Sustainable Energy for London Transport & European Investment Bank

The London Olympics is a timely opportunity for companies to set in place a long-term strategy to change employee travel habits, says Trewin Restorick. An extra 2,000 Boris bikes and 4,000 docking points will be laid on, but will London’s transport gain long-term sustainable benefits? And is the European Investment Bank as green as it is expected to be? If it put its clout behind renewable energy and energy efficiency, it could help to reconcile energy security and the fight against climate change, says Manana Kochladze.

Trewin Restorick of Global Action Plan in the Guardian (17 January 2012):

The Olympics is a timely opportunity for companies to set in place a long-term strategy to change employee travel habits, says Trewin Restorick in Guardian Sustainable Business.

An extra 2,000 Boris bikes and 4,000 docking points will be laid on, but will London’s transport gain long-term sustainable benefits?

It is easier to get people to think about changing their behaviour when their normal routines are disrupted. Such a disruption is heading London’s way during the Olympics. It’s an opportunity that could be used to encourage employees to adopt more sustainable travel behaviours.

Research from Global Action Plan shows that this opportunity could be missed unless companies change from just considering the short-term implications of the games to a longer-term, more strategic view.

Over the 100 days of the London Olympics, an anticipated 5.3 million visitors are expected. On some of the busiest days this will create 855,000 games-related trips. There will be more than 100 miles of roads designated as the Olympic route network. Some of these roads will have lanes for accredited vehicles only, while other roads in the capital will be used for Olympic events.

Despite the best endeavours of planners, this level of activity is certain to disrupt travel for many Londoners. The question is: can the disruption be used to encourage more long-term sustainable travel behaviour?

The travel dilemma

Recent research by Global Action Plan with 138 organisations shows that cutting carbon emissions from travel is one of the biggest challenges they face. Our research discovered that almost 40% of respondents do not have a strategic approach to cutting travel costs and emissions. Companies’ data collection is patchy at best and, if it is collected, only one in five use it to encourage staff to change their behaviour. Significant barriers also exist, including lack of senior leadership, the expectations of line managers and inadequate technology. These barriers mean that, although policies may be in place, they are not being widely implemented.

Will the Olympics help overcome these barriers and provide the momentum for significant long-term change? The results from Sydney after the 2000 games suggest that they do have the potential for stimulating action: 24% of Sydney employees changed their working hours and 22% worked remotely during the games. Interestingly, 27% chose to take annual leave.

Transport for London is certainly doing as much as it can to help organisations cope. Extensive advice is already included on its website. Particular emphasis has been placed on deliveries, where guidance includes changing delivery times, consolidating orders, pre-emptive maintenance and co-ordinating deliveries with neighbouring firms. More than 4,000 new Barclays cycle-hire docking points will also be installed and 2,000 new bikes will be provided.

The moped solution

Case studies are publicly available from companies such as Sainsbury’s, who acknowledge that usual methods of supplying stores and delivering to customers may not be possible. Their solutions include “first-response mopeds” designed to get engineers to stores rapidly to deal with maintenance problems. The initiative has many potential benefits, including greater efficiency, lower carbon emissions and the ability to maximise store sales. If successful, Sainsbury’s will extend the idea to all its stores within the M25.

Our research suggests that other organisations in London are also starting to realise the potential implications of the games: 69% believe that they will cause significant or medium disruption.

The most popular solution being considered is to allow more flexible working: 65% of companies are assessing this idea but, rather worryingly, only a quarter of them are looking to ensure that IT systems can cope with this significant change. Other popular solutions include negotiating fewer client meetings, negotiating changes with suppliers and encouraging greater use of video conferencing.

But what about the legacy?

All of these solutions are good business planning designed to address the travel disruption that the games might cause. However, our research shows that most companies are not thinking about how they can use the change to embed long-term sustainable solutions.

Only 17% of companies in our survey indicated that they would use the games as an opportunity to change employee travel habits. This is a huge opportunity that could be missed and suggests that organisations need to start thinking.

Trewin Restorick is chief executive of Global Action Plan

Source: www.guardian.co.uk

Manana Kochladze writes about Greening the European Investment Bank (23 December 2011):

BRUSSELS – Over the past four years, the European Investment Bank – the European Union’s house bank – has loaned €48 billion ($62 billion) to energy projects around the world. Indeed, the EIB lends more to the energy sector than to any other, except transport (and its €72 billion total loan portfolio in 2010 made it a bigger lender than the World Bank).

Investment on this scale can help countries worldwide to make vital progress on reducing greenhouse-gas emissions at a time when political solutions based on international agreement remain elusive. Unfortunately, the EIB’s lending priorities and energy-investment portfolio are making the problem worse.

In 2007, the EIB adopted its first energy policy – “Clean Energy for Europe: A Reinforced EIB Contribution.” Since then, the Bank has significantly increased its lending for renewable energy, which totaled €13 billion in 2007-2010.

Yet, over the same period, the bank compromised this performance by lending €16 billion ($21 billion) for fossil-fuels projects, one-third of the institution’s total energy lending. Indeed, the EIB’s fossil-fuel lending grew from €2.8 billion in 2007 to €5 billion in 2010, including new coal units in Germany and Slovenia.

In new EU member states, the EIB has supported mostly high-carbon energy, which traps these countries in unsustainable energy systems. The EIB also loaned North Africa and Syria €1.6 billion for fossil fuels between 2007 and 2010, which constituted 30% of total lending to the region.

Make no mistake: these are long-term investments. The energy infrastructure constructed today will be used for at least another 40 years, thereby tying countries to carbon-dependent paths. In Slovenia, for example, if the government implements EU-wide climate targets, the new EIB-financed Sostanj lignite unit will consume most of that country’s CO2 emissions quota by 2050. Meanwhile, the EIB invests only 5% of its energy portfolio in energy-efficiency programs.

The EIB argues that fossil-fuel lending supports strategic projects that safeguard European energy security. That is partly true: EU members’ political interests do drive some of this lending, particularly investments in oil and gas import infrastructure. The EU’s goals therefore embody an inherent contradiction – energy security versus climate-change prevention – which makes it difficult for the EIB to clean up its energy portfolio.

Yet a closer look shows that  €6.7 billion of the €16 billion that the EIB loaned for fossil fuels went to coal, gas, and oil-fired plants, both inside and outside the EU – not to EU energy-security projects. These figures suggest that the EIB may simply find dirty energy projects more familiar, easier to access, and more profitable.

But the EIB, which is both an investment bank and the EU’s public bank, is uniquely placed to lead markets, and should not merely be following them. As a public bank, its financial operations are guaranteed by European taxpayers’ money, and its capital is immense. Moreover, it benefits from the information and know-how of EU institutions.

If the EIB were to put its clout behind renewable energy and energy efficiency, it could help to reconcile energy security and the fight against climate change. And Europe could lead that fight if it fully exploited its renewable and energy-efficiency potential. The EU would then have little need to rely on dirty-energy imports from politically unstable parts of the world.

