New Energy Management Standard & Urban Farming for Singapore

Supplier scorecards from large
companies such as Kaiser Permanente and Walmart, along with global carbon
registries such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), have driven a marked
increase in the number of companies reporting sustainability and environmental
data. Large organizations and the CDP should now add ISO 50001, the new energy
management standard, as driving its adoption will lead to energy savings,
reduced carbon emissions and more efficient supply chains. Meanwhile, word has
it that Singapore’s highly urbanised population could be turned into an
advantage by pursuing urban farming. It could leverage on its dense population
to find unique, urban solutions to food security.

The Energy Management Standard
Walmart Should Add to Its Scorecard

By Paul Baier

Published August 30, 2011

GreenBiz

Supplier scorecards from large
companies such as Kaiser Permanente and Walmart, along with global carbon
registries such as the Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP), have driven a marked
increase in the number of companies reporting sustainability and environmental
data. Large organizations and the CDP should now add ISO 50001, the new energy
management standard, to their company scorecards and questionnaire. Driving
adoption of ISO 50001 will lead to energy savings, reduced carbon emissions and
more efficient supply chains.

What is ISO 50001?

ISO 50001 is the new ISO
certification that implements a foundation process for energy management. ISO
standards enhance the business process and have been around for decades. Many
companies throughout the world have adopted these standards for quality (9001)
and environmental management (14001).

ISO certification requires
third-party verification. This certification increases consumer confidence and
improves the company’s brand image. More than a million companies are now
certified with the ISO quality standard (9001), and some even have ISO 9001
signs and banners touting this achievement on the front lawn of their
facilities.

Key elements of the ISO 50001
energy management standard include establishing an energy baseline, energy goals,
monitoring metrics, and management oversight.
Particularly important is that the standard focuses on ongoing
monitoring and improvement, not just being a snapshot in time of a facility or
operations.

When standards are not based on
continuous improvement and monitoring, performance can lag, which can lead to a
false sense of confidence. We already see this with some new buildings that
were as LEED-certified as new builds but became out of spec and, in some cases,
below code over time because management’s attention to operations waned after
achieving certification.

The ISO 50001 standard can be
applied to a single facility or multiple facilities.

Who is using it?

Leading organizations are already
adopting 50001, including Delta Electronics in China, Schneider Electric of
France, Dahanu Thermal Power in India, AU Optronics of Taiwan, The Province of
China, and Bad Eisenkappel in Australia. Other companies such as Alcoa, 3M,
Eaton and Nissan are becoming ISO 50001 certified in conjunction with the Department
of Energy’s Superior Energy Performance program.

Why is it promising?

The 50001 standard directly helps
companies save money. In addition, with improvement of the energy management
process being tied with company goals, third-party verification directly
enables companies along the supply chain to differentiate, and purchasing
companies have more confidence in their supply chain.

Why do we need another
certification standard?

It’s certainly true that the
world is flooded with product- and company-level certifications.
Ecolabelling.org lists 424 of them, and companies should be very cautious about
expanding their supplier criteria. Organizations, however, should adopt
standards that have a proven ability to save money and provide competitive
differentiation. ISO 50001 promises to be one of these standards.

Adopting ISO 50001 is
advantageous because the ISO framework is already a well-accepted global
standard that is supported by hundreds of ISO practitioners and is also
familiar to senior management. Some organizations already certified with 9001
and 14001 are currently considering 50001.

The contents of company and
supplier scorecards matter. The questions asked on scorecards, CDP submittals
and other rating systems matter. When LEED award points for bike racks for its
green building certification, hundreds of building owners added bike racks,
even if there was no clear, safe way to use bikes.

When Walmart added a question
about carbon footprint to its sustainability scorecards, thousands of suppliers
decided to calculate their company’s carbon footprint for the first time.

Such companies as Walmart and IBM
will improve the competitiveness of their supply chain by asking their
suppliers if key facilities are ISO 50001 certified. We’ve seen that business
benefits from a more systematic focus on quality and environmental management,
and a similar opportunity exists with a more methodological focus on energy
management.

Although scorecards don’t
actually need more questions, ISO 50001 questions should be added to some of
the less-effective ones. This allows for more focus on energy reduction, where
the best financial and environmental returns reside.

Paul Baier is vice president of
sustainability consulting at Groom Energy and a senior contributor at
GreenBiz.com.

