The New Paper ponders recently on whether Singapore needs a new Ministry of Energy to tackle energy issues more holistically and ensure our future energy security. The article says that “energy security lies in a muddy middle zone” and “there’s no one body fully in charge”. It also suggests some ideas on what a Ministry of Energy can do, such as:

• Buy our own oil field
• Buy overseas farms to grow food
• A law to set a minimum temperature in Singapore offices
• Forge closer relations with oil-producing countries

The government’s energy policies on energy conservation, energy efficiency, energy market regulation and energy industry are pursued by the different relevant ministries and agencies. This is understandable as energy issues are often complex and cut across different sectors and industries.

Nevertheless, the government recognises the need to have an integrated approach to dealing with energy and has outlined six strategies in the National Energy Policy Report. One of the strategies is to develop whole-of-government approach to energy policy which is led by the Energy Policy Group (EPG). The EPG consists of representatives from the:

• Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI);
• Ministry of Finance (MOF);
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA);
• Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR);
• Ministry of Transport (MOT);
• Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR);
• Building and Construction Authority (BCA);
• Economic Development Board (EDB);
• Energy Market Authority (EMA);
• Land Transport Authority (LTA); and
• National Environment Agency (NEA)

The EPG has four working groups on Economic Competitiveness, Energy Security, Climate Change and the Environment, and Energy Industry Development, headed by the different agencies shown in the diagram below:

So, do we need a Ministry of Energy? On paper, it seems that there is no need for one as the energy policies are managed and coordinated by the EPG. But on the ground, the administrative difficulties and layers of bureaucratic red tape accumulated across 11 ministries and agencies in the EPG might pose a problem to the effectiveness and timeliness of the energy policies. We think that it might be better to have a Ministry of Energy which is accountable and focused, to ensure energy security and tackle the threat of climate change.

Source: The New Paper; National Energy Policy Report. Image: National Energy Policy Report.

Share This

The Hot Topic: How To Tackle Global Warming And Still Keep The Lights On by Gabrielle Walker and Sir David King, discusses the problems and solutions of climate change in a clear and straightforward way. The authors explain the science of global warming and describe the possible changes that could take place due to climate change. Despite the serious problem of climate change, the authors believe that this “is neither a time for pessimism nor for denial. It is a time for constructive, determined action.” What we need are a combination of technological and political solutions.

Technological solutions are about using energy more efficiently, reducing carbon emissions from transport and switching to cleaner sources of energy generation. But technological solutions are not enough, what we need too is the political willpower. Political solutions require the involvement of industrialised nations and rapidly developing nations, working together and moving beyond the Kyoto Protocol.

The book ends with how we can change the world through the choices we make to influence companies and politicians to embrace sustainability. As the authors say, “We are all part of the problem, and each of us will need to be part of the solution.”

Borrow it from your local library or buy it from our AsiaIsGreen Bookstore.

Share This

World Environment Day is celebrated on 5 June each year to increase environmental awareness and action. This year’s focus is on climate change, with the theme, Kick the Habit! Towards a Low Carbon Economy. There will be activities around the world on 5 June to highlight the problem of global warming and climate change, and how we can do our part to reduce carbon emissions. Check out the World Environment Day website for more details and activities.

The message for World Environment Day 2008 by United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, is shown below:

MESSAGE FOR WORLD ENVIRONMENT DAY 2008

KICK THE CARBON HABIT

Addiction is a terrible thing. It consumes and controls us, makes us deny important truths and blinds us to the consequences of our actions. Our world is in the grip of a dangerous carbon habit.

Coal and oil paved the way for the developed world’s industrial progress. Fast-developing countries are now taking the same path in search of equal living standards. Meanwhile, in the least developed countries, even less sustainable energy sources, such as charcoal, remain the only available option for the poor.

Our dependence on carbon-based energy has caused a significant build-up of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Last year, the Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change put the final nail in the coffin of global warming sceptics. We know that climate change is happening, and we know that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that we emit are the cause.

