2. Solar energy is inferior to hydroelectric waterdams in Canada.
3. Although this article in the first place appears to be unfavorable for solar energy, it eventually worked out to prove me that solar energy is a quite solid energy basis. In Canada solar energy cannot compete with electricity generated by waterdams. This energy is another alternative energy source and is more than ten times cheaper than fossil fuel in Germany. Furthermore this article connects to another article`s statement that solar energy has a big potential to become cheaper and more effective in the future.
The source is a local online source in Vancouver and appears neutral, although it also has to gather data somewhere.
--------------------
Solar energy loses out to cheap power rates By Travis Lupick
On a Kitsilano roof, Karen Wristen pointed upward and traced the sun's rays down from the clear blue sky to a large, thin sheet of silicon.
"The panels produce power by collecting sunlight on the surface," Wristen told the Georgia Straight, standing beside one of eight photovoltaic solar panels on the Society Promoting Environmental Conservation's building. "Particles in the sunlight called photons strike the dark black silicon surface and drive off electrons."
The electrons, she continued, are then captured by aluminum wires in the panels, fed into an electrical inverter, and converted into the alternating current that is used to power homes and offices.
Wristen, the executive director of SPEC, estimated that anywhere from one-third to one-half of the building's electricity comes from its solar panels.
When Al Gore's 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth took the concept of climate change mainstream, the solar panel became an icon for the future of clean energy. But in Vancouver, with winter fast approaching and the sky now dark before most people leave work for the day, some wonder whether the technology is a good fit.
According to a Natural Resources Canada Web site, Vancouver is among Canadian cities with the lowest potential for producing solar power.
"The problem with Vancouver is that there is not enough sun," said John S. MacDonald, chair and chief executive officer of Day4 Energy, which manufactures solar panels in Burnaby. "Solar energy works everywhere, to a greater or lesser extent. But, basically, the amount of sunlight that is available is a big factor in the economic calculation."
The SPEC building's solar-power-production numbers support MacDonald's argument. During Vancouver's brightest months, May to July, the building's panels produce an average of 175.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity a month. But in November and December they generate an average of only 51.3 kilowatt-hours per month.
According to Wristen, the SPEC building's eight panels plus the inverter cost a total of $18,000. She estimated that it would take 168 years to make good on the investment, or six times the productive life of the panels.
"There are days, clearly, in Vancouver's winter where you are not getting much of anything out of the panels," Wristen conceded.
But she noted that as long as the clouds are light-toned, enough of the sun's photons reach the panels to generate electricity.
"The country that has spent the most money encouraging solar is Germany," Wristen said. "And they have less sunlight than we do."
Indeed, MacDonald said that Day4 Energy doesn't worry about the weak market for solar panels in Vancouver, because it has a very strong market in Europe.
"Canada is an energy-rich country," explained MacDonald, who cofounded the Vancouver-based space-technology company MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates. "Germany, France, Italy, Spain—they are all energy-poor…and so there is a huge incentive in those countries to get the cost of renewable energy down and to develop the potential of renewable energy."
MacDonald pointed out that the alternative-energy market in B.C. is already quite crowded: most of the province's electricity comes from hydroelectric dams, many areas are well-suited for wind energy, and forests devastated by the mountain pine beetle—itself a consequence of climate change-hold the potential to make B.C. a leader in biomass energy.
Rob Baxter is a cofounder of the Vancouver Renewable Energy Cooperative, which, among other things, installs solar panels throughout the Lower Mainland. Like MacDonald, he candidly told the Straight of the limitations of solar energy in B.C.
"It is not really our climate that is the issue here," Baxter said. "The problem is that we have some of the cheapest electricity in the world here in B.C., so the systems don't pay for themselves anytime soon."
Baxter said that many governments promote the independent production of solar power through feed-in tariffs. These are incentives that see electric utilities pay producers like homeowners and businesses above-market prices for energy produced from renewable sources.
According to Baxter, when such power producers sell solar energy into Germany's electric grid, they receive approximately 70 cents per kilowatt-hour. In Ontario, the incentive is 42 cents, while in B.C. it's only 5.4 cents.
Jake Jacobs, spokesperson for B.C.'s Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, told the Straight that the province has no plans to offer above-market rates for solar power.
He noted that feed-in tariffs can make a lot of sense in jurisdictions like Ontario and Germany, where much of the electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels. But in places like B.C., where 90 percent of power comes from hydroelectric facilities, above-market prices for solar power are not justified, Jacobs said.
For now, even solar-power users like Wristen are telling Vancouver residents to hold off on making the switch.
"The message I give to people all of the time is to wait for it," Wristen said. "But keep in touch, because the technology is changing fast and the cost could change quite dramatically in the very near future."
3. The International Energy Agency said that coal, which produces more climate-warming carbon dioxide than oil or gas, will remain world's main source of power until year 2030. It is said that coal emissions, including toxic and pollutant gases, can have serious effects on the local environment and human health.
4. ----------------------------------
5. From: Reuters Published November 14, 2008 10:07 AM Coal to remain world's top power source: IEA
LONDON (Reuters) - Coal, which produces more climate-warming carbon dioxide than oil or gas, will remain the world's main source of power until 2030 and nuclear will lose market share, the International Energy Agency said on Wednesday.
Expectations of slower economic growth have led the IEA to downgrade its 2030 world electricity demand forecast to 23,141 terawatt hours (TWh), but the share of coal generated power would rise to 44 percent by 2015 from 41 percent in 2006.
It would stay at that level to 2030.
"Globally, coal-based electricity is projected to rise ... to almost 14,600 TWh by 2030, giving rise to significant increases in associated CO2 emissions," the Paris-based agency said in its World Energy Outlook.
The report from the IEA, adviser to 28 industrialized nations, says coal emissions, also including toxic and pollutant gases, can have serious effects on the local environment and human health.
Most of the growth was expected in non-OECD countries, such as China, which the IEA expected soon to become the world's biggest electricity consumer. Its demand for power doubled between 2000 and 2006.
The IEA urged stronger policies for carbon capture and storage (CCS), saying the world was likely to make only a minor contribution in the period.
"Market mechanisms alone will not be sufficient to achieve the demonstration program on the scale required. Another challenge is financing the necessary CO2 transport infrastructure," it said.
Despite a global nuclear renaissance sparked by efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change, the IEA expected nuclear's share in power generation to drop to 10 percent by 2030 from 15 percent in 2006.
"Over the past few years, a large number of countries have expressed renewed interest in building nuclear power plants," it said. "Few governments, however, have taken concrete steps to build new reactors."
CHINA IN THE LEAD
As of the end of August, China topped the list of countries with nuclear power plants under construction, with 5,220 megawatts (MW), followed by India at 2,910 MW and Korea at 2,880 MW.
On a brighter note, the IEA predicted the share of renewable energy to rise to 23 percent by 2030 from 18 percent in 2006.
"Higher fossil fuel prices, increasing concerns over energy security and climate change are expected to encourage the development of renewable energy for electricity," the IEA said.
The agency said high prices would constrain growth in gas-fired generation, although it remained attractive due to
lower capital costs and shorter construction time. Its market share was likely to fall slightly from 20 percent.
Looking into per capita electricity demand around the world, the IEA saw a gloomy outlook for some non-OECD countries, despite overall anticipated strong growth.
"A large number of people living there are not expected to have access to electricity even in 2030. India and Africa have the highest number of people in this category," it said.
Per capita electricity consumption in non-OECD countries was likely to rise to almost 2,400 kilowatt hours (kWh) by 2030, but the IEA saw it rising only to 671 kWh in Africa from 518. It would rise to 4,776 kWh in China from 1,788 in 2006.
3. This is an interesting article I found which I suppose has something to do with energy sources. It's basically the opinions of this one professor who talks about how the problem of deforestation in, among other countries, Haiti, is not indicative of a world-scale climate problem, the likes of which have become rather fashionable of late, but instead of a national problem. Specifically related to the cutting down of trees for coal and firewood, and the disorganized urban sprawl, especially in Haiti's capital, Port-au-Prince. The professor seems to look mainly to technological solutions here, and I'm not sure I agree entirely. He says it's a matter of investment, that engineers must be hired to shape the landscape in the best possible way, and things of the like. If the problem finds at least some of its roots in actions taken by the people who inhabit the land in question though, I wonder if that's not just a band-aid on the wound; wouldn't a more long term, lasting solution start from addressing the problems that lead to the rampant tree-cutting in the first place? The solutions that would come out of addressing that problem may require more changes in practices and fewer expensive engireers
4. 2008/11/15 CLIMATE change is likely to increase landslides, but it isn’t thing that will increase landslides the most. The culprit, the biggest driver of landslide events, is a more basic, says Professor Dr David Petley.
It’s the growth of cities.
While scientists and governments puzzle over how climate change will impact rainfall and the number of landslide events in a year, this engineering geologist from the International Landslide Centre at Durham University warns about serious and more easily visible problems.
“Climate change is terribly important and we have to find ways of reducing carbon dioxide emissions quickly or we will face a very dire situation. “But that’s not the only crisis we are facing.
“What’s likely to increase landslides the most, are cities moving out into more and more marginal land.
“If this is poorly planned or poorly constructed housing development, it poses a real threat in terms of landslides,” said Petley who delivered keynote address on the subject at the International Conference on Slopes 2008.
Petley said this is evident to some extent in Kuala Lumpur and that’s why the proposed National Slope Masterplan is so important.
“As KL expands and slopes are developed, having a policy and body that makes sure that development is done properly is critically important.”
The second key factor, said Petley, is deforestation. Though not as great a concern in Malaysia as in other Asian countries, the country is still likely to be impacted by the conversion of forests into other uses.
“There will be more pressure to turn land into palm oil plantations in order to generate oil and that can lead to degradation of the environment.
“We’ve seen in many places that deforestation and conversion to plantation are environmentally very serious.”
Petley also linked the issue of deforestation to what he termed Asia’s “next great threat”: population growth.
As population density goes up, each fatal landslide incident is likely to claim more lives, he explained.
The United Nations Habitats Programme projects that between 2000 and 2030, the population of Asia would increase by about 1.2 billion people, the most in South Asia, which is expected to gain 700 million inhabitants.
Over the same period Asia’s urban population is expected to increase by 1.3 billion.
A substantial proportion is expected to come in the form of urban slums that will inevitably result in the occupation of some land with marginal stability.
“The population we now have is living in most of the land that’s suitable to live in, so as the population grows we are inevitably going to push into more and more difficult areas.
“Those people will need to be fed, so more land will be transferred to produce food, and this could lead to more landslides.”
Petley illustrated his point using the example of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, two countries that share an island.
Haiti has very high population growth and a very poor population. Here the mountainsides have almost completely been deforested and most marginal areas have been inhabited.
“If you do take a look at the two countries on Google Earth, you can see the line – one side deforested and the other forested, because the Dominican Republic has been much better at preserving their forests.
“Haiti has had just the most terrible series of landslide disasters – 600 people killed this summer in landslides disasters. The Dominican Republic doesn’t have this problem.”
So while climate change should be taken seriously, the focus shouldn’t be taken off other environmental stresses that play a more significant role in dramatically increasing the number of landslide tragedies.
The trick, he said, was to find a balance between the short term problems and the changes we expect to see in the next 50 or more years.
Pinpointing the very short term needs such as locations in need of immediate repair and implementing measures to reduce landslide risk quickly would be sensible.
It would also be crucial to look study what the combination of climate change, population growth and urban development would do, and modify some of those short term plans with the future in mind.
And all these threats and changes, do not spell the end to all hillside development, said Petley.
It is possible to develop hillsides safely but it does require investment to do it.
He cites the example of Europe that has seen many landslides and has much landslide-prone terrain.
Despite this, few lives are lost because Europe’s population, authorities and engineers have become very good at dealing with it, said Petley.
The most dangerous landslides are nearly always mitigated and where they aren’t, they are identified and people are relocated.
In a developing economy like Malaysia, where hillside locations are expensive and attractive there is in fact hope, he said.
Hope because it provides an opportunity for higher enforcement of regulations.
“You can have a series of guidelines that force people to develop their hillsides properly to high standards of design.
“Whereas if you go to Philippines, the hillside is occupied almost entirely by the poor and development is totally unplanned.
“As long as you have a set of strong guidelines, enforcement and an agency to monitor, it can be controlled.”
Petley believes that of all natural disasters, slopes-related disasters are the most manageable.
When compared with volcanoes and earthquakes, the one that were the best at dealing with is landslides.
We can identify areas that likely to suffer landslides, create warning systems in large areas or on specific slopes and stabilise slopes.
But there are certain prerequisites for success: a proactive approach to managing slopes, strong government will and a series of measures to ensure that management happens.
This, said Petley, included people trained appropriately to manage slopes, a set of standards for building design.
It also meant having an agency to design and implement warning systems, to coordinate research and one given the authority to implement the plans.
“There is a real danger everywhere that because of the combined pressure of changing climate, development and pressures on land, the toll from landslides will rise through time.
“It will rise quite quickly and that’s what we’ve seem in other countries. So proactive government intervention here, to start to bring the risk down, is a good move.
1. Haerang Park 2. W3 trillion set aside for green growth 3. I became interested in the Korean government's plan for a greener nation and this article briefly tells us how the Lee administration defines its visions. First of all, the government declares to invest about three trillion won over the next five years in environment and energy sectors for low carbon and green growth. The energy-related industry includes solar and wind power plants with which the government aims to take up thirteen per cent of the global market by 2030. Although it is part of the state's environmental policy, the main driving force behind this first national strategy seems to be a high oil price as of September this year. This article also quotes an official's saying that the state wants to develop green energy industries to make them as a next-generation engine for economic growth. With the row oil price in the recenteconomic bust and with less urgency to find a new energy source, it is doubtful that the government pays a continuous attention and efforts to carry out this plan. 4. Korea plans to invest 3 trillion won in the next five years in environment and energy-related industries, in order to realize President Lee Myung-bak`s recently unveiled vision for "low carbon, green growth."
The government wants to foster the local green energy sector, including solar and wind energy and fuel cells, to grab a 13 percent share of the global market by 2030, officials said yesterday.
A blueprint for this has been reported to Lee.
"The era of low-price oil is gone. Even if oil prices declined, it wouldn`t reverse the trend toward increasing reliance on renewable energy sources," the president said at the opening of the session.
The Ministry of Knowledge Economy explained in a press release: "This is the first national strategy to develop green energy industries with the aim of making them a new engine for economic growth."
A more detailed development roadmap will be devised by March next year, it said.
The government chose nine industries as the green energy sector - solar energy, wind energy, fuel cells, power plants using synthetic gas, energy storage technology, light emitting diodes technology and IT-based electricity control systems.
Currently, the nine industries represent a meager 0.2 percent of the country`s gross domestic product, hiring just 9,000 workers. According to Clean Edge, a U.S.-based researcher, the industries are expected to grow an average 15 percent annually in the next 10 years.
"The local industry is in its infancy. But we still have chances, because there is almost no company that can be described as a global leader in this field yet," the ministry said.
For the solar energy sector, the government hopes to raise a fund of 360 billion won, including 160 billion won from private companies, to enhance the economic efficiency of solar power. It hopes to bring down the production cost to supply solar energy at 150 won per kilowatt-hour by 2020, from about 700 won at present, it said.
The government`s plan also calls for the country to build mid-scale wind power facilities with its own technology and develop next-generation fuel cell technologies. 5. http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=108&oid=044&aid=0000076789
A very down to earth* kind of guy. I'm an environmental sociologist interested in establishing material and organizational sustainability worldwide. I'm always looking for interesting materials/technologies, inspiring ideas, or institutional examples of sustainability to inspire others to recognize their choices now. To be fatalistic about an unsustainable world is a sign of a captive mind, given all our options.
*(If "earth" is defined in a planetary sense, concerning comparative historical knowledge and interest in the past 10,000 years or so anywhere...) See both blogs.
4 comments:
1. Bjoern Schmidt
2. Solar energy is inferior to hydroelectric waterdams in Canada.
3. Although this article in the first place appears to be unfavorable for solar energy, it eventually worked out to prove me that solar energy is a quite solid energy basis. In Canada solar energy cannot compete with electricity generated by waterdams. This energy is another alternative energy source and is more than ten times cheaper than fossil fuel in Germany.
Furthermore this article connects to another article`s statement that solar energy has a big potential to become cheaper and more effective in the future.
The source is a local online source in Vancouver and appears neutral, although it also has to gather data somewhere.
--------------------
Solar energy loses out to cheap power rates
By Travis Lupick
On a Kitsilano roof, Karen Wristen pointed upward and traced the sun's rays down from the clear blue sky to a large, thin sheet of silicon.
"The panels produce power by collecting sunlight on the surface," Wristen told the Georgia Straight, standing beside one of eight photovoltaic solar panels on the Society Promoting Environmental Conservation's building. "Particles in the sunlight called photons strike the dark black silicon surface and drive off electrons."
The electrons, she continued, are then captured by aluminum wires in the panels, fed into an electrical inverter, and converted into the alternating current that is used to power homes and offices.
Wristen, the executive director of SPEC, estimated that anywhere from one-third to one-half of the building's electricity comes from its solar panels.
When Al Gore's 2006 film An Inconvenient Truth took the concept of climate change mainstream, the solar panel became an icon for the future of clean energy. But in Vancouver, with winter fast approaching and the sky now dark before most people leave work for the day, some wonder whether the technology is a good fit.
According to a Natural Resources Canada Web site, Vancouver is among Canadian cities with the lowest potential for producing solar power.
"The problem with Vancouver is that there is not enough sun," said John S. MacDonald, chair and chief executive officer of Day4 Energy, which manufactures solar panels in Burnaby. "Solar energy works everywhere, to a greater or lesser extent. But, basically, the amount of sunlight that is available is a big factor in the economic calculation."
The SPEC building's solar-power-production numbers support MacDonald's argument. During Vancouver's brightest months, May to July, the building's panels produce an average of 175.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity a month. But in November and December they generate an average of only 51.3 kilowatt-hours per month.
According to Wristen, the SPEC building's eight panels plus the inverter cost a total of $18,000. She estimated that it would take 168 years to make good on the investment, or six times the productive life of the panels.
"There are days, clearly, in Vancouver's winter where you are not getting much of anything out of the panels," Wristen conceded.
But she noted that as long as the clouds are light-toned, enough of the sun's photons reach the panels to generate electricity.
"The country that has spent the most money encouraging solar is Germany," Wristen said. "And they have less sunlight than we do."
Indeed, MacDonald said that Day4 Energy doesn't worry about the weak market for solar panels in Vancouver, because it has a very strong market in Europe.
"Canada is an energy-rich country," explained MacDonald, who cofounded the Vancouver-based space-technology company MacDonald, Dettwiler and Associates. "Germany, France, Italy, Spain—they are all energy-poor…and so there is a huge incentive in those countries to get the cost of renewable energy down and to develop the potential of renewable energy."
MacDonald pointed out that the alternative-energy market in B.C. is already quite crowded: most of the province's electricity comes from hydroelectric dams, many areas are well-suited for wind energy, and forests devastated by the mountain pine beetle—itself a consequence of climate change-hold the potential to make B.C. a leader in biomass energy.
Rob Baxter is a cofounder of the Vancouver Renewable Energy Cooperative, which, among other things, installs solar panels throughout the Lower Mainland. Like MacDonald, he candidly told the Straight of the limitations of solar energy in B.C.
"It is not really our climate that is the issue here," Baxter said. "The problem is that we have some of the cheapest electricity in the world here in B.C., so the systems don't pay for themselves anytime soon."
Baxter said that many governments promote the independent production of solar power through feed-in tariffs. These are incentives that see electric utilities pay producers like homeowners and businesses above-market prices for energy produced from renewable sources.
According to Baxter, when such power producers sell solar energy into Germany's electric grid, they receive approximately 70 cents per kilowatt-hour. In Ontario, the incentive is 42 cents, while in B.C. it's only 5.4 cents.
Jake Jacobs, spokesperson for B.C.'s Ministry of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources, told the Straight that the province has no plans to offer above-market rates for solar power.
He noted that feed-in tariffs can make a lot of sense in jurisdictions like Ontario and Germany, where much of the electricity is produced by burning fossil fuels. But in places like B.C., where 90 percent of power comes from hydroelectric facilities, above-market prices for solar power are not justified, Jacobs said.
For now, even solar-power users like Wristen are telling Vancouver residents to hold off on making the switch.
"The message I give to people all of the time is to wait for it," Wristen said. "But keep in touch, because the technology is changing fast and the cost could change quite dramatically in the very near future."
-------
http://www.straight.com/article-169734/solar-energy-loses-out-cheap-power-rates
1. Sally Paik
2. Coal to remain world's top power source: IEA
3. The International Energy Agency said that coal, which produces more climate-warming carbon dioxide than oil or gas, will remain world's main source of power until year 2030. It is said that coal emissions, including toxic and pollutant gases, can have serious effects on the local environment and human health.
4. ----------------------------------
5. From: Reuters
Published November 14, 2008 10:07 AM
Coal to remain world's top power source: IEA
LONDON (Reuters) - Coal, which produces more climate-warming carbon dioxide than oil or gas, will remain the world's main source of power until 2030 and nuclear will lose market share, the International Energy Agency said on Wednesday.
Expectations of slower economic growth have led the IEA to downgrade its 2030 world electricity demand forecast to 23,141 terawatt hours (TWh), but the share of coal generated power would rise to 44 percent by 2015 from 41 percent in 2006.
It would stay at that level to 2030.
"Globally, coal-based electricity is projected to rise ... to almost 14,600 TWh by 2030, giving rise to significant increases in associated CO2 emissions," the Paris-based agency said in its World Energy Outlook.
The report from the IEA, adviser to 28 industrialized nations, says coal emissions, also including toxic and pollutant gases, can have serious effects on the local environment and human health.
Most of the growth was expected in non-OECD countries, such as China, which the IEA expected soon to become the world's biggest electricity consumer. Its demand for power doubled between 2000 and 2006.
The IEA urged stronger policies for carbon capture and storage (CCS), saying the world was likely to make only a minor contribution in the period.
"Market mechanisms alone will not be sufficient to achieve the demonstration program on the scale required. Another challenge is financing the necessary CO2 transport infrastructure," it said.
Despite a global nuclear renaissance sparked by efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate change, the IEA expected nuclear's share in power generation to drop to 10 percent by 2030 from 15 percent in 2006.
"Over the past few years, a large number of countries have expressed renewed interest in building nuclear power plants," it said. "Few governments, however, have taken concrete steps to build new reactors."
CHINA IN THE LEAD
As of the end of August, China topped the list of countries with nuclear power plants under construction, with 5,220 megawatts (MW), followed by India at 2,910 MW and Korea at 2,880 MW.
On a brighter note, the IEA predicted the share of renewable energy to rise to 23 percent by 2030 from 18 percent in 2006.
"Higher fossil fuel prices, increasing concerns over energy security and climate change are expected to encourage the development of renewable energy for electricity," the IEA said.
The agency said high prices would constrain growth in gas-fired generation, although it remained attractive due to
lower capital costs and shorter construction time. Its market share was likely to fall slightly from 20 percent.
Looking into per capita electricity demand around the world, the IEA saw a gloomy outlook for some non-OECD countries, despite overall anticipated strong growth.
"A large number of people living there are not expected to have access to electricity even in 2030. India and Africa have the highest number of people in this category," it said.
Per capita electricity consumption in non-OECD countries was likely to rise to almost 2,400 kilowatt hours (kWh) by 2030, but the IEA saw it rising only to 671 kWh in Africa from 518. It would rise to 4,776 kWh in China from 1,788 in 2006.
6. ---
7. http://www.enn.com/energy/article/38655
1. Moctar Aboubacar
2. Desforestation in Haiti: organization or will?
3. This is an interesting article I found which I suppose has something to do with energy sources. It's basically the opinions of this one professor who talks about how the problem of deforestation in, among other countries, Haiti, is not indicative of a world-scale climate problem, the likes of which have become rather fashionable of late, but instead of a national problem. Specifically related to the cutting down of trees for coal and firewood, and the disorganized urban sprawl, especially in Haiti's capital, Port-au-Prince.
The professor seems to look mainly to technological solutions here, and I'm not sure I agree entirely. He says it's a matter of investment, that engineers must be hired to shape the landscape in the best possible way, and things of the like. If the problem finds at least some of its roots in actions taken by the people who inhabit the land in question though, I wonder if that's not just a band-aid on the wound; wouldn't a more long term, lasting solution start from addressing the problems that lead to the rampant tree-cutting in the first place? The solutions that would come out of addressing that problem may require more changes in practices and fewer expensive engireers
4.
2008/11/15
CLIMATE change is likely to increase landslides, but it isn’t thing that will increase landslides the most.
The culprit, the biggest driver of landslide events, is a more basic, says Professor Dr David Petley.
It’s the growth of cities.
While scientists and governments puzzle over how climate change will impact rainfall and the number of landslide events in a year, this engineering geologist from the International Landslide Centre at Durham University warns about serious and more easily visible problems.
“Climate change is terribly important and we have to find ways of reducing carbon dioxide emissions quickly or we will face a very dire situation.
“But that’s not the only crisis we are facing.
“What’s likely to increase landslides the most, are cities moving out into more and more marginal land.
“If this is poorly planned or poorly constructed housing development, it poses a real threat in terms of landslides,” said Petley who delivered keynote address on the subject at the International Conference on Slopes 2008.
Petley said this is evident to some extent in Kuala Lumpur and that’s why the proposed National Slope Masterplan is so important.
“As KL expands and slopes are developed, having a policy and body that makes sure that development is done properly is critically important.”
The second key factor, said Petley, is deforestation. Though not as great a concern in Malaysia as in other Asian countries, the country is still likely to be impacted by the conversion of forests into other uses.
“There will be more pressure to turn land into palm oil plantations in order to generate oil and that can lead to degradation of the environment.
“We’ve seen in many places that deforestation and conversion to plantation are environmentally very serious.”
Petley also linked the issue of deforestation to what he termed Asia’s “next great threat”: population growth.
As population density goes up, each fatal landslide incident is likely to claim more lives, he explained.
The United Nations Habitats Programme projects that between 2000 and 2030, the population of Asia would increase by about 1.2 billion people, the most in South Asia, which is expected to gain 700 million inhabitants.
Over the same period Asia’s urban population is expected to increase by 1.3 billion.
A substantial proportion is expected to come in the form of urban slums that will inevitably result in the occupation of some land with marginal stability.
“The population we now have is living in most of the land that’s suitable to live in, so as the population grows we are inevitably going to push into more and more difficult areas.
“Those people will need to be fed, so more land will be transferred to produce food, and this could lead to more landslides.”
Petley illustrated his point using the example of Haiti and the Dominican Republic, two countries that share an island.
Haiti has very high population growth and a very poor population. Here the mountainsides have almost completely been deforested and most marginal areas have been inhabited.
“If you do take a look at the two countries on Google Earth, you can see the line – one side deforested and the other forested, because the Dominican Republic has been much better at preserving their forests.
“Haiti has had just the most terrible series of landslide disasters – 600 people killed this summer in landslides disasters. The Dominican Republic doesn’t have this problem.”
So while climate change should be taken seriously, the focus shouldn’t be taken off other environmental stresses that play a more significant role in dramatically increasing the number of landslide tragedies.
The trick, he said, was to find a balance between the short term problems and the changes we expect to see in the next 50 or more years.
Pinpointing the very short term needs such as locations in need of immediate repair and implementing measures to reduce landslide risk quickly would be sensible.
It would also be crucial to look study what the combination of climate change, population growth and urban development would do, and modify some of those short term plans with the future in mind.
And all these threats and changes, do not spell the end to all hillside development, said Petley.
It is possible to develop hillsides safely but it does require investment to do it.
He cites the example of Europe that has seen many landslides and has much landslide-prone terrain.
Despite this, few lives are lost because Europe’s population, authorities and engineers have become very good at dealing with it, said Petley.
The most dangerous landslides are nearly always mitigated and where they aren’t, they are identified and people are relocated.
In a developing economy like Malaysia, where hillside locations are expensive and attractive there is in fact hope, he said.
Hope because it provides an opportunity for higher enforcement of regulations.
“You can have a series of guidelines that force people to develop their hillsides properly to high standards of design.
“Whereas if you go to Philippines, the hillside is occupied almost entirely by the poor and development is totally unplanned.
“As long as you have a set of strong guidelines, enforcement and an agency to monitor, it can be controlled.”
Petley believes that of all natural disasters, slopes-related disasters are the most manageable.
When compared with volcanoes and earthquakes, the one that were the best at dealing with is landslides.
We can identify areas that likely to suffer landslides, create warning systems in large areas or on specific slopes and stabilise slopes.
But there are certain prerequisites for success: a proactive approach to managing slopes, strong government will and a series of measures to ensure that management happens.
This, said Petley, included people trained appropriately to manage slopes, a set of standards for building design.
It also meant having an agency to design and implement warning systems, to coordinate research and one given the authority to implement the plans.
“There is a real danger everywhere that because of the combined pressure of changing climate, development and pressures on land, the toll from landslides will rise through time.
“It will rise quite quickly and that’s what we’ve seem in other countries. So proactive government intervention here, to start to bring the risk down, is a good move.
“But it now needs implementation.”
5.http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/Focus/20081115170602/Article/index_html
1. Haerang Park
2. W3 trillion set aside for green growth
3. I became interested in the Korean government's plan for a greener nation and this article briefly tells us how the Lee administration defines its visions.
First of all, the government declares to invest about three trillion won over the next five years in environment and energy sectors for low carbon and green growth. The energy-related industry includes solar and wind power plants with which the government aims to take up thirteen per cent of the global market by 2030. Although it is part of the state's environmental policy, the main driving force behind this first national strategy seems to be a high oil price as of September this year. This article also quotes an official's saying that the state wants to develop green energy industries to make them as a next-generation engine for economic growth. With the row oil price in the recenteconomic bust and with less urgency to find a new energy source, it is doubtful that the government pays a continuous attention and efforts to carry out this plan.
4.
Korea plans to invest 3 trillion won in the next five years in environment and energy-related industries, in order to realize President Lee Myung-bak`s recently unveiled vision for "low carbon, green growth."
The government wants to foster the local green energy sector, including solar and wind energy and fuel cells, to grab a 13 percent share of the global market by 2030, officials said yesterday.
A blueprint for this has been reported to Lee.
"The era of low-price oil is gone. Even if oil prices declined, it wouldn`t reverse the trend toward increasing reliance on renewable energy sources," the president said at the opening of the session.
The Ministry of Knowledge Economy explained in a press release: "This is the first national strategy to develop green energy industries with the aim of making them a new engine for economic growth."
A more detailed development roadmap will be devised by March next year, it said.
The government chose nine industries as the green energy sector - solar energy, wind energy, fuel cells, power plants using synthetic gas, energy storage technology, light emitting diodes technology and IT-based electricity control systems.
Currently, the nine industries represent a meager 0.2 percent of the country`s gross domestic product, hiring just 9,000 workers. According to Clean Edge, a U.S.-based researcher, the industries are expected to grow an average 15 percent annually in the next 10 years.
"The local industry is in its infancy. But we still have chances, because there is almost no company that can be described as a global leader in this field yet," the ministry said.
For the solar energy sector, the government hopes to raise a fund of 360 billion won, including 160 billion won from private companies, to enhance the economic efficiency of solar power. It hopes to bring down the production cost to supply solar energy at 150 won per kilowatt-hour by 2020, from about 700 won at present, it said.
The government`s plan also calls for the country to build mid-scale wind power facilities with its own technology and develop next-generation fuel cell technologies.
5. http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&sid1=108&oid=044&aid=0000076789
Post a Comment