Read more from Paul Baier

Source: www.greenbiz.com

Yang Razali Kassim, For The
Straits Times 24 Aug 11;

FOOD security is an emerging
global concern. Certain realities define food security planning for Singapore:
It is not an agricultural country, has not much land to grow its own food, and
is almost totally dependent on food imports.

As such, Singapore may be viewed
as being just a passive food importer – perpetually subject to the vagaries of
external forces when it comes to feeding its own people.

Such a reading, however, could
change.

There are indications of a
fundamental rethink in Singapore’s food security strategy. Indeed, a mental map
of a multi- pronged strategy, spearheaded by research and development, is
emerging on Singapore’s food security front that could turn old limitations
into new strengths.

The clearest indication came out
of the inaugural International Conference on Asian Food Security on Aug 10-12,
held here and initiated by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

Senior Parliamentary Secretary
for Defence and National Development Mohamad Maliki Osman spelt out how
Singapore is moving to become a contributing player to support the global quest
for a more stable global food system amid volatile supplies and prices.

There are four prongs to this
strategy. The first is research and development. Singapore will leverage on its
excellent infrastructure, intellectual property regime, a pro-enterprise tax
structure and a financial ecosystem that supports both publicly and privately
funded research.

Its National Research Foundation
recently awarded a US$8.2 million (S$9.9 million) grant to a joint project
between the National University of Singapore, the Temasek Life Sciences
Laboratory and the International Rice Research Institute, to address pressing
food concerns such as the need to develop rice strains that can adapt to
climate change. The potential benefits extend beyond Singapore.

The second strategy, related to
the first, is to grow Singapore into an agribusiness hub. The Economic
Development Board is encouraging big players to set up their operational
headquarters and trading operations, as well as engage in upstream research, in
Singapore.

Two examples are Syngenta and
Bayer CropScience, whose research laboratories aim to develop ‘elite’ crop
varieties for the region.

The third strategy is to turn
Singapore’s own domestic market into a ‘test lab’ of sorts, especially for
urban agriculture.

Singapore’s highly urbanised
population could be turned into an advantage by pursuing urban farming. Indeed,
Singapore could leverage on its dense population to find unique, urban
solutions to food security.

Agricultural production can be
creatively brought within the city space, such as through ‘rooftop farming’,
thus reducing Singapore’s reliance on food imports.

The success of urban farming can
eventually be shared and replicated in other cities, said Dr Maliki. One pilot
project on rooftop farming was started last year when the Agri-Food and
Veterinary Authority engaged a local company, SkyGreens, to do a commercial
‘vertical farming’ prototype.

Singapore’s potential in urban
farming has attracted quiet international attention. The Urban Agriculture
Network (UAN) set up under the auspices of the United Nations Development
Programme once declared Singapore a possible world leader in some aspects of
urban agriculture – food production from its residential and commercial
rooftops.

In other words, the rooftops of
thousands of HDB blocks can potentially be turned into urban farmland. New
economic opportunity for Singapore could come from two particular techniques -
aeroponics (growing plants without soil and water) and aquaponics (growing plants
using recycled fish waste).

According to the UAN’s Western
Pacific offshoot in Australia, these two technology spin-offs from hydroponics
and aquaculture could make Singapore a world leader in rooftop production of
fresh vegetables, fruit and flowers; certain types of seafood in specially
designed containers; and a greener, cleaner cityscape that contributes less to
global warming and therefore climate change.

A fourth, but no less important,
strategy is the shift towards greater local production of three key food items
- eggs, leafy vegetables and fish. A $20 million Food Fund, launched in
December 2009, is in place to incentivise farms to explore new farming
technologies to ensure Singapore’s food supply resilience.

Singapore’s multi-pronged
strategy fits in with the search for holistic solutions to solve food security
issues. It dovetails with at least three fronts in the global action to tackle
food security: Asean, through the Asean Integrated Food Security Framework; the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum through measures to enhance food
security within the Asia-Pacific region; and the Group of 20 which aims to
tackle food price volatility through international coordination.

In a nutshell, Singapore’s
overall strategy is to seek win-win partnerships locally, regionally and
globally as food security issues transcend national boundaries.

By taking care of its own needs
while being useful to the world, Singapore is now playing its part in tackling
the global food security problem.

The writer is a Senior Fellow
with the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies, Nanyang Technological

Source: www.wildsingaporenews.blogspot.com