We don’t just burn carbon in the form of fossil fuels. Throughout the tropics, valuable forests are being felled for timber and making paper, for pasture and arable land and, increasingly, for plantations to supply a growing demand for biofuels. This further manifestation of our carbon habit not only releases vast amounts of CO2; it also destroys a valuable resource for absorbing atmospheric carbon, further contributing to climate change.

The environmental, economic and political implications of global warming are profound. Ecosystems — from mountain to ocean, from the Poles to the tropics — are undergoing rapid change. Low-lying cities face inundation, fertile lands are turning to desert, and weather patterns are becoming ever more unpredictable.

The cost will be borne by all. The poor will be hardest hit by weather-related disasters and by soaring price inflation for staple foods, but even the richest nations face the prospect of economic recession and a world in conflict over diminishing resources. Mitigating climate change, eradicating poverty and promoting economic and political stability all demand the same solution: we must kick the carbon habit. This is the theme for World Environment Day 2008. “Kick the Habit: Towards a Low Carbon Economy”, recognizes the damaging extent of our addiction, and it shows the way forward.

Often we need a crisis to wake us to reality. With the climate crisis upon us, businesses and governments are realizing that, far from costing the Earth, addressing global warming can actually save money and invigorate economies. While the estimated costs of climate change are incalculable, the price tag for fighting it may be less than any of us may have thought. Some estimates put the cost at less than one per cent of global gross domestic product — a cheap price indeed for waging a global war.

Even better news is that technologies already exist or are under development to make our consumption of carbon-based fuels cleaner and more efficient and to harness the renewable power of sun, wind and waves. The private sector, in particular, is competing to capitalize on what they recognize as a massive business opportunity.

Around the world, nations, cities, organizations and businesses are looking afresh at green options. At the United Nations, I have instructed that the plan for renovating our New York headquarters should follow strict environmental guidelines. I have also asked the chief executives of all UN programmes, funds and specialized agencies to move swiftly towards carbon neutrality.

Earlier this year, the UN Environment Programme launched a climate neutral network — CN Net — to energize this growing trend. Its inaugural members, which include countries, cities and companies, are pioneers in a movement that I believe will increasingly define environmental, economic and political discourse and decision making over the coming decades.

The message of World Environment Day 2008 is that we are all part of the solution. Whether you are an individual, an organization, a business or a government, there are many steps you can take to reduce your carbon footprint. It is message we all must take to heart.

Source: World Environment Day, UNEP. Image: World Environment Day, UNEP.

Share This

Check out Al Gore’s new slideshow on climate change, presented at TED. He gives us new evidence on the climate change problem, and argues persuasively and emotionally about the need for a worldwide global mobilisation to “solve this crisis and lay the basis for a bright and optimistic human future”.

Source: TED.

Share This

Three of our favourite heroes (Thomas Friedman, Al Gore and Bono) on the same stage at the World Economic Forum, discussing the need to have solutions that address both extreme poverty and climate change. Includes a very funny joke where Bono confessed his oil addiction sins to Father Al. Enjoy!

Source: Youtube.

Share This

The seminar on Post-Bali UN Climate Change Conference: What Lies Ahead? was conducted today and we share some notes from the four speakers.

Dr Chen Gang spoke on the need for economic incentives to help in the success of post-Bali negotiations. Economic and social incentives are requisites for states to join international cooperation. The Bali conference emphasises incentives, such as the three flexible mechanisms and the new funding for adaptation in developing countries.

Dr Youngho Chang spoke on a sustainable post-Kyoto regime which needs to address unresolved issues such as the historical liability for accumulated carbon emissions by developed countries, and engagement plans for large current and potential carbon emitters. A post-Kyoto regime must include all countries, contributions by all, and tools for penalising non-compliance. The principles of efficiency and equity should be included.

Dr Geh Min gave her take on Singapore’s roadmap for climate change and the speech given by the Prime Minister in Bali. Singapore is unlikely to go for absolute reductions but will use carbon intensity as targets. Our strategy is on energy efficiency for the short to medium term, and renewable energy for the long term. There is also a need to develop capacity in the field of climate change and play catch-up as we are rather late in addressing the issues of climate change. Singapore is also supporting the idea of reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD), which would not only reduce emissions but also reduce the haze problem and allow us to play a potential regional regulatory role in REDD.

Professor Kog Yue Choong addressed the issue of urban planning in Singapore and climate change. Due to our highly urbanised environment and lack of natural disasters, Singaporeans are less concerned about the environment. We are also less successful in changing behaviors such as littering, keeping the toilets clean, and recycling. He said that economic and business principles still underscore urban planning in Singapore. There is also ambivalence about whether planners should address sustainability and put it on the agenda. Singapore also have to relook its transportation sector, including getting our urban mobility right and studying the possibility of cross-subsidies for private to public transport.

Share This

We were going through various news and reports from the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali. All of a sudden, we had this feeling that everything and nothing was happening in Bali.

EVERYTHING was happening in Bali - multitude of speeches, debates, negotiations, demonstrations and reports from thousands of government officials, NGOs and businesses.

Yet we felt that NOTHING was happening that addressed what really need to be done about the problem of climate change. It’s the same old story - developed countries should take responsibility and cut emissions first; developing countries should have the rights to develop economically and increase emissions; more financial and technological resources should be given to developing countries; it’s impossible to tackle climate change without the participation of the United States; carbon trading, renewable energy and technology will solve the problem; etc.

We are not dismissing the above actions; they’re necessary and important. We just feel that something is not right? Maybe we are just ignorant of what’s happening in Bali? Maybe it’s information overload? Or maybe we’re just feeling tired? Is it just us?

Perhaps we feel that we’re caught in a cycle that keeps repeating itself. The intentions were good; the planning and negotiations went well; actions were taken. But the problem persisted and got worse.

It seems like what Ishmael described:

You’re captives of a civilizational system that more or less compels you to go on destroying the world in order to live.

Share This

The United Nations Climate Change Conference starts today in Bali and anyone interested in climate change awaits the results of this conference. This conference is a crucial step in negotiating our post-Kyoto actions to tackle global warming and climate change. Will there be a breakthrough or will it be business as usual?

If you can’t be in Bali but would like to know what’s happening, check out the UNFCCC’s official Youtube channel at http://www.youtube.com/user/climateconference for daily video news from the conference, or watch the live webcast of the conference at http://www.un.org/webcast/unfccc/.

The first Youtube video below is about the expectations for the Bali conference by Yvo de Boer, Executive Secretary, United Nations Climate Change Secretariat. His expectations are to launch negotiations on a long term climate change strategy, to agree on the agenda of those negotiations, and to put an end date to those negotiations.

Source: UNFCCC’s official Youtube channel. 

Share This

Sometimes, we are hurt by comments that tell us the truth. We find them unpleasant even if they are spoken for our own good. We often ignore them or try to dispel them. Recently, there are some comments about Singapore’s efforts in energy and climate change:

Today reported the following comments by National University of Singapore Associate Professor Natasha Hamilton-Hart in response to whether Singapore could lead on climate change in Southeast Asia:

Prof Hamilton-Hart said while Singapore has “great potential”, the country lacked credibility.

“The target here is to reduce energy intensity, but that’s not the same as reducing emissions,” she said. “To get other countries involved, Singapore needs to show a willingness to commit to bringing down its emissions.”

Today reported comments by Mr Erik Thorsen, president and chief executive officer of Renewable Energy Corporation:

“The (solar) industry will have to take responsibility by lowering prices, with governments supporting with incentives.”

He added: “Singapore has a philosophy of not subsidising or subsidising very little. So, it’s very hard to make use of technologies and programmes that need more incentives to happen.”

Were all countries to share Singapore’s attitude of waiting for technology to become cost-competitive before adopting it, such technology could not have been accomplished, he argued.

The government has reasons for not doing the things mentioned in the comments - It’s the economy, stupid! The government cannot afford to bring down emissions significantly or give subsidies because it will distort the market and increase the business costs for companies and living costs for the people. It’s the typical ‘environment is important but economy comes first’ mindset and reasoning.

We understand the government’s worries for our business and living costs, and appreciate their good efforts to maintain a sustainable environment as described in the National Climate Change Strategy and National Energy Policy Report. But if we were to give the government a report card, it would say, “Has shown improvement but can do better”.

For Singapore to become a global clean energy hub or take the lead in the region on climate change, we have to do better. The comments have some truth in them and it’s time to relook the two issues below:

Using reduction in absolute carbon dioxide emissions as a target instead of carbon intensity

The national target in the National Climate Change Strategy is to reduce carbon intensity to 25% below 1990 levels by 2012. A reduction in carbon intensity (carbon dioxide emissions per dollar of GDP) does not necessary mean a reduction in the amount of carbon emissions. The problem of climate change is one of absolute concentrations of carbon dioxide and each country must reduce its absolute carbon emissions.

Singapore’s per capita emission is one of the highest in Asia and is similar to some developed countries. Most developed countries under the Kyoto Protocol are required to reduce absolute emissions by about 5% below 1990 levels. Likewise, we should set a target of reducing our absolute carbon dioxide emissions.

Work towards a Four National Switches energy portfolio

We diversified our water supplies and have our four national taps: local catchment water, imported water, NEWater and desalinated water. Similarly, we should diversify our energy sources and work towards an energy portfolio of four national switches: fuel oil, natural gas and two other renewable energy sources (solar, wind, biomass, tidal, etc). The intention is not to completely replace fossil fuel but to reduce our dependence on their import.

The cost of alternative renewable energy might be higher now but we should also take into account the future price of oil given the security and climate change concerns. Besides considering the cost of doing something, we should also consider the cost of not doing it.

Source: National Climate Change Strategy; National Energy Policy Report; Today. Image attribution: nic221.

Share This

Bangkok-Manila-Jakarta-Dhaka - Global warming is set to reverse decades of social and economic progress across Asia, home to more than four billion people or 60 per cent of the world’s population, according to a new multi-agency report published today called ‘Up in Smoke: Asia and the Pacific.’

The report–the fourth in a series, compiled by more than 35 development and environmental groups including Oxfam and Greenpeace–says there is growing consensus about the huge challenges facing Asia. However it notes “reason to hope” that there is now enough knowledge about the causes of climate change, how the world must tackle it, and how people in Asia must continue to adapt to it. Immediate action is vital, it says. Read the rest

Share This

ASEAN Member Countries, Australia, China, India, Japan, Korea and New Zealand signed the Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment yesterday at the Third East Asia Summit (EAS) in Singapore. The Declaration reaffirms the need for countries in East Asia to tackle the “interrelated challenges of climate change, energy security and other environmental and health issues”. Some key issues that the countries commit to:

Stress that all countries should play a role in addressing the common challenge of climate change, based on the principles of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities; and that developed countries should continue to play a leading role in this regard;

Participate actively in the process of developing an effective, comprehensive, and equitable post-2012 international climate change arrangement under the UNFCCC process; and in this context, reiterate our support for the successful outcome of the 13th session of the COP to the UNFCCC and the 3rd MOP to the Kyoto Protocol to be held in Bali, Indonesia in December 2007;

Working towards achieving a significant reduction in energy intensity;

Cooperating for the development and use of civilian nuclear power, in a manner ensuring nuclear safety, security and non-proliferation, in particular its safeguards, within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), for those EAS participating countries which are interested.

Work to achieve an EAS-wide aspirational goal of increasing cumulative forest cover in the region by at least 15 million hectares of all types of forests by 2020;

Pooling our experiences, expertise and technology in areas such as urban planning including transportation, green building, water management, urban greenery and urban biodiversity conservation, sanitation and waste management, 3Rs (Reduce, Reuse and Recycle) and air, noise, water, and land pollution control;

Source: Singapore Declaration on Climate Change, Energy and the Environment. Image attribution: 13th ASEAN Summit.

Share This

(Just for fun, rest assure that the carbon credits from CDM projects are not earned in the above manner.)

The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) was discussed in our previous article. We are encouraged by the interest and participation of China and India in the CDM projects. However, the other Asian countries are still not making full use of the CDM to get funding and technology to reduce their emissions. Some information that we obtained from the Carbon Forum Asia 2007 is shown below.

The UNFCCC CDM website reported that there are 844 registered projects and 53 requesting registration, and more than 2600 projects in the pipeline. Of the registered projects, 61% is implemented in Asia and the Pacific (34% is implemented in India, 16% in China, 2% each in Malaysia and Korea). The expected average annual CERs from the registered projects amount to about 174,268,851 and 45% is generated by China while India generates 16%. Together, India and China takes up 50% of the CDM registered projects and generates 61% of the annual CERs.

The UNEP Risoe Centre reported that for the other 2600 projects in the pipeline, 73% is in Asia and the Pacific. The number of CDM projects in Asia by country are as follows: China (44%); India (40%); Malaysia (4%); Indonesia (3%); Philippines (2%); South Korea (2%); Thailand (2%); Vietnam (1%); Sri Lanka (1%) and Others (1%). The expected volume of CERs until 2012 in Asia is generated mostly from China (66%) and India (19%).

The above figures show that China and India host most of the CDM projects in Asia and the world, and most of the CERs is expected to be from China. The other countries in Asia are still lacking behind in the CDM market and some speakers attribute it to the lack of knowledge and awareness of CDM among the governments and private companies, and also the lack of financial support. Those countries can learn from China, especially on China’s role in CDM and carbon trading, and on how China use the profits generated for tackling climate change.

Source: UNFCCC CDM website; UNEP Risoe Centre; China.org.cn; Xinhua News Agency. Image attribution: WillyFeng.

Share This

ChinaDialogue published an interesting article (below) by Jonathon Porritt. We agree with him that Chinese leaders do know the need for sustainability and China could be the leader in tackling climate change through its innovations. Jonathon Porritt is the Founder Director of Forum for the Future, Chairman of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, and also the author of Save the Earth. 13 years ago, his book opened my eyes to the impacts of human activities and made me decide what I wanted to do in life - to improve and protect the environment for nature and future generations.

———- 

China could lead the fight for a cooler climate

Jonathon Porritt

November 13, 2007

China may have become the default excuse for inaction by western politicians and idle citizens, says Jonathon Porritt, but its contradictions may even now help it lead in fighting climate change. Read the rest

Share This

What if we do not presume that global warming and climate change is happening? Is it possible to not believe in global warming and climate change but still take action? Can we look at different future scenarios and choose what to do?

Let us imagine four simple future scenarios.

Scenario One is called ‘Happily Ever After’, where there is no global warming and no early action taken. The sceptics were right. No money was spent to implement useless plans to tackle climate change. Everyone lived happily ever after.

Scenario Two is called ‘Pat On The Back’, where there is global warming and early action was taken. Global warming is happening but with less impact because we took preventive actions. Money was spent but it turned out to be a good investment. We gave ourselves a pat on the back for doing what was necessary and right.

Scenario Three is called ‘No Regrets’ where there is no global warming and early action was taken. The scientists were wrong and money was wasted. Sceptics lambasted that the money could have been used instead to help developing countries.

But the scientists retorted that the sceptics were right with hindsight. The money spent was not wasted, it was used to make buildings and transport energy-efficient; develop alternative energy and reduce reliance on oil; and conserve trees and natural habitats.

We are not short of money, we are short of political will power and foresight. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reported that stabilising greenhouse gases at 535 to 590 parts per million will reduce the global economy in 2050 by 1.3 per cent. In 2005, global advertising expenditure alone was 1.3 per cent of world GDP and is sufficient to help developing countries meet United Nations millennium development goals.

Scenario Four is called ‘Reap And Sow’, where there is global warming and no action was taken. We see the impact of climate change, and now everyone believes. But it is too late. We reap what we sow.

Which scenario will happen?

If we take action, we either have no regrets or can pat ourselves on the back in the future. Nothing much to lose and everything to gain.

If we do not take action, we either live happily ever after or reap what we sow. Everything to gain or everything to lose.

What is your choice?

Share This