The EIB must act more courageously to clean up its energy-lending portfolio. Coal investments must be stopped immediately, and a plan to phase out all fossil-fuel lending should be prepared and implemented as soon as possible. The capital from fossil-fuel investments could be redirected towards green projects instead.

For regions such as Central and Eastern Europe, where the EIB argues that it is more difficult to find investment opportunities, the bank must develop targeted instruments and technical assistance that supports small-scale renewable-energy projects. It must also encourage governments to build flexible power grids.

Weaning Europe from its addiction to fossil fuels will not be easy. But if the EU’s house bank will not accept the challenge, it is difficult to imagine who will.

Manana Kochladze is a campaigner at CEE Bankwatch Network, an NGO that monitors international financial institutions active in Central and Eastern Europe. She is the winner of the 2004 Goldman Environmental Prize.

Source: www.project-syndicate.org

Global Airline Industry Chief: “Sustainability is our licence to grow”

Something we can expect to see a lot of this year: Airlines talking up their green credentials. From chicken fat to algae, carriers are busy looking for new ways to fuel their planes and reduce their emissions. Several airlines have already claimed “world-first” initiatives using jet bio fuel and Qantas has announced its intention to operate Australia’s first biofuel flight. British Airways will be getting jet fuel from its waste-to-energy  plant in East London by 2014.

In 2010, British Airways announced that it will start producing jet fuel from landfill waste to reach its target of 50 percent reduced emissions by 2050. The airline is partnering with biofuels company Solena to construct a waste-to-energy fuel plant in East London that will turn 500,000 tonnes of organic waste into 16 million gallons of jet fuel per year.

Jane E. Fraser in Sydney Morning Herald (22 January 2012):

Eco talk … airlines are under immense pressure to become greener.

Could fast food chains be the answer to airlines’ carbon emissions dilemmas?

IF THERE’S something we can expect to see a lot of this year, it is airlines talking up their green credentials. From chicken fat to algae, carriers are busy looking for new ways to fuel their planes and reduce their emissions.

Several airlines have already claimed “world-first” initiatives such as the first commercial biofuel flight, the first scheduled biofuel flight and the longest distance biofuel flight, and Qantas has announced its intention to operate Australia’s first biofuel flight early this year.

Airlines are very keen to be seen to be making these efforts, hence the amount of marketing hype accompanying each development, but there are also commercial imperatives driving them.

The global aviation industry produces only 2 per cent of the world’s man-made carbon emissions, according to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), but airlines are nevertheless under immense pressure to become greener.

The IATA has declared work on biofuels to be a major priority for the industry in the year ahead, with the association’s chief executive, Tony Tyler, saying it is “one of aviation’s great challenges” to reduce its carbon emissions.

“Sustainability is our licence to grow,” Tyler says.

The problem with biofuels and other green initiatives is that they can be expensive and their supply can be inconsistent.

Until the world goes into large-scale biofuel production and distribution, biofuel flights might remain in the same category as electric cars: a nice idea but not all that practical.

The executive chairman of the CAPA Centre for Aviation, Peter Harbison, says the greening of aviation is a complicated issue involving a combination of alternative fuels, new engine technology and practical measures such as efficient flying patterns.

“You add all those things together and you’re talking about growth [in aviation] without an increase in emissions,” Harbison says.

“The airlines are doing a tremendous amount; the things that get overlooked are things like load factors.

“Airlines used to regularly fly at 70 per cent full … now, when it’s more like 90 per cent, you’ve suddenly got a massive increase in efficiency.”

Harbison says while airlines are undoubtedly very good at marketing their green initiatives, their efforts are genuine.

“The airlines really don’t have any choice … oils are not going to last forever and then there’s the environmental side,” he says.

“It’s a hard call at the moment, when things are tough and they have short-term issues and competition, to focus on a long-term issue such as fuel but they really need to be doing it.”

Harbison says while airlines are doing their bit and manufacturers are making steady improvements to aircraft engine efficiency, governments need to come to the party to facilitate practical measures such as more efficient air traffic control.

“Governments are very good at putting taxes on private industry but doing little themselves,” he says.

On the positive side, aviation and other methods of transport could actually provide a use for the grease that comes out of the deep fryers at your favourite fast food chain.

A leading provider of biofuels, Dynamic Fuels in the US, says both animal fats and “yellow grease”, predominantly vegetable-based oil, can be turned into a clean fuel that replaces the need for petroleum.

Among the list of sources from which the company says it can create renewable, synthetic fuel are poultry fat, beef fat, soybean oil, oil from the jatropha plant and oil cultivated from algae.

Dynamic Fuels says it can even use fat recovered from wash water that has been used in the process of beef rendering.

Virgin Atlantic recently announced that it is working on a world-first “low carbon aviation fuel” derived from waste gases in industrial steel production.

The gases can be captured, fermented and chemically converted to jet fuel rather than being burnt into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide.

The carrier says the fuel, which has half the carbon footprint of the standard fossil fuel alternative, has the potential to be rolled out for worldwide commercial use.

Virgin Atlantic aims to be using the new fuel on selected routes in two to three years’ time and says the cost will be comparable to conventional jet fuel.

Falling into line

Among the many ideas put forward for greener aviation is aircraft flying in formation to improve aerodynamics. A report by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in Britain says long-haul aircraft flying in a V-shaped formation could yield fuel savings of up to 12 per cent and cut nitrogen oxide emissions (a major issue, along with carbon emissions) by a quarter.

The report suggests future planes could be autonomous, controlled by computers rather than pilots. Remote sensing equipment and infrared cameras would allow the aircraft to “autonomously position” itself to “make the maximum use of the vortexes from the aircraft ahead of them”.

Source: www.smh.com.au

How to Escape the Concrete Jungle:  Carbon Negative Cement?

The Portland cement industry acknowledges that it is responsible for 5% of man-made carbon dioxide emissions worldwide, more than aviation. UK-based Novacem is developing a cement that is, it claims, carbon negative. And an exciting new product from Lafarge, one of the world’s largest cement makers,  is Aether, which has 25-30% fewer CO2 emissions and can be made in existing plants with the same raw materials but needs less energy.

By Paul Miles in Financial Times  (20 January 2012):

Can the development of carbon-negative cement clean up the heavily polluting construction industry?

The town of Concrete in Skagit County, Washington, was named in 1909 when Washington Portland Cement and Superior Portland Cement were its most influential companies

In the early 1900s, inventor Thomas Edison had a flash of inspiration: concrete homes, cast in one piece. Concrete bathtubs and beds would be integral to the design. Occupants could even play concrete pianos. Unsurprisingly, such homes weren’t as successful as Edison’s light bulbs. Few were made – pouring concrete into a mould the size of a house proved tricky – but some still stand in New Jersey.

Concrete is made from cement mixed with water, sand and aggregate, such as gravel. The cement that had become popular in Edison’s day – Portland cement – was invented in England in 1824 and named after rock from the Isle of Portland that it resembled. Edison owned one of the first cement works in the US and needed customers. Concrete homes would require tonnes of the material. As for marketing, the Edison Portland Cement Company published a book, The Romance of Cement.

Our affair endured. Portland cement and concrete paved the way for America’s growth, for its dams and skyscrapers, and today is one of the most commonly used building materials worldwide. Strong, long-lasting, cheap (about 15 cents per kg) and … everywhere.

According to Cembureau, the body that represents the industry in Europe, more than 3bn tonnes of Portland cement were manufactured in 2010. That’s enough for 30bn tonnes of concrete, or about 4 tonnes per person. By 2050, worldwide production is estimated to reach 4.4bn tonnes.

This causes concern for some in the construction industry. “Whole mountains are being ground down to get the raw ingredients of cement,” says Rob McLeod, a designer of Passivhaus Homes (which need no or few fossil fuels to heat or cool). “Using one tonne of [Portland] cement results in nearly one tonne of CO2 being released into the atmosphere,” he says.

The Portland cement industry acknowledges that it is responsible for 5 per cent of man-made carbon dioxide emissions worldwide, 3 percentage points more than aviation (although aviation also produces other greenhouse gases and, at altitude, they are three times as damaging). “Portland cement requires that limestone be heated to 1,450 centigrade,” says Paul Tennis of the Portland Cement Association, which represents the industry in the US. “About 60 per cent of [CO2] emissions are due to the chemical reaction that occurs when limestone – calcium carbonate – is burnt.” Heating the kiln to such a high temperature – with fossil fuels – accounts for most of the remaining 40 per cent.

The most obvious way to reduce emissions is to use less of the stuff. Passivhaus is constructing homes with little or no concrete by building them on wooden pilings with small concrete foundations (or used tyres and rocks), rather than the conventional slabs that require 40 tonnes of concrete for a typical semi-detached house.

Reducing consumption is not a strategy that the cement industry is willing to consider. Its first line of attack is to improve fuel efficiency. Lafarge, one of the world’s largest cement companies, makes 150m tonnes of cement annually. It claims to have reduced CO2 emissions by 20 per cent over 20 years: from 774kg per tonne in 1990 to 606kg per tonne in 2010.

“We’ve refurbished old plants to make them more efficient and use less fossil fuel by burning alternatives, like old tyres, and biomass, such as rice husks,” says Vincent Mages, vice-president of climate change initiatives at Lafarge.

Portland cement can also be blended with waste (Mages prefers to call it “byproducts”) from other industries – fly ash from coal-fired power stations and blast-furnace slag from the iron industry. They contain minerals that, in the presence of an activator such as a small amount of Portland cement, form a “hydraulic cement” (one that can harden underwater).

“Through blending, [CO2] emissions from cement can be reduced by 40 per cent [compared to ordinary Portland cement]; a waste product is diverted from landfill and more mining is avoided,” says Mages. But there’s only so far you can go in reducing emissions when the chemical reaction that creates cement produces CO2.

A more exciting new product from Lafarge is Aether, which has 25-30 per cent fewer CO2 emissions than ordinary Portland cement. It can be made in existing plants with the same raw materials but, crucially, needs less energy. Aether is just one of “a handful” of alternatives that emit less CO2 than Portland cement, says Dr Martin Schneider of the European Cement Research Academy (ECRA). One alternative cement that “excites” him is Celitement, claimed to emit 50 per cent less CO2 than ordinary Portland cement in its manufacture.

Developing “alternative cements” is of increasing interest (ECRA held its first conference on the topic in May 2011). After all, only a quirk of history led to the use of Portland cement. Other cements suitable for mortar have been around for millennia. They may not suit all of today’s construction: Roman concrete, used to make the Pantheon, would have needed a year or more to fully harden.

With the growth of a low-carbon building industry, an alternative class of cements, called geopolymers, may soon be widely found in buildings and pavements. Australian company Zeobond has been developing E-Crete ready-mix concrete. It is made with a geopolymer cement that, claims chief executive Peter Duxson, emits up to 80 per cent less CO2 than ordinary Portland cement in its manufacture.

Zeobond started making geopolymer paving slabs in 2008. Now a library in Melbourne has been specified solely in E-Crete for its walls and pavement. The company produces 3,000 tonnes a year of E-Crete (the average Portland cement plant produces 1m tonnes of cement annually, enough for up to 10m tonnes of concrete) but “economies of scale hinder growth”. It’s a perennial problem with materials that haven’t stood the test of time. “No one wants to be the first to build with them,” says Duxson. “If you were going to build a 100-storey building tomorrow, I’d recommend you use ordinary concrete in the support columns but for the walls and driveway, let’s use a substitute with a better emissions profile.”

One product seems to trump the lot. UK-based Novacem is developing a cement that is, it claims, carbon negative. Based on magnesium silicates rather than calcium carbonate, Novacem claims it absorbs 30kg-100kg of CO2 per tonne. A pilot plant is currently producing 4-5 tonnes of the cement annually. Lafarge has invested £1m. By 2015 Novacem hopes to be making 25,000 tonnes. Raw materials are abundant at 20 tonnes worldwide, says chief executive Stuart Evans, and Novacem cement could be manufactured in existing plants with a retrofit. “It would ‘just’ need the equivalent of a heart and lung transplant.”

Perhaps Novacem will breathe new life into the heavily polluting cement industry and transform it into one that tackles the problem of CO2 emissions. Some experts are yet to be won over. It’s still very early days in the concrete jungle.

……………………………………………………………..

Build like an Egyptian

Are some of the building blocks of the Egyptian pyramids concrete rather than hewn rock? It’s a controversial theory but one that is gaining ground. Nuclear magnetic resonance studies by the University of Warwick appear to show that rock from Senefru’s Bent Pyramid is, in fact, man-made. “The ancient Egyptians knew how to make cement from local minerals and used it to bind together stones, forming a crude concrete,” says Dr John Hanna, who co-authored a 2011 paper in Materials Letters.

This ancient Egyptian cement was made from aluminosilicates and alkaline solution, says Hanna. “It was the forerunner of the modern geopolymer cements that are being developed today.”

Professor Joseph Davidovits, of the non-profit Geopolymer Institute in France, was one of the first to propose that Egyptians knew how to make cement and thus concrete. He coined the word geopolymer in the 1970s. These cements – not based on limestone – are fire and chemical-resistant.

Niche products for use in the home are being developed and some are commercially available such as a new chemical and stain-resistant grouting from BASF called PCI Geofug.

Source: www.ft.com

Could Rossi’s Cold Fusion Produce Cheap & Clean Energy?

Australia is showing sceptical interest in the work of Italian inventor Andrea Rossi, who claims his E-cat machine can take a small amount of energy and drive a reaction between atoms of hydrogen and nickel which can, through an unknown process, produce a large amount of energy, far exceeding the initial energy input. Cold fusion, or a low-energy nuclear reaction, is the seemingly impossible process by which a light element and a heavy element are fused, releasing vast amounts of energy at room temperature.

Nicky Phillips, Philip Chan in Sydney Morning Herald (13 January 2012):

An Italian inventor claims to have developed a machine that can produce large amounts of energy. If verified, entrepreneur Dick Smith is ready to award the group $200,000.

ALL going well, the world’s energy crisis may be solved in the auditorium of the Mullumbimby Ex-Services Club.

A community group will gather to discuss the work of an Italian inventor who claims to have developed a machine that can produce large amounts of energy from almost nothing.

The Byron New Energy Charitable Trust, founded by a local retiree, Sol Millin, is hoping to convince prospective investors of the technology’s merit. The mastermind behind the invention, physicist Andrea Rossi, will appear via Skype.

The entrepreneur Dick Smith has sent a consulting aerospace engineer, Ian Bryce, who has a science background, to assess the machine on his behalf.

If Mr Bryce, who as a member of the Australian Skeptics has experience testing the scientific veracity of all sorts of weird and wacky things, gives the technology the thumbs-up, Dick Smith will give the group $200,000.

Dr Rossi, who works for the US based Leonardo Corporation, claims his E-cat machine can take a small amount of energy and drive a reaction between atoms of hydrogen and nickel which can, through an unknown process, produce a large amount of energy, far exceeding the initial energy input.

Cold fusion, or a low-energy nuclear reaction, is the seemingly impossible process by which a light element and a heavy element are fused, releasing vast amounts of energy at room temperature.

If the process works, not only can it produce energy, but it can be done without the heat required by nuclear fusion, a process harnessed by the sun, and without the dangerous radiation produced by nuclear fission.

So far, Mr Rossi’s invention has been greeted with much cynicism by the scientific community.

Mr Bryce is sceptical too, but says the machine has the support of six physicists, including two Swedish professors.

”I’ll need to see some more evidence before committing the money,” he said.

Mr Millin, who first heard about the E-cat last year, believes a healthy dose of scepticism is a good thing.

Nevertheless, he is convinced the machine is the single device that could save the world.

”[It is] far more efficient than coal. It’s absolutely clean, no radiation and no bad waste,” he said.

Source: www.smh.com.au

Italian inventor Andrea Rossi has revealed that the first E-Cat Fusion factory will be located in Florida, USA. Plans are also underway to put up another factory in Massachusetts. As this develops, the plan to start production of the Rossi energy catalyzer device this autumn is going as scheduled. It is expected that the sales of the Low energy Nuclear Reaction technology powered E-Cat will commence in the US by winter of this year.

Although his company, Leonardo Corporation, is interested to have hedge funds investors, Rossi made it clear that he only welcomes them if they are will to invest a small percentage investment.  The inventor also elaborated that they are not so much interested in family investors since the E-Cat Fusion business is still quite risky. He also revealed that they plan to go public eventually.

A picture of the 10 kW Rossi energy catalyzer for home use is now emerging. In this radio interview done by Sterling D. Allan from PESN and conducted on the Australian radio show Smart Scarecrow, Rossi described the E-Cat as having the size of a portable computer. There will be no H2 canisters to be utilized in the energy catalyzer device because it can be recharged using the so called energy sticks.  Its reactor is designed to store and recycle the H2 hence it will only need picograms of H2.

The E-Cat Fusion home units will be able to run in self-sustain mode.  Rossi revealed that they were able to detect 512 keV 180 deg Gammas . In another development, he also said that the first 1 MW Rossi Plant manufactured is now in modification and that 12 additional 1 MW Rossi plants are currently in production. This latest news about the E-Cat is the first confirmation that the energy catalyzer device factory in Florida will be operational by autumn of this year.

The impact of Andrea Rossi’s e-cat fusion to the environment is often pointed out in the news. This low energy nuclear reaction technology can produce unlimited energy that is not only unbelievably cheap but clean as well. In fact, it could even help stop global warming. It is interesting to note that the device does not use radioactive materials. Thus, it does not leave radioactive waste and most importantly prevents environmental damage. It can be easily considered as a dream technology of many people who are concerned about the environment.

Wind and solar power are currently the two clean technologies that are popularly used today. However, these green alternatives are still not at par with the cost and efficiency of traditional fossil and nuclear power. If Rossi’s e-cat fusion proves valid and many people embrace its potential uses, the first commercially successful LENR device could be a genuine contender replacing fossil and nuclear in terms of energy production. Wind and solar power could merge with the Italian inventor’s energy catalyzer and utilize its unlimited energy. For sure, many people could become very excited if the technology makes a successful entry onto the scene. If this was the case, skeptics would stop all the bickering.

If the e-cat fusion penetrates the conventional and scientific community, it could strengthen the advocacy of environmental awareness. National and international debates surrounding the pros and cons of e-cat to the environment would take place. Of course, it is not going to be smooth and easy. Government policies might be affected with the entrance of a new technology that could solve the world’s energy concerns. There are many things that remain unknown when it comes to this device. If the e-cat proves that it really works, it might even lead to political revolts and environmental uprising.

Source: www.ecatfusion.com

Energy Efficient Empire State Building Cuts $4.4 Million off Annual Power Bill

Clean technology may have been a political hot potato in 2011, but energy efficiency is becoming downright cool. A major overhaul at the iconic Empire State Building helped raise its profile as that project  alone –  which included replacing 6,500 windows, adding insulation, upgrading lighting, and installing a digital wireless monitoring system – is powering a 38% annual energy reduction and US$4.4 million in annual savings.

By Joel Makower in Green Biz (19 January 2012):

Clean technology may have been a political hot potato in 2011, but energy efficiency is becoming downright cool.

A major overhaul at the iconic Empire State Building helped raise the profile of energy efficiency. That project — which included replacing 6,500 windows, adding insulation, upgrading lighting, and installing a digital wireless monitoring system — is powering a 38 percent annual energy reduction and $4.4 million in annual savings.

Publicity surrounding the project — from the likes of Presidents Clinton and Obama, not to mention major flogging by the companies and nonprofits involved with the $13 million project — amounts to a towering achievement for energy efficiency, which has remained in the background, an unheralded hero, for years.

The Empire State Building wasn’t the only aging star getting an energy makeover. Sixty-odd blocks downtown, the 104-year-old New York Stock Exchange building replaced more than 7,000 square feet of windows with super-insulating SeriousGlass. The windows were designed to increase the thermal performance by almost 60 percent and reduce solar heat gain by 40 percent compared to the original glass. Clearly, there’s a bull market for saving energy.

Such initiatives are destined to grow, thanks in part to federal government efforts to promote building efficiency, along with other initiatives by US cities and states. But the impacts are limited to date.

It’s not just buildings. The federal government issued the first-ever efficiency standards for heavy-duty trucks and proposed new standards for passenger vehicles. The truck standard will reduce fuel use by up to 23 percent, depending on truck type, while the passenger vehicle standard should bring average new vehicle fuel economy to just under 50 miles per gallon by 2025. The feds also introduced new efficiency standards for appliances like residential refrigerators and air conditioners and furnaces.

The big question is whether consumers will join in. To date, individuals haven’t found much appetite for efficiency measures, short of turning off switches or swapping out a few light bulbs — if that.

But that’s changing. Cool technologies are starting to make home energy efficiency more compelling, such as a smart thermostat from Nest Labs, created by one of the designers of Apple’s iPod. Smartphone apps from companies as varied as ecobee and General Electric allow for near-real-time information about home energy use.

Facebook joined forces with Opower and the Natural Resources Defense Council to allow members to benchmark their home energy use against a national database of millions of homes, as well as with their friends. Best Buy announced plans to start carrying home energy management tools, and Pike Research predicted that worldwide users of home energy management systems will reach 63 million by 2020, up from just over 1 million in 2011.

Clearly, we are only at the beginning of a new era of energy efficiency, as continuous innovations in techno-wizardry make our homes, vehicles, office buildings, appliances, and devices increasingly efficient. The ability for anyone to get real-time, detailed information about their energy use portends a new democratization of energy among consumers. The question, of course, is whether all of this intelligence will actually smarten, and change, individual habits.

Source: www.greenbiz.com

Norway to US: There Can Be Absolutely No Doubt about Climate Change

Norway’s minister of foreign affairs stood at a Petroleum Club lectern in Houston and delivered a few blunt words on climate change. Failure to set ambitious targets for cutting emissions and enact environmental regulations will erode the public’s confidence in its institutions. Meanwhile, the US Interior Department has a national strategy to help reduce climate change impacts on species, ecosystems and people and economies dependent on them, to involve state, tribal and federal agency partners.

By Ronnie Crocker, Houston Chronicle (6 January 2012):

Norway’s minister of foreign affairs stood at a Petroleum Club lectern in Houston and delivered a few blunt words on climate change, about which, he said, “there can be absolutely no doubt.”

“If you want to see evidence, go to the Arctic,” Jonas Gahr Støre said. His resource-rich country borders the polar region, where melting ice has expanded shipping lanes and cut sailing time on certain routes from Asia to Europe by 40 percent during parts of the year. Last year, Støre said, 34 ships used this “northeast passage,” up from six in 2010.

Environmental impact notwithstanding, governments risk political “revenge,” as Støre described it to an attentive World Affairs Council crowd, unless they start addressing this warming. Failure to set ambitious targets for cutting emissions and enact environmental regulations, he said, will erode the public’s confidence in its institutions.

“I think the time is comparatively short and the imperative is clear,” Støre said at the close of a question-and-answer period that drew so many written questions about his views on climate change that the moderator combined them into one final broad query.

Yet the foreign minister was hardly a flamethrower. He spoke warmly of Houston’s energy sector and encouraged more ventures in the “High North.”

He noted proudly that Norway is the world’s second-largest exporter of natural gas – providing a third of the gas used in Germany, Britain and France – and the sixth-largest exporter of oil.

He pointed out that those new thaw-induced shipping routes have the benefit of cutting fuel usage. And he did not address the contentious issue of human contribution to climate change until that final question, when he expressed “no doubt there’s a man-made dimension.”

Støre was equally clear that Norway does not intend to stop producing fossil fuels. Cutting natural gas supplies to Europe, he said, would only increase the use of more-polluting coal there.

He stressed that while it is dangerous to deny climate change, it also is dangerous to deny the world’s energy needs.

“I think denial is the worst,” he said, “and it can have a backlash that none of us should live to see.”

The crowd – mostly male, lots of suits, strongly representing the energy business – applauded Støre, and lines to greet him formed immediately once he’d finished speaking. In a cramped elevator afterward, one attendee noted to murmured agreement that the climate-change remarks appeared to have struck a nerve.

“It’s the man-made part that I think is a bunch of hogwash,” responded an elegantly dressed woman who appeared to be in her 60s. “I’m sure at the end of the last ice age there was global warming, too. The Earth warms and the Earth cools. God made it that way.”

Source: www.chron.com

UPI reports (19 January 2012):

The U.S. Interior Department has announced a strategy to help reduce climate change impacts on species, ecosystems and people and economies dependent on them.

Working with state, tribal and federal agency partners, the department has created a first draft national strategy to help policy makers and resource managers prepare for those impacts, a release from the Interior Department said.

The draft National Fish, Wildlife and Plants Climate Adaptation Strategy is available for public review and comment through March 5 at www.wildlifeadaptationstrategy.gov, the release said.

“The impacts of climate change are already here and those who manage our landscapes are already dealing with them,” Deputy Secretary of the Interior David J. Hayes said. “The reality is that rising sea levels, warmer temperatures, loss of sea ice and changing precipitation patterns — trends scientists have definitively connected to climate change — are already affecting the species we care about, the services we value, and the places we call home.”

The draft strategy includes descriptions of current and projected impacts of climate change on the eight major ecosystems of the United States, the fish, wildlife and plant species those ecosystems support and the vital ecosystem services they provide, the Interior Department said.

The strategy is being developed by a committee that includes government representatives from 16 federal agencies, five state fish and wildlife agencies and two inter-tribal commissions, it said.

Source: www.upi.com

Sanergy is First Award Winner in Katerva’s  Best Sustainability Idea

Katerva announced the winner of its first annual award for the Best Sustainable Idea, a process touted as the Nobel Prize of Sustainability by the non-profit organization. Sanergy, a company providing low-cost sanitation in developing countries, won the award for its work building waste treatment centres in Kenya – a $200 locally produced toilet, which is designed for 100 uses per day.

By Silvio Marcacci for Cleantechnica (6 January 2012):

The award for Best Sustainability Idea 2011

In a ceremony last month, Katerva announced the winner of its first annual award for Best Sustainable Idea, a process touted as the “Nobel Prize of Sustainability” by the non-profit organization.

Sanergy, a company providing low-cost sanitation in developing countries, won the award for its work building waste treatment centers in Kenya. Its technology, a $200, locally produced toilet, is designed for 100 uses per day. Toilets are emptied and the human waste taken to a Sanergy processing facility for conversion into biogas for electricity and crop fertilizer for homes and businesses.

The start-up, founded by MIT alumni, will receive $500,000 worth of in-kind consulting and assistance from a group of elite business and sustainability organizations to help bring their technology to the global market.

The Awards Process

Katerva is an international organization focused on identifying the most promising sustainability initiatives across the globe. Its rigorous year-long awards process starts with a global “spotter network” tasked with nominating hundreds of sustainability technologies in 10 categories.

Several panels of experts then evaluate the nominees on their initiative’s marketability, scalability, feasibility, originality, and potential impact. Finalists are chosen in each category, and then compete against each other for the grand prize, chosen by an “award council” of eight global sustainability thought leaders.

Other Clean Tech Finalists

Sanergy was the winner in the Materials & Resources category, but category winners were also recognized in the Behavioral Change, Economy, Energy & Power, Food Security, Human Development, Transportation, Urban Design, Protected Areas, and Gender Equality categories. Several category finalists have pioneered innovative new clean tech and environmental initiatives.

In the Energy & Power category, Barefoot Power was recognized for creating an alternative lighting technology that combines polycrystalline solar panels and LED lights to boost rural electrification and replace kerosene lamps used for lighting in developing countries. Its product has been deployed to low-income families in 15 African and Asian countries.

An invention named the Solarclave was the finalist in the Human Development category. The Solarclave, also invented by MIT students, is a solar-powered device that sterilizes surgical instruments in clinics that do not have reliable access to electricity. The low-cost device uses solar energy to generates high-pressure steam at 121 degrees Celsius in an insulated pressure vessel.

The Nissan Leaf won the Transportation category for being the first zero-emission all-electric vehicle to go into mass production at a price level affordable to a large segment of the population. Nissan was also cited for developing and supplying 240kv home-charging stations.

Finally, New York City’s Freshkills Park was recognized in the Urban Design category. Formerly one of the largest landfills in the world, Freshkills is being converted into a 2,200 acre park featuring wind and biogas energy generation, new ecosystems for wildlife, and recreational facilities.

Looking Ahead

2011 was the first year for the Katerva Awards, but during the ceremony, CEO Terry Waghorn said he has hopes for an even more impressive future, including more nominees and a cash prize for the 2012 winner.

Source: www.cleantechnica.com

Munich Re Totals Global Losses from Catastrophes in 2011

A sequence of devastating earthquakes and a large number of weather-related catastrophes made 2011 the costliest year ever in terms of natural catastrophe losses. At about US$ 380bn, global economic losses were nearly two-thirds higher than in 2005, the previous record year with losses of US$ 220bn. In Thailand, approximately 25% of the world’s supply of components for computer hard drives was directly impacted by the floods. With economic losses amounting to tens of billions of dollars, the floods were by far the costliest natural catastrophe in Thailand’s history.

Munich Re Announcement (4 January 2012):

Review of natural catastrophes in 2011: Earthquakes result in record loss year

A sequence of devastating earthquakes and a large number of weather-related catastrophes made 2011 the costliest year ever in terms of natural catastrophe losses. At about US$ 380bn, global economic losses were nearly two-thirds higher than in 2005, the previous record year with losses of US$ 220bn. The earthquakes in Japan in March and New Zealand in February alone caused almost two-thirds of these losses. Insured losses of US$ 105bn also exceeded the 2005 record (US$ 101bn).

Torsten Jeworrek, Munich Re Board member responsible for global reinsurance business: “Thankfully, a sequence of severe natural catastrophes like last year’s is a very rare occurrence. We had to contend with events with return periods of once every 1,000 years or even higher at the locations concerned. But we are prepared for such extreme situations. It is the insurance industry’s task to cover extreme losses as well, to help society cope with such events and to learn from them in order to protect mankind better from these natural perils.”

The year in figures

With some 820 loss-relevant events, the figures for 2011 were in line with the average of the last ten years. 90% of the recorded natural catastrophes were weather-related – however, nearly two-thirds of economic losses and about half the insured losses stemmed from geophysical events, principally from the large earthquakes. Normally, it is the weather-related natural catastrophes that are the dominant loss drivers. On average over the last three decades, geophysical events accounted for just under 10% of insured losses. The distribution of regional losses in 2011 was also unusual. Around 70% of economic losses in 2011 occurred in Asia.

Some 27,000 people fell victim to natural catastrophes in 2011. This figure does not include the countless people who died as a result of the famine following the worst drought in decades on the Horn of Africa, which was the greatest humanitarian catastrophe of the year. Civil war and political instability made it very difficult to bring effective aid to the victims.

The earth shakes: 11 March, the Tohoku earthquake

The most destructive loss event of the year was the earthquake of 11 March in Tohoku, Japan, when a seaquake with a magnitude of 9.0 occurred 130 km east of the port of Sendai and 370 km north of Tokyo. It was the strongest quake ever recorded in Japan. The damage from the tremors themselves was relatively moderate thanks to strict building codes. However, the quake triggered a terrible tsunami. The wave devastated the northeast coast of the main island Honshu. In some bays, the wave reached a height of up to 40 metres. Entire towns, roads and railway lines were washed away, hundreds of thousands of houses were destroyed. Some 16,000 people were killed in spite of high protective dykes and an excellent early-warning system. Without these protective installations, the death toll would have been much higher. The tsunami-exposed northeast of Japan is believed to have last been hit by a seismic sea wave of this size in the year 869.

The tsunami led to severe damage at several blocks of the Fukushima 1 nuclear power plant. Some areas within a radius of several kilometres of the plant will remain uninhabitable for a period of many years. Even without considering the consequences of the nuclear accident, the economic losses caused by the quake and the tsunami came to US$ 210bn – the costliest natural catastrophe of all time. The share of insured losses may amount to as much as US$ 40bn.

The fault line that triggered the quake was actually fairly short with a length of 450 km. However, the seabed at the fracture face shifted by 30 to 40 metres. Experts believe that an earthquake of this strength occurs there once every 500 to 1,500 years. The main shock was followed by thousands of aftershocks, the strongest of which, some 40 minutes after the main shock, had a magnitude of 7.9.

The earth shakes II: The Christchurch earthquake

Before the tsunami catastrophe in Japan, there had been an earthquake of 6.3 magnitude in Christchurch, New Zealand, on 22 February. The notable aspect of this event was that an earthquake of 7.1 magnitude had hit Christchurch just six months earlier. Unfortunately, the seismic waves were amplified due to reflection off an extinct volcano, so that far greater destruction was caused than would have normally been expected with an earthquake of this magnitude. The epicentre was located at a shallow depth and only a few kilometres from the city centre.

The losses were enormous. Numerous old buildings collapsed, and many new buildings were damaged despite the very high building standards. Some residential areas will not be rebuilt. Economic losses came to around US$ 16bn, of which approximately US$ 13bn was insured.

One day before Christmas, the earth shook again in Christchurch. Over a dozen people were injured following three strong earthquakes. However, in terms of their severity, the quakes were not as bad as the devastating event in February. Consequently, losses for the insurance industry from these aftershocks are expected to be significantly lower.

Prof. Peter Höppe, Head of Munich Re’s Geo Risks Research unit: “Even if it seems hard to believe given recent events, the probability of earthquakes has not increased. However, these severe earthquakes are timely reminders that the decisions on where to build towns need careful and serious consideration of these risks, especially where certain buildings are concerned, above all nuclear power plants. Also, building codes in regions exposed to earthquakes need to be made even stricter, so that buildings do not just remain standing to an extent sufficient to save lives but can be used again afterwards.”

Weather-related catastrophes: Floods in Thailand

The floods in Thailand stand out among the many weather-related catastrophes of 2011. They were triggered by extreme rainfall, which started in spring and peaked in the autumn. Due to its low elevation above sea level, the plain of central Thailand – where the capital Bangkok is situated – is prone to flooding throughout the rainy season from May to October. According to the authorities, this year’s floods were the worst for around 50 years. It is presumed that the La Niña natural climate phenomenon was a contributory factor, since the rainy season is often stronger during this phase.

The floods claimed the lives of some 800 people. Not only were hundreds of thousands of houses and vast expanses of farmland flooded, but also seven major industrial areas with production facilities belonging mainly to Japanese groups. A large number of electronic key component manufacturers were affected, leading to production delays and disruptions at client businesses. Approximately 25% of the world’s supply of components for computer hard drives was directly impacted by the floods. With economic losses amounting to tens of billions of dollars, the floods were by far the costliest natural catastrophe in Thailand’s history.

North America: Many storms but few hurricanes in North America

The tornado season was especially violent in the Midwest and southern states of the USA. Several series of storms with numerous tornadoes caused economic losses totalling some US$ 46bn, of which US$ 25bn was insured. Insured losses were thus twice as high as in the previous record year of 2010. The series of severe weather events can largely be explained by the La Niña climate phenomenon. As part of this natural climate oscillation, weather fronts with cool air from the northwest more frequently move over the central states of the USA and meet humid warm air in the south. Under such conditions, extreme weather events are more probable than in normal years.

Losses from North-Atlantic hurricanes were moderate. However, as in 2010, this was purely by chance. At 18, the number of recorded tropical cyclones in this season was some way above the long-term average (11) and above the average for the current warm phase with increased hurricane activity since the mid-1990s (15). The number of hurricane-strength storms (6) was in line with the long-term average. However, the number of tropical cyclones that made landfall, especially on the US coast, was very low. Only three named storms, one of them Hurricane Irene, made landfall in the USA. Irene caused economic losses in the Caribbean and USA totalling US$ 15bn, US$ 7bn of which was insured.

Another striking feature of this year was that, for the first time ever, US weather agency NOAA categorised a low-pressure system over the Mediterranean as a tropical storm. The low-pressure system Rolf formed on 3 November. It was caused by a ridge of cold air forming over the still warm sea (20°C). With peak wind speeds of 120 km/h, the storm “01M” made landfall on the French Mediterranean coast before dispersing. The storm produced extreme rainfall along the Cote d’Azur.

Munich Re stands for exceptional solution-based expertise, consistent risk management, financial stability and client proximity. Munich Re creates value for clients, shareholders and staff alike. In the financial year 2010, the Group – which pursues an integrated business model consisting of insurance and reinsurance – achieved a profit of €2.4bn on premium income of around €46bn. It operates in all lines of insurance, with around 47,000 employees throughout the world. With premium income of around €24bn from reinsurance alone, it is one of the world’s leading reinsurers. Especially when clients require solutions for complex risks, Munich Re is a much sought-after risk carrier. Our primary insurance operations are concentrated mainly in the ERGO Insurance Group. With premium income of over €20bn, ERGO is one of the largest insurance groups in Europe and Germany. It is the market leader in Europe in health and legal protection insurance. More than 40 million clients in over 30 countries place their trust in the services and security it provides. In international healthcare business, Munich Re pools its insurance and reinsurance operations, as well as related services, under the Munich Health brand. Munich Re’s global investments amounting to €193bn are managed by MEAG, which also makes its competence available to private and institutional investors outside the Group.

Source: www.munichre.com

Flood Experts Recommend Green Roofs to Reduce Water Flow Speed

Rooftop rain gardens are relatively inexpensive and can hold large amounts of water. And if the authorities accept a recommendation by an expert panel on floods to mandate that all buildings have these green roofs, they can be quick to install, too.  These rooftop gardens, traditionally installed to beautify the skyline and reduce the heat around a building, can help absorb rainwater and reduce the speed of water flow.

By Jessica Cheam,  Straits Times (13 January 2012):

Rooftop rain gardens are relatively inexpensive and can hold large amounts of water. And if the authorities accept a recommendation by an expert panel on floods to mandate that all buildings have these green roofs, they can be quick to install, too.

The 12-man panel, tasked by the Government to look into solving Singapore’s flooding woes in the long run, has recommended that building owners be required by law to build green roofs. These rooftop gardens, traditionally installed to beautify the skyline and reduce the heat around a building, can help absorb rainwater and reduce the speed of water flow.

Local contractors The Straits Times interviewed yesterday said these gardens would cost from $20,000 to $180,000, depending on their size.

Property developer City Developments, a leader in green buildings here, spends $150 to $400 per sq m for a green roof for a new building, and $105 to $150 per sq m to retrofit an existing one. For a residential project with an extensive green roof, installation generally does not exceed 1 per cent of total construction cost, it said.

Contractors say such gardens can store anything from about six to 34 litres per sq m. The size can range from 200 sq m for a commercial building, to 1,200 sq m for the entire roof of a multi-storey Housing Board carpark.

The National Parks Board (NParks) said the cost of such gardens is usually between $100 and $150 per sq m, which means a commercial green roof costs between $20,000 and $30,000 and can hold 6,800 litres. An HDB carpark roof costs $120,000 to $180,000 and can hold 40,800 litres of water.

Mr Andy Chew, director of local firm Elmich, which designs, builds and installs green roofs, said the idea of rooftop gardens to help alleviate flooding could work for Singapore as large amounts of rainwater can be stored in the garden’s water retention system.

This comprises soil-like material, membranes and storage trays. The water is then eventually absorbed by the plants as they grow. He added that the soil-like material also helps to regulate the flow of water; therefore, the speed of any excess water that flows down to ground level is reduced. The system is also light and can typically be installed in an average building.

Elmich, which has been in the business for 26 years and has installed gardens such as the one atop Orchard Central mall, offers systems that can store between six and 28 litres per sq m.

Another firm, Prince’s Landscape & Construction, offers a proprietary solution whose water reservoir feature can store up to 34 litres of water per sq m.

Its manager Eugine Spicer said its roof gardens can help alleviate flooding as ‘the sudden flow of water is minimised’. Depending on the size of the project and whether there is easy rooftop access, installing a green roof of about 400 sq m could take a month. Growing the plants takes two to three months before that, said Mr Spicer.

Prince has installed green roofs for properties such as Marina Bay Sands, and typically installs gardens 500 sq m in size at a cost of $150 per sq m.

NParks deputy director of horticulture and community gardening Ng Cheow Kheng told The Straits Times that to date, 36ha of skyrise greenery – greenery planted on rooftops or vertically on walls – have already been installed in buildings across Singapore.

NParks has a Skyrise Greenery Incentive Scheme which pays for half of installation costs, up to a maximum of $75 per sq m of green roof and $750 per sq m of green wall. Since the scheme launched in 2009, it has seen 40 buildings get fitted with 1.1ha of green roofs and 0.1ha of green walls.

Under the Building and Construction Authority’s green building rating scheme Green Mark, buildings that feature such green roofs get extra points.

HDB has also piloted green roofs in existing housing blocks in recent years to reduce heat build-up and slow down stormwater. Its first eco-friendly residential project, Treelodge@ Punggol, features a rain-harvesting system where water collected is put to uses such as washing common areas.

PUB said it is studying the recommendations of the expert panel and will respond at a later date.

Benefits of rooftop gardens

A green roof, also known as a rooftop garden or rain garden, is a roof that is partially or completely covered with plants and provided with an irrigation system.

Such greenery reduces the ‘urban heat island’ effect which makes a built-up area significantly warmer than its surroundings.

Green roofs also:

Conserve energy use in the building by keeping temperatures down so less air-conditioning is needed;

Improve air quality;

Reduce noise pollution;

Enhance a building’s aesthetics;

Store rainwater and reduce the amount and speed at which water flows to the ground.

Source:  www.greenbusinesstimes.com

Ken Hickson has the Last Word:  Buildings, Books, Bananas & the British

Somehow I have found time to do some reading in recent weeks, in between a busy round of visits to 20-plus Singapore properties to promote energy efficiency measures for the i Light Marina Bay festival in Singapore 9 March to 1 April.

One book – “How Bad are Bananas?”  – was remarkably relevant to the job at hand, in spite of its mysterious title.

Singapore is certainly getting the message about making its buildings more sustainable, energy efficient and pleasant to occupy. Research is showing conclusively that green buildings are not just about meeting higher standards, but they are so much better to live in and work in. Wellness comes to buildings as well as people.  If we can retrofit buildings better and faster, we can rid ourselves of the sick building syndrome altogether. Read More

Somehow I have found time to do some reading in recent weeks, in between a busy round of visits to 20-plus Singapore properties to encourage them to take up energy efficiency measures at the time of the i Light Marina Bay festival in Singapore 9 March to 1 April.

One book – “How Bad are Bananas?”  – was remarkably relevant to the job at hand, in spite of its mysterious title. You should know I’m a great fan of bananas and don’t want anyone to malign them!

Two writers I admire had good things to say about it: Bill Bryson said he couldn’t remember “the last time I read a book that was more fascinating and useful and enjoyable all at the same time”.

Chris Goodall, author of “How to Live a Low Carbon Life” described it thus:

“Mike Berners-Lee knows more about carbon footprints than anyone else in the UK.  Enjoyable, fun to read and scientifically robust. A triumph of popular science writing.”

Without wishing to bore you with the details, or spoil your fun reading it yourself, I must say it is an extremely readable and useful book, full of easy to understand messages, as well as tips to apply to home, business, community or country.

You can look out for it at a library or bookshop near you, or go to Amazon, as I know it’s there – in print or digital form.  Interestingly, the author says that unless you read hundreds of e-books, having a digital reading device adds significantly to your carbon footprint. Real books are better for you.

So are bananas!

Which brings me back to what I’ve been doing in addition to reading about bananas.

Energy Efficiency Gets Priority

Singapore is certainly getting the message about making its buildings more sustainable, energy efficient and pleasant to occupy. Research is showing conclusively that green buildings are not just about meeting higher green standards, but they are so much better to live in and work in.

People working in green marked buildings are more productive and less inclined to take sick leave. Wellness comes to buildings as well as people.  If we can retrofit buildings better and faster, we can rid ourselves of the sick building syndrome altogether.

I was impressed not only with the quality of the green buildings visited in Singapore over recent weeks, but also with the desire by building owners and managers to see that they are being operated in the most energy efficient way possible. Going the extra mile – or reducing kilowatt hours of electricity used – is increasingly becoming an objective for office blocks, hotels, convention halls and shopping centres.

For the purpose of the lighting festival, properties are asked to see where they can make some significant reductions in energy over a 24-day period. Many are already doing as much as they can, but they are prepared to do more. Hopefully, many will come up with meaningful measures which they can continue with, saving energy and money at the same time.

Switching off lights selectively and turning up the air conditioning can work wonders!

Leading Lights

CDL properties are already leading with green buildings and sustainable practices in Singapore. One of the best of CDL properties visited was City Square Mall where the visitor or shopper is shown and told in the nicest way possible what’s going on to provide a pleasant experience and energy efficient environment.

Asia Square was an eye-opener. A brand new office tower – with a sister block under construction – boasts a massive open meeting place space at street level , along with a spacious food court, and unique features such as 400 bicycle racks with associated shower rooms and lockers for the active commuter.  There’s also an Alpha Bio Fuels plant on site to put used cooking oil to good use.

Described as “Singapore’s most advanced green commercial building, Asia Square supports a sustainable way or life as well as work”. The building developer and manager MGPA has also produced one of the best Sustainability Guides ever to see the light of day.

In an inspection tour that ranged from tourist attractions like Singapore Flyer to the very functional Marina Barrage (for water storage and treatment), along with the Pit Stop Buildings for Singapore’s Formula One motor race, the intentions were clear. They are already doing a lot, but are prepared to do more to save energy.

Hotels like the Pan Pacific, The Fullerton and the Conrad all have energy saving measures in place, but will consider where they can do more.

A big complex like Suntec City – with a large convention/exhibition centre, five office towers and shopping mall – is taking incremental steps to reduce energy consumption during the lighting festival.

Then there’s the massive commercial properties of One Raffles Quay, the Marina Bay Financial Centre, along with its connecting Link Mall, all ready to add to their energy efficiency and green building credentials in the “Switch Off, Turn Up” campaign.

Marina Bay Sands is a stand out in more ways than one.  The prominent casino, hotel, convention centre, shopping mall  and entertainment complex is committed to support i Light Marina Bay as a major sponsor as well as see how where it can reduce its energy-impact for the duration of the March lighting festival.

There’s more work to do, more buildings to visit and more good intentions to tap, but what an insight into the greening of Singapore buildings and desire of so many to see how they can do more for sustainability and energy efficiency.

Go to www.ilightmarinabay.sg  for more good insight into the event and for an article by Jenny Marusiak, on the lighting festival as well as its connection with Liveable cities, energy efficiency and buildings go to:  http://www.eco-business.com/features/liveable-cities-series-illuminating-the-path-to-sustainable-lighting/

Climate Action & London Olympics

We’ve referred elsewhere to what the London Olympics is doing for sustainability and it was great to catch up with John Pearson at the British High Commission to hear of his work throughout South East Asia promoting climate change awareness and action. Notably, the British appear to be the only official diplomatic agents in Asia for climate change.

The British also marked the 200 days to go until the London Olympics, inviting Singapore Olympic athletes to share in a flag raising ceremony.

In the same week, British High Commissioner Antony Phillipson hosted a “sustainability seminar” at his Eden Hall home, featuring none other than Martin Blake. The genial diplomat even wondered whether he could introduce some meaningful energy efficiency measures at the historic British mansion in Nassim Road.

Expect to hear more about sustainability for events  like the London Olympics and Singapore’s i Light Marina Bay, as well as who’s doing what for energy efficiency at home and abroad.

In coming weeks and months, here are some business names to look out for too: Green Koncepts, Phoenix Solar, Power Seraya, YTL, Power Save, GreenBizCheck, Carbon Soft and Carbon Systems.

Source: www.sustain-ability-showcase.com and www.abccarbon.com