Gore, who has become a guru for environmentalists since leaving office urged the UN to turn its attention to the global ramifications of climate change and the need to curb greenhouse gases. California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger also gave support by adding that quick global action was needed to stem emissions in order to start the healing process. 

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon added his support by addressing the 80 world leaders present at the event with the message that they should let the world know that they are ready to shoulder the responsilbity to address the problem head on. The session by the world leaders was meant to gather momentum for a meeting in Bali, Indonesia in December where negotiations will start work on a climate treaty to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, which set binding emission targets for 36 developed countries (the Kyoto plan expires in 2012).

Developing countries said that it was unfair to ask them to curb their emissions as their economics grow while industrialised nations have been polluting for decades. President Bush has rejected the Kyoto Protocol, an international agreement that requires nations to cut emissions by at least 5 percent from 1990 level by 2012. Bush said that the accord unfairly burdens rich countries while exempting developing countries like China and India, and the it will cost US jobs. 

Enviroprotect: The strong words given by various world leaders (including those not mentioned in this entry) are a positive step uphill struggle against climate change. However, as Al Gore has so bluntly said it, it is now time to put action to words. The words that various leaders said are next to meaningless if countries do not move forward to increase co-operation and cutting emissions. In many peoples’ opinion, Bush gave his myopic and US-centric view of world/planetary events by saying that this will cost jobs in the US. Emission controls may cost jobs in the US, it will cost jobs in any other big economies. But more importantly, if the emissions keep increasing, there won’t be jobs anywhere in the world when there is nothing to farm, people are dying, water sources are tainted and the world become a more dangerous place with more intense storms. No one wants to look back at history. Industrialised countries have no doubt be the biggest polluters during their growth phase. It is only now with new research on climate change that people are aware of the affects of pollution and unchecked emissions. Politics and finger pointing aside, the burden is a worldwide issue and emissions should be checked no matter the costs. Developed countries have the ability to move capital more effectively to counter the potential loss of income and their labour pool much more mobile that developing countries. I personally do not think that developed countries are losing out when it comes to emission controls. It just politics talking and for the sake of sustainable developing of the world, this attitude has got to stop.  

The report said that Tianjin has China’s leading lead production bases contributing to lead poisoning and various disorders and illnesses in children. Tianjin has a population of more than 10 million people but the report that said Tianjin in Anhui province that 140,000 people were affected by the pollution. The institute issued an official correction and said that Tianying in improvised Anhui province, 750km (460 miles) south of Tianjin, is one of the world’s top 10 most polluted sites, not Tianjin.  

Despite the mixup, there is no doubt that toxic pollution is a big problem in China and about 460,000 people in China die prematurely each year from breathing dirty air and drinking polluted water (from a World Bank estimate). The Chinese authorities has promised to reduced industrial pollutants by 10 percent between 2006 and 2010.  Xinhu  news agency said that Jieshou, the city that encompasses Tianying, continues to process 160,000 tonnes of lead, mostly from used batteries every year – half of the total national production.

Enviroprotect: To publish a report that creates negative news about a large city in another sovereign country without checking on the name and the location is quite hard to understand. I do know that Asia is part of the ‘mythical’ Far East that is culturally different from the country that is compiling the list, but i do think that research institutions need to take their work more seriously as it could affect relations between countries.  With regard to the industrial pollutant problem in China. The world’s most populus nation is constantly threading the fine line between its rapid economic progress and environmental destruction. The authorities need to cool the bouyant economy and take stock of its vast natural resources and find ways to protect it (through the bottom up approach and close consultation with the most improverished areas of China), to reduce the income gap between industrial zones and areas inland so that there is less pressure to overuse natural resources for economic gains.  

The United Nations’ (UN) International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has launched a comprehensive study in July to assess the impact of emissions by the shipping industry and its impact on the climate. The IMO hopes to reach a definitive conclusion by the end of 2007.

An IMO official said that land based sources are targeted intensely in many areas of the world and with sipping activities growing with the global economy, the shipping traffic will contribute to air quality problems as the shipping trade continues to grow. The trillion-dollar shipping industry carries around 90 percent of world trade by volume on about 50,000 merchant ships and account for approximately 10 percent of global sulphur dioxide emissions (the pollutant that causes acid rain).

According to the International Council on Clean Transportation, by 2020, shipping will produce more sulphur and nitrogen oxides than all land-based sources in the European Union (EU) combined. However, shipping industry officials argue that sipping is at least two or three times cleaner than road or rail transport and around 20 times more environmentally efficient than air transport and should be seen as part of a solution instead of being targeted as a problem.   Don Gregory, director of BP Marine, said that the shipping industry should ideally come up with its own regulations before prescriptive measures were imposed by regulators and other stakeholders.   

One of the solutions to reduce emissions from shipping includes the switch from sulphur fuel to cleaner burning-distillate fuels. However, this solution would lead to an increase in carbon dioxide emission in the manufacturing process at oil refineries. The other idea is to employ exhaust scrubbing devices to remove the sulphur dioxide before they are released into the air. This solution is potentially costly and could end up costing the industry billions of dollars. A third solution is for new markets to trade emissions of sulphur or greenhouse gases. Gregory added that there won’t be a single solution to the problem and he thinks that the industry will be operating off a menu of solutions. The IMO also added that the It was essential to agree on a long term globally-accept strategy for emission control for the viable future of the global shipping industry.   

Enviroprotect:  The global shipping industry is the lifeblood of world trade. With 90 percent of goods being moved around the world via merchant ships, the industry shoulders great responsibility to maintain its efficiency and should acknowledge its impact on global climate. The study of the effects of shipping emission is still an on-going process, it is universally accepted that emission control from the shipping industry will go a long way to manage global climate change. The global shipping community needs to sit down to formulate and abide by a long-term strategy that will not hinder the industry while controlling emissions at the same time.  

The joint venture partners are also exploring the possibility of a coker plant to upgrade heavy fuel oil into gasoline and diesel. This coker plant could cost between US$300 to US$400 million. SPC spent US$121 million to upgrade its plant to produce ultra-low sulphur diesel to meet the demands of the regional markets that are increasingly going green.

This is in line with SPC plans to focus on upscale exploration and production (E&P) activities to become a more integrated oil and gas company. The company is currently capable of producing 285,000 barrels per day.  SPC’s CEO, