and that the project’s success cannot be determined until people move in. “It’s about developing a community,” he says.

Brain and nervous system

PlanIT Valley will have its own artificial nervous system to control its water and energy consumption.

Sensors in every building will measure occupancy, temperature, humidity and energy use. This information will be fed to a central “brain”, along with information on energy production from photovoltaic devices and wind turbines, as well as water used and waste produced.

The brain can then use this information to control each aspect of the city. For example, if sensors show that the water level in one building’s storage tank is low, the system will move water from another building where there is an excess.

It will also use weather forecasts to predict when days will be cloudy, which will reduce the amount of energy generated by the city’s photovoltaic devices. It would then switch to using stored energy, in the form of ice produced by excess electricity on sunnier days, to provide chilled water for the building’s air conditioning systems, for example.

An urban data centre will process all the information gathered by the system’s sensors – around 5 petabytes each day. To prevent a problem hitting the data centre and knocking out the control of the entire city, each building will also have sufficient computing power to function on its own.

To save on heating bills, the hot air produced by the data centre will be used to heat other buildings.

Kidneys

Only 3 per cent of the water consumed in a city is used for drinking and cooking, so buildings in PlanIT Valley will re-use as much water as possible.

Cooking water can be collected and reused for flushing toilets. Similarly, rainwater will be collected by tanks on the “green roofs” of buildings and then filtered by the plants to remove pollutants. A series of lagoons in the city’s central park will use reeds, bamboo and other plants to filter waste water, making it suitable for reuse as “grey” water in toilets and irrigation.

Once these plants have grown, consuming carbon dioxide as they do so, they will be cut down and used to produce biofuel, with a new batch planted to replace them.

Eyes and ears

If a child goes missing, its parents could turn to the city’s eyes: a network of cameras connected to software.

An application called “Find my Kid” will allow parents to locate children who wander off at the shopping centre, for example. Software first checks if the person asking for the information has a right to know the answer – a father, say – and then automatically searches footage from security cameras to identify the child based on a description of their clothing and appearance.

Find my Kid is one example of the “Place Apps”, which Living PlanIT hopes to develop by collaborating with software firms. They could be available at computer terminals dotted around the city or in smartphones. Other possible apps could help inhabitants find a parking space, for example.

The apps could also use microphones to listen for sounds. A Place App designed to run in the meeting room of an office building could identify the topic of the meeting from the use of certain spoken keywords. Then it could suggest potential collaborators within or outside the company, Lewis proposes.

Stomach

This city will thrive by eating its trash.

On average, cities divert only 5 per cent of trash for recycling or energy production. That figure will be 80 per cent for PlanIT Valley.

Human and organic waste will be used to generate electricity. An anaerobic digester will use enzymes to stimulate microbes to digest such waste, producing chemicals that can be fermented and distilled into biofuels to run the city’s cars or to generate electricity. The process also generates by-products such as amino acids and vitamin B12, which can be sold to the pharmaceutical industry.

Dishwasher-sized digesters are also being developed for homes. Fed by a tablet containing enzymes, these would process food and human waste to generate biofuel, which can then be burned to generate electricity.

Of the remaining landfill waste, any aluminium will be extracted and used in industrial chemical reactions to generate hydrogen, which could be used as a fuel to power vehicles.

Finally, a biomass reactor will heat whatever waste cannot be recycled to 400 °C without oxygen, a process known as pyrolysis, to generate energy and biochar, which can be used as a fertiliser.

Residents will not be asked to separate plastic and glass in their trash. All waste is fed through the central digester, which cleanses materials of organic contamination, before they are separated. That means more can be recycled.

Source: www.newscientist.com

Premium for Green Roofs & Global Common Metric for Green Buildings

According to Sidonie Carpenter, president of Green Roofs Australia, the owners of two outstanding green roofed buildings in Toronto Canada claim they enjoy a 15% premium on their rents and a 15 year waiting list for tenants. Green Roofs Australia holds its national conference in Adelaide next week. Also Alfonso Ponce Alvarez was one of the speakers at the World Green Building Council Congress in Singapore last on his work with the United Nations to develop a common carbon metric and on green building drivers in Europe. The Fifth Estate reports.

For more information on the Green Roofs Australia Conference in Adelaide go to: http://www.icebergevents.com/greenroofsconference2010/

Following is an edited transcript of the interview by Tina Perinotto in The Fifth Estate:

According to Sidonie Carpenter, president of Green Roofs Australia, the owners of two outstanding green roofed buildings in Toronto Canada claim they enjoy a 15 per cent premium on their rents and a 15 year waiting list for tenants.

A look at the websites of these two, www.401richmond.net and www.robertsonbuilding.com makes the claims seems plausible. Certainly Carpenter believes the financial case for green roofs stacks up in more ways than one.

First there is the looming carbon price and the opportunity for “some carbon payback and sequestration opportunities and we start putting a dollar value on that,” Carpenter says.

Next is the very little understood information that a green roof, instead of taking up space where the solar panels might go, will actually enhance the efficiency of photo voltaic panels – by a fairly sizeable margin, in fact.

According to Carpenter when it’s too hot on the roof you get “brown outs” and the solar energy system won’t produce anywhere near as much energy as promised because the system can’t cope with the heat. It works best at between 23-25 degrees Celsius.

“Solar panels work more efficiently over a green roof. You get 25 per cent more efficiency because it reduces the ambient temperature,” she says.

“Even in Hobart it would be over 25 degrees Celsius in summer so you get brown outs.

“In Brisbane even in winter the temperature rises to up to the 30s and on a high rise building in summertime the temperature gets to 70-90 degrees.

“Which is why countries like Germany are leading in photo voltaics. They don’t actually work in very high temperatures on the roof. You’re better off putting them on the ground.”

Carpenter says there is now a lot of research coming out of Germany that combines photo voltaics and green roof analysis because of the benefit of evaporative transpiration, [which is like the cool moist atmosphere that a rainforest creates.]

Green roofs can also help reduce the load on airconditioning of having to cool air of 70 degrees so it can be used inside a building.

So how much do green roofs cost?

To Carpenter that’s a bit like the piece-of-string question. It depends totally on what sort of green roof you want – and that’s anything from a lightweight solution to a full deep-soil garden that requires special structural support. But generally most jobs range between $60 a square metres to $100 a square metre.

There are times, of course, when the project is simply uneconomic. As in her own house, for instance, a “small domestic house, where the quote for the structural steel alone came in at $75,000.”

Did she go ahead?

“No, we did not go ahead with it. It would have meant no bathroom, no kitchen. So we just did a light weight retrofit on the existing roof.”

Another job currently underway at Balmoral in Brisbane may also not see the light of day, because of cost blowout, thanks to a steep site that is difficult to access and requires soil and all other elements to be craned in.

In this case the costs look like blowing out to $2000 a square metre for each of the 60-70 square metre roofs over each of the five dwellings,” Carpenter says. “And the budget is $200,000.”

A green wall, by the way, generally costs between $1200 to $2000. [This might seem pricey but at a recent conference that she spoke at - the 3rd International Urban Design Conference in Canberra - Carpenter expressed mild exasperation that while the cost of structures and maintenance in other parts of a building structure are rarely questioned, the costs and needs for the same in a green roof or green wall were so often viewed as onerous.]

Carpenter says the most expensive green roof in Australia is probably the one over the Victorian desalination plant at Wonthaggi, recently announced in a tender awarded to Fyto Green, at a cost of $4.3 million.

The biggest is undoubtedly over M Central in Sydney’s inner west at Pyrmont, she says.

In the US the Ford motor plant has a 24 acre (9.72 ha) green roof but elsewhere around the globe there are the beginnings of radical experiments – with high-rise farms in Harlem in New York and paddy fields in China.

Carpenter says that there is also great opportunity for large industrial sheds to lower their carbon footprint, especially when so many are occupied by  high profile corporates such as Coles and Woolworths under the spotlight for their high energy use.

“I think that’s where there is opportunity, for companies such as Coles and Woolworths, shipping their goods all over; their food miles are huge, and their carbon foot print is huge.

“They could start to cover their industrial buildings with very lightweight green roofs that produce carbon sequestration. We’d be looking at very shallow soil profiles – they are the ones that would really make a difference -especially with those large industrial estates, where there isn’t a blade of grass to cool the ambient temperature.”

And most, adds Carpenter, could be done for around $100 a sq m.

By Tina Perinotto

14 October 2010 – Alfonso Ponce Alvarez was one of the speakers at the World Green Building Council Congress in Singapore in September.  He spoke with The Fifth Estate on his work with the United Nations to develop a common carbon metric and on green building drivers in Europe.

Following is an edited transcript of the interview.

The Fifth Estate: Please tell us what your work is about

Alfonso Ponce Alvarez: I work for the French Building Research Centre, under the authority of the huge Ministry for Sustainable Development in France, which is the result of a merger between the Ministry for Construction, Transportation and Urban Affairs, the Ministry of Environment, and the Ministry of Social Affairs. So my organisation is placed under the authority of this ministry.  So we are 900 engineers, five different locations in France, one in China.

We do fundamental research on buildings and infrastructures, and we get money from the French Government for that. We do certification of building products, and we run the French National Scheme for Green Buildings, which is called HQE and stands for High Environmental Quality. It’s a government-owned scheme. This is very peculiar.

TFE: What’s peculiar about it?

APA: It is completely public. It’s public sector driven. It’s not driven by industry. We do also testing; we do publications and we help the French Government in drafting all the regulation for buildings in France. And we are heavily involved in European standardisation too.  I’m also a board member of UNEP-SBCI (.The United Nations Environment Programme Sustainable Building & Construction Initiative

TFE: What is happening with green buildings in France and Europe? And what are the drivers?

APA: In Europe we have the European Commission, and we have what we call directives.  So the European Commission issues directives that all member states have to comply with.  But you are free to determine the path you will follow.  You need to get to the point A, but you are free to choose how you get there.  So there is no harmonised reality in Europe; every country is at a different stage.

I can tell you what’s happening in France.  In France we have this regulation called Grenelle de l’Environnement.  Basically, the commitment is all new buildings will consume 50 kilowatt hours per square metre per annum by 2012.

TFE: And what do they produce now?

APA: Today we are more or less about 120 [kwh] in new buildings.  So the first piece of the regulation is 50 kilowatt hours per square metre per annum by 2012.  Positive buildings by 2020.

TFE: What do they mean by positive buildings?

APA: Net zero energy.  So they produce more energy than they use.  In Europe we call that positive buildings.  And in America they call that net zero energy buildings. The idea is they produce more energy than they consume by 2020. This is the French Government, but it’s in line with a directive called 20-20-20 Directive or Energy Package, and that’s a European regulatory framework that says that by 2020 we will reduce by 20 per cent global emissions of carbon in the European Union, and we will use 20 per cent of renewable energy to get that goal.

TFE: On the base of 1990?

APA: On the base of 1990, exactly.

TFE: With this directive, how does that compare with existing buildings?

APA: Well, regulations in Europe are very stringent, more than in the US, because we didn’t have the same attitude towards the petroleum shocks of the ’80s and ’73. So energy efficiency policies have been in place for a long time in Europe. So regulations are quite high already.

TFE: How do European buildings compare with American buildings then?

APA: There is this British report from BRE which shows how a LEED-rated building will perform in the US and in Europe against a BREEAM and…Green Star. They’re basically comparing how a LEED Gold building would perform in Europe against a BREEAM outstanding building in Europe. The result is that you get a higher certification on the LEED in Europe, so you have several buildings that are certified in Europe with LEED, even if they are just complying with the regulation. But that’s normal. It’s because LEED is referring to American standards and different targets and different calculation methodologies, and the standards in the US tend to be lower because of the way you build a building. You use more wood, you know, it’s different, it’s a different reality.

TFE: So a Platinum LEED might equate to what in France?

APA: It’s not that – what we say is – for example, energy; energy will be calculated in this manner: kilowatt hours per square metre per annum. And we will all measure that in the same way. And the same applies for indoor air quality.

TFE: Okay, so it’s not that the actual ratings will harmonise, it’s the actual methodology will be the same, for water, energy, for anything?

APA: Exactly. So the metrics that we will be using will be the same.

TFE: Is there a move to make it the same rating systems so everyone understands what a Five Star is?

APA: Well, that’s more of a political movement. Not today.

TFE: How does it help the fund manager, though?  Because the fund manager wants to know that his or her portfolio of buildings in four different countries with four different rating system, is the same standard. Does this really help them?

APA:    Yeah, it does. It does, because what this guy wants is to actually establish baselines, benchmark his portfolio, the performance of his portfolio with his competitors, and monetarised indicators.

TFE: So he’ll know that a level three on one scale is the same as a level four somewhere else?

APA: Exactly.

TFE: But the market doesn’t understand that?

APA: The market might not understand. It’s a first step, it’s a first step.

TFE: Okay, first step, you’re not going to stop there?

APA: No. It’s a technical step so that this guy will know, will be able to compare the energy performance of his portfolio, even if he has buildings in France, Germany and the UK, because for energy he will know that we are using the same metric.

TFE: How are you organising that?

APA: We decided to partner with the Working Building Council and UNEP-SBCI – United Nations Environment Program – Sustainable Building and Climate Change Initiative. So these people basically took one of the metrics we defined, the carbon metric -  the way we calculate the carbon emissions from buildings. We worked with them, so we worked the metric a little bit, and they endorsed that metric. And that metric was presented by UNEP’s spokesman, Nick Nuttall at the latest COP, COP 15 in Denmark, in Copenhagen. What we’re planning to do now is to extend that collaboration to other metrics. So we have to find six metrics and we’ll want to extend that cooperation to the rest of the metrics that we have to find.

TFE: Can you tell us more about the European and French situation with green buildings?.

APA: Well, you know, France is in a very funny spot, because the involvement of the French Government is huge because of the French traditions. So for example, the HQE rating system is mandatory in several parts of the country, in what we call… business districts, for example.  So if you want to build a skyscraper, for example, in Paris, in La Défense, you have to comply to the HQE scheme. It’s mandatory. It’s the High Environmental Quality. It’s the equivalent of Green Star.   Insurance companies are giving premiums if you use it where it’s not mandatory.

TFE: Why is this?

APA: Because from their perspective it presents a risk-reduction factor. It anticipates regulation, so it’s a way for them to reduce their risk exposure. So they give premiums. You get also an acceleration of your working premium or tax rebates if you use it. So these are the things that the government …it’s highly, highly incentivised.

TFE: What other incentives are there?

APA: The  public policies include tax rebates, and the acceleration of the working permits, so you get your working permit more quickly.

TFE: To start development?

APA: Yes.

TFE: And what about the tenants, the premium tenants, do they want it?

APA:    Yes, landlords because of [the incentive] and tenants because…they would like to display the results.

TFE: What about existing stock?

APA: I am not really familiar with existing stock.  What I know from existing stock is the problem we have with existing stock is we don’t really know if certification is the right tool to incentivise this sector. I mean, certification as a third party verified system. It’s probably more a simple assessment that we need, and what we need is to collect that data from the stock. So physical, functional data, but also financial data. And put that into a database. But the problem is, who owns that database? How can you make sure that the data is confidential

In all the European territory, you have  a directive called the Etiquette- the European Etiquette for Energy, and you have the DPCs…so this is basically that you have to disclose the energy..for all buildings when you sell it and when you rent. And that’s mandatory.

TFE: There’s no minimum performance, or saying you have to improve it?

APA: No. This Energy Etiquette is not really having an impact in the marketplace actually.
The reality in the European Union [on energy] is so diverse. For example, a country like France, people don’t really care about carbon because 85 per cent of our energy comes from nuclear power.  So it’s carbon neutral.

TFE: So why are they making restrictions for new buildings, then?

APA: To be in line with European directives. But carbon is not an issue in France. Water is an issue in Spain, but it’s not an issue in Finland. It’s very… very …like that.

TFE: So what are the big drivers then in France?  Just the European directives, then?

APA: The big drivers in France are, yes, the directives [which are market drivers] just for a segment, the leaders, the 20 per cent more advanced. And that’s pretty much it.

TFE: Alfonso, thank you for that.

The Fifth Estate travelled to Singapore to cover the World Green Building Council Congress, as a guest of the Green Building Council of Australia

Source: http://www.thefifthestate.com.au

Keep on Trucking with Biofuels & Waste to Ethanol

Around the world there’s an increasing use of biofuels not only to decrease emissions from transport, but also to reduce Australia’s trade deficit, improve domestic fuel security with readily available, renewable and sustainable fuels and bring about regional development opportunities around the country. So says Heather Brodie, CEO of the Biofuels Association of Australia on the launch of a biodiesel blend fuelled Volvo truck. Meanwhile, US biofuels company Coskata plans to name a Melbourne-based site for its $400 million waste-to-ethanol plant within the next few months.

Heather Brodie, CEO of the Biofuels Association of Australia, provided an update on all relevant biofuel developments in Australia at the Carbon Expo in a session on Transport Biofuels. Also on show at the Expo in Melbourne was the Volvo 13 litre truck, operating with a biodiesel blend. It was launched in Sydney a few days earlier.

Announcement (8 October 2010):

The Biofuels Association of Australia announced the launch of the BAA Volvo FH 13 litre truck by the Hon Minister Tony Kelly, NSW Minister for Planning, Infrastructure and Lands, today at the International Passenger Terminal at Circular Quay, Sydney.

“The BAA is delighted that the Minister has been able to take time out of his very full schedule to promote the use of biodiesel in Australia by launching this truck on our behalf” said Heather Brodie, CEO of the Biofuels Association of Australia.

“Volvo Trucks is working with the BAA and Ron Finemore Transport to promote to the community how important it is to use increasing blends of biodiesel in our fuel mix” Ms Brodie continued. “Ron Finemore Transport has been using 20% blends of biodiesel for the last three years and has notched up more than 40 million kilometres in their fleet of trucks. This truck will be travelling the length and breadth of the east coast promoting how the average consumer can use biodiesel as well.”

“Around the world we are seeing an increasing use of biofuels not only to decrease our emissions from transport, but also to reduce our trade deficit, improve our domestic fuel security with readily available, renewable and sustainable fuels and bring about regional development opportunities around Australia”.

“Australia’s production of biofuels – both ethanol and biodiesel – continues to come predominantly from by-products and waste streams. This is a fantastic opportunity to promote the local industry and we thank Volvo, Ron Finemore Transport and the Minister for taking part in the program” Ms Brodie said.

Source: www.biofuelsassociation.com.au

Barry Park in Sydney Morning Herald (11 October 2010):

BIOFUELS company Coskata plans to name a Melbourne-based site for its $400 million waste-to-ethanol plant within the next few months.

Wes Bolsen, chief marketing officer of the US-based company that has attracted business partners including car maker GM Holden and the Victorian government, told BusinessDay he expected five potential sites to be whittled down to three within days, with a single site nominated by January.

Mr Bolsen is in Victoria to meet government and a group of companies that are helping the Illinois-based biofuel producer set up a fuel factory that can convert waste products as diverse as household food scraps and old tyres into cheap ethanol that can then be mixed with petrol and used in cars.

The Coskata plant proposed for Melbourne should be able to produce about 250 million litres of ethanol a year from the system, which Mr Bolsen said would help reduce the country’s dependence on mineral oils.

Holden has become the first car maker to offer a vehicle that can run on anything from 100 per cent petrol to E85, a mix of 85 per cent ethanol and 15 per cent petrol.

Mr Bolsen said ”major community engagement” would help determine which of the five sites would be the most appropriate.

”These communities are competing for jobs and growth,” Mr Bolsen said. ”We’re looking for a site around the Melbourne area, and we’ve already had interest from NSW and Queensland.”

Mr Bolsen said the Victorian biofuel plant would take up to three years to build, creating hundreds of construction jobs and ongoing employment from a waste collection process that will source feedstock for the plant within a 50-kilometre radius.

Mr Bolsen said sourcing waste material was proving an easy process, with companies already lining up to offer Coskata waste products to feed into the plant.

He said this waste would normally cost up to $150 a tonne to dispose of and that it would mostly end up as landfill.

Source: www.smh.com.au

Last Word: Conservation as an investment, not a cost

We hear a lot about putting a price on carbon, but what about putting a price on conservation and biodiversity? That’s exactly what the people at The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) have done in the most comprehensive study yet: they have estimated the cash value of ecosystems.

They say the figures show the case for conservation is overwhelming in pure economic terms. One case study found that protecting and replanting mangrove swamps in Vietnam cost $1.1 million – an investment which reduced spending on dyke maintenance by seven times as much each year.

They admit frustration that most mainstream economists are blind to the value of biodiversity. “Conservation has to be seen as an investment and not a cost,” says Rudolf de Groot of Wageningen University in the Netherlands, one of the lead authors of the study. Fred Pearce in the New Scientist has the full report. Read More

Fred Pearce in New Scientist (12 October 2010)

End the carnage decimating the natural world

Invest in lush tropical forests, vibrant coral reefs and clear blue streams, and they will provide a healthy return. That’s the message from a group of environmental economists who for the first time have estimated the cash value of ecosystems.

They say the figures show the case for conservation is overwhelming in pure economic terms. One case study found that protecting and replanting mangrove swamps in Vietnam cost $1.1 million – an investment which reduced spending on dyke maintenance by seven times as much each year.

Yet the scientists behind The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity study (TEEB) admit frustration that most mainstream economists are blind to the value of biodiversity. “Conservation has to be seen as an investment and not a cost,” says Rudolf de Groot of Wageningen University in the Netherlands, one of the lead authors of the study.

TEEB was initiated at the 2007 G8 summit, in Germany. “It aims to do for biodiversity what the Stern report did for the economics of climate change,” says de Groot. The group will launch the first part of its work – a report called The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Ecological and Economic Foundations – at a UN summit on biodiversity in Nagoya, Japan, this month.

In it, they use prior studies to calculate cash values for biomes ranging from tropical rainforests to Arctic tundra, based on the services they provide to humanity. Coral reefs come in top, and are valued at up to $1.2 million per hectare per year, mostly reflecting the tourism income they provide. By moderating extreme events like storms, the group estimates each hectare of reef saves $34,000 per year, on average.

But even humble savannah grasslands, which protect water supplies and store carbon, have a calculated annual worth of thousands of dollars per hectare. Each hectare of coastal wetlands, meanwhile, treats dirty water to the tune of $120,000 in avoided costs each year.

The report makes clear that the value of many “ecosystem services” remains difficult to price, however. Its authors speculate that many woodlands have a high value for filtering air pollution, grasslands for pollination and rainforests for climate regulation.

One appendix speculates that, at current prices on carbon offset markets, the carbon tied up in trees and soils of the Amazon rainforest would have a “stock value” of $1.5 to $3 trillion. Many ecosystems also recycle moisture to maintain the water cycle, create soil and perform many other functions vital to life on Earth – something which no ecological economist has yet managed to value.

“For all the ecosystems we investigated, restoration pays,” says de Groot. “For every dollar invested in restoration of forests, wetlands or grasslands, the benefits are between twice and 75 times higher.” Nonetheless, he says, “getting this understanding incorporated into mainstream economics remains a problem”.

The figures are designed to bring politicians up short before a major meeting under the Convention on Biological Diversity from 18 October in Nagoya (see “Promises, promises”, below).

The economists decided not to calculate a single global figure for the planet’s ecosystems. But a rough calculation by New Scientist based on TEEB’s figures for individual biomes puts the cash value of the Earth’s ecosystems at about half a trillion dollars.

This seems far too low, considering that the global economy – much of which is ultimately dependent on biological resources – is valued at around $70 trillion. And lower still, given that by cycling carbon the biosphere acts as a planetary thermostat.

The numbers are therefore most useful as an indicator of the most immediate economic benefits. Including unquantified ecosystem services would considerably raise the figure. After all, as Tim Killeen of Conservation International puts it: “Biodiversity has been the foundation for the world’s economy since the origin of human civilisation.”

The cash value of Earth’s biomes

Values are in dollars per hectare per year. The range represents the different values of biomes of each type around the world, with the top end of each range corresponding to prime locations (Source: TEEB)

Coral reefs (tropical and subtropical): $14 – $1,195,000

Key values: tourism, storm protection, fish nurseries

Coastal wetlands: $2000 – $215,000

Key values: waste purification, fish nurseries, storm protection

Other coastal systems: $248 – $80,000

Key values: tourism, fish nurseries

Inland wetlands: $1000 – $45,000

Key values: natural water reservoirs, waste treatment

Rivers and lakes: $1800 – $13,000

Key values: water supply, waste treatment, tourism

Tropical forests: $91 – $23,000

Key values: climate regulation, gene banks (for medicinal plants, for example), erosion prevention

Temperate and boreal forests: $30 – $4900

Key values: Food, gene banks, watershed protection

Woodlands: $16 – $2000

Key values: timber and other forest products, waste treatment

Grasslands: $300 – $3100

Key values: climate regulation, watershed protection

Promises, promises

In Nagoya, Japan, this month, the world’s governments will agree that they have not kept a promise they made at the World Summit for Sustainable Development at Johannesburg in 2002 to decrease the rate of species loss by 2010.

They are likely to agree a new set of targets for 2020, including stemming the loss of biodiversity, controlling invasive species and conserving at least 10 per cent of all the world’s major biomes.

Diversitas, a group of leading conservation biologists, has already condemned the proposed new targets as vague, unachievable and not based on good science. Georgina Mace of Imperial College London, a leading figure in Diversitas, told New Scientist: “I don’t think the current process or the 2020 targets are really fit for purpose.”

In a letter to Nature earlier this year, Mace, Harold Mooney of Stanford University in California and others from Diversitas said: “The targets continue to mix the biodiversity we value highly and the biodiversity we urgently need to secure the benefits people derive from functioning ecosystems. To resolve competing demands, these different priorities should be made explicit.”

Diversitas proposes distinguishing three conservation aims. Red targets would protect human safety and include conserving mangroves to shield coastlines against storms, maintaining coral reefs to prevent the loss of local fisheries, and preventing deforestation that causes landslides.

Green targets would protect things that societies value – sacred forests or charismatic species like the great whales. Finally, blue targets would protect key ecosystem services, like carbon sinks in forests, soils and permafrost that help maintain the climate.

Source: www.newscientist.com and www.teebweb.org

A river runs through it

Yes, more than 80% of the world‘s population relies on rivers for livelihood and yet they’re in a mess. A classic example of what we humans have done – or not done – to affect our environment and our climate. Action on that front gets the headlines this week, as does discussions in China and action Indonesia to recognise the importance of forests and trees as a means to cut emissions. We can all learn from the mistakes – and well-meaning intentions – of others, like how Europe has attempted to tackle emissions and manage energy. But more attention needs to be on incentives for clean tech and clean energy investment. This applies to Australia, where we are seeing our wave energy innovators go the way of our solar power pioneers – to greener pastures! Australia is showing some leadership in Green IT or is it ICT. Enough to rescue us?  And there’s some good advice on how to get Government aid for environmental projects, as well as news of attempts to innovate and act from unlikely places, like the Sunshine Coast with its Clean Futures event. October in Queensland promises to be fruitful – with a big outing for the Beyond Zero Emissions plan and Guy Pearse’s assault on the Smart State. Before that we have Victoria’s Premier extolling the virtues of his even smarter state and acting as host for the bigger than ever Carbon Expo in Melbourne next week.  For a clean diversion we have algae as automotive fuel, a new Nissan cleaner than ever and bamboo continues to makes a sustainable mark. Sara Phillips looks at the UK controversy over the overly-dramatic film encouraging climate change action. Is this seriously funny? Ken Hickson

Profile: John Brumby

Victoria leads Australia in the carbon/climate change stakes and it is fitting that John Brumby, the State premier should reinforce his commitment to 20% reduction in emissions by 2020 (compared to 2000 levels), when the Federal Government is going after a pathetic 5% reduction. Victoria is also   driving solar energy, energy efficiency measures and planning for the impacts of climate change. It amounts to $10 billion in new investment.  He welcomes all comers – even from Federal Government and other states – to the Carbon Expo which starts in Melbourne on Monday 11 October.

 Message from Victoria Premier to the Carbon Expo:

I welcome you to Melbourne, Victoria, for the Carbon Expo Australasia 2010, which is Australasia’s premier Trade Fair and Carbon Conference. This Expo assists industry to better manage its emissions and allow businesses to exhibit their low-carbon products and services.

Climate change is the greatest challenge of our generation and there has never been a stronger case for action – we know that climate change poses big risks for our economy, our environment and our way of life. Taking action now to cut emissions will not only help our environment but will also create new economic opportunities through the development of new industries, technologies, markets and jobs.

Taking Action for Victoria’s Future, Victoria’s Climate Change White Paper – The Action Plan, strengthens Victoria’s leadership in responding to climate change and creates a climate of new economic opportunity for our State. The Action Plan sets a solid target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020 (compared to 2000 levels), as well as driving solar energy, energy efficiency measures and planning for the impacts of climate change. These actions not only position Victoria as the leading Australian State in tackling climate change – they will also drive around $10 billion of new investment in the State.

As part of our commitment to act on climate change, the Victorian Government is supporting the growth of Victoria’s carbon market services industry and establishing Victoria as a leading regional centre for carbon market services. Victoria has conducted a feasibility study into a Carbon Market Institute, will continue to publish the Melbourne Carbon Market Services Guide, will establish an export cluster to participate in Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects, and is developing international trade and investment linkages to assist companies to engage in global carbon markets. In addition, we are establishing the Victorian Carbon Exchange to drive the creation and purchase of Victorian offsets.

I consider Victoria to be well placed to become a leading carbon market services centre in the Asia-Pacific region. We have a concentration of over 100 carbon market businesses and have made significant investment in the clean technology sector. Victoria also has well established business relationships with developing countries eligible to host CDM projects, supported by the Victorian Government’s international business offices.

The Victorian Government is proud to sponsor the Carbon Expo Australasia 2010 which, with your contribution, will lead to the discovery of new carbon business opportunities, and products and services, that will help our region successfully transition to a new low carbon economy.

The Hon John Brumby

PREMIER OF VICTORIA

As momentum builds again for serious national emissions reform, don’t miss the biggest Australian carbon business networking event of 2010 - Carbon Expo Australasia 2010 – starting NEXT MONDAY.  There will be carbon wargames, an Oxford-style debate and doubtless worms.  Direct from the newly established ‘Climate Change Committee’ Australian Climate Change Minister Greg Combet and Professor Ross Garnaut will headline an outstanding conference program that also includes THE global and domestic carbon business leaders.  The Trade Fair features the leading Australian and Asian businesses involved in the business of emissions reductions.  Clean development projects from a dozen Asia-Pacific countries will be featured in the Trade Fair - with project managers looking to do CDM deals. 

Delegates can register here with our online registration form

A NEW version of Expo’s Program can be downloaded here or from Expo’s website at www.carbonexpo.com.au

Expo delegates will hear and interact with international and domestic carbon business leaders to;

• gain the latest insights regarding international climate policy – what will happen at Cancun ?
• understand the likely future of carbon markets – internationally & domestically
• understand the opportunities for Australian business in the Asian Green Revolution
• get a handle on the issues around raising finance for low carbon projects
• get a sense of the scope and likely emphasis for Australia’s role in climate change action
• learn of the likely role of energy efficiency & renewables
• get the latest on the best approaches to carbon reporting & accounting
• hear of the opportunities in forests & reduced deforestation
• get the fair dinkum story on soil carbon opportunities
• hear the opportunities and how big a role transport & biofuels can play in reducing emissions
• learn of the latest science and how it is to be communicated

Should you wish to further clarify any aspects of delegate and/or exhibitor registration, please contact Merrin McAuley at the Expo Secretariat at secretariat@carbonexpo.com.au or on 07 5528 2501

Regards

Michael Whitehead
Director
Carbon Expo Australasia 2010

Moderator – Tony Jones

Keynote – Dr Graeme Pearman, Fellow, Academy of Science; former Chief of Atmospheric Research, CSIRO

• An outline of the latest international climate data and what it means for countries, communities, policy-makers and business sectors

• What does this suggest GHG reduction targets should be?

• Arming society with foresight – why climate scientists must improve the way they communicate their knowledge and what it means

09.30 to 10.30

Plenary

Keynote

address

Welcome and introduction

Moderator – Tony Jones

Robert Purves, Chairman, Environment Business Australia

The Hon Gavin Jennings MLC, Minister for the Environment, Climate Change and Innovation, Victoria

Opening address – The Hon Greg Combet AM MP, Australian Minister for Climate Change and Energy Effi ciency

Vote of thanks to Minister Combet – Paul Verschuer, Managing Director, Foreign Exchange & Commodities, Carbon, Energy (FX & CCE),

Westpac Institutional Bank

10.30 to 11.00 Morning tea/coffee – in trade fair area

Trade fair walkabout, accompanied by key sponsors, discussion with exhibitors

11.00 to 12.15

Plenary

Keynote

address

and Panel

discussion

International policy progress

Moderator – Tony Jones

An overview of the latest developments and trends in international policy responses to GHG abatement and mitigation. What are the

challenges and opportunities for setting emissions reduction objectives, emerging carbon markets and investment in the low-carbon

economy? This session will consider:

• emerging national and international policy action in the USA, Europe, Asia, Australia & New Zealand

• prospects for meaningful international policy action post-2012

• which way to go? Bilateral, multi-lateral or global?

• why delay national action in Australia? Action is being spearheaded elsewhere and opportunities will be lost

• how to strengthen Australia’s contribution to the Mexico COP?

Keynote address – Peter Young, Chairman, Aldersgate Group (Green Investment Bank), London

Panelists

Dr Hu Tao, Senior Environmental Economist, Policy Research Centre, Ministry of Environmental Protection, People’s Republic of China;

Member, China Carbon Forum Advisory Board

Martijn Wilder, Partner and Head of Global Environmental Markets and Emissions Trading Practice, Baker & McKenzie

Stuart Calman, Director, Climate & Risk, Ministry for the Environment, New Zealand

Joanne Evans, Assistant Secretary, Finance, Markets and Forests Branch, International Division, Australian Department of Climate Change

& Energy Effi ciency

Robert Hill, Chairman, Australian Carbon Trust; Former Australian Environment Minister; Former Australian Ambassador to the UN

Wayne Sharpe, CEO and Founder, Carbon Trade Exchange

Source: www.carbonexpo.com.au

Europe Could Do Better for Investors

Europe, widely regarded as the pace-setter in climate and energy policies, has failed, according to a new report, to provide a strong enough signal to encourage private investment to switch away from carbon-intensive technologies. France, the UK and Germany have become alarmed by the speed of transition taking place in key Asian markets, particularly China, which is able to effect change without a carbon price because it simply drives investment through government mandates and with finance from state-owned banks. Now in Australia with Norton Rose, Anthony Hobley produced research for the IIGCC report.

Avoiding Europe’s mistakes

Giles Parkinson in Climate Spectator (5 October 2010):

Europe is widely regarded as the pace-setter in climate and energy policies. It has had an emissions trading scheme for more than five years, it has championed the most ambitious emissions reduction targets, and individual countries have made enormous investments into renewable energy technology.

But a survey has found that, for all its policy initiatives, Europe has failed to provide a strong enough signal to encourage private investment to switch away from carbon-intensive technologies: investment has been deterred not just by a weak price signal from the emissions trading scheme, but by the mish-mash of complimentary policies across the region.

The failure of the EU ETS to deliver a meaningful price on carbon was initially due to a massive over-allocation of allowances, and then because of a slump in industrial production caused by the financial crisis. Now it is thought to lack ambition, particularly in light of the massive shift in capital in Asian countries such as China, South Korea and Japan.

The European carbon price is currently trading at around €15.40 ($A21.80), but even that is insufficient – a price close to €30 or more is considered necessary to drive the scale of change required.

The report, “Shifting private capital”, conducted on behalf of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, which represents more than 50 pension funds and other asset managers responsible for some $8 trillion under of investments, suggests that this is only part of the problem: despite having a regional trading scheme, the EU policy on climate and energy is piecemeal, and unless the mix of policies on energy efficiency, renewable energy, grids and fossil fuel subsidies are crafted with a long term vision, then private capital will not come to the party.

And private capital is essential. The report notes that it will need to provide 85 per cent of the hundreds of billions of dollars required to cut greenhouse gas emissions at the scale required to achieve climate goals, but will only do so if low-carbon investments, projects and assets offer sufficiently attractive risk-adjusted returns.

The IIGCC report is designed to increase pressure on the EU to raise its unilateral greenhouse reduction targets, and to encourage it to develop some policy certainty in other areas, particularly on renewables, and to avoid the retrospective cuts in subsidies that are now occurring in Spain, for instance.

But it also has relevance to Australia, which is now embarking on a new process, via the climate committee, to evaluate what models and measures should be adopted to set Australia, belatedly, on its path to emission reductions.

Anthony Hobley, the head of the climate change practice at Norton Rose, which did much of the research for the IIGCC report, says it highlights the pitfalls of a piecemeal approach to legislation: not only is it ineffective, but it doesn’t produce the least cost solution. “This shows the importance of long term signals … so that investors can understand what the economic drivers are.”

EU countries such as France, the UK and Germany have become alarmed by the speed of transition taking place in key Asian markets, particularly China, which is able to effect change without a carbon price because it simply drives investment through government mandates and with finance from state-owned banks.

These three countries, aware that their technologies are in danger of being shunted out of the market by the sheer weight of Chinese capital, have called for a tougher emissions reduction target – a unilateral move to 30 per cent by 2020 from the current target of 20 per cent – to provide a stronger carbon price, greater investment and a quicker transition. This has been fiercely resisted by emissions-intensive industries, who warn of carbon leakage.

Australia will juggle the same considerations: How to provide the incentive for investment in low carbon technologies while offering a shield to those industries waiting for their international competitors to be subject to similar costs. You can see where this might be heading – an interim carbon tax followed by a trading scheme that is able to be adjusted to more ambitious emission reduction targets down the track, or an ETS with a floor price.

The greater challenge will be to square this proposal away with other legislative measures that encourage quick and effective investment in energy efficiency, and can provide the right sort of long-term signals for renewables, while at the same time allowing those subsidies to be eased as the carbon price ramps upwards.
 
The IIGCC wants the EU to make a decision soon on whether to unilaterally set a more ambitious emissions reduction target for 2020, and also wants the EU to set an ambitious medium-term target for 2030 or 2035.

It is also pushing for mid- and long-term targets for increased energy efficiency in the buildings sector; for better coordinated European climate and energy policy; infrastructure development that would facilitate cross-border trade in energy and the development of renewable energy; and the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies.

The research found that 90 per cent of investment managers were deterred from investing in low carbon projects by the lack of long-term policies and by retrospective changes to member states’ climate change guidelines, while grid access and grid infrastructure issues were seen as a deterrent by 45 per cent.

Nearly two thirds of the fund managers said setting tougher targets and sending the carbon price higher would incentivise low-carbon investments, while 50 per cent saw a long-term and detailed roadmap out to 2030, even in the absence of international action, as one of the most important drivers for incentivising a shift in investment sentiment.

Source: www.climatespectator.com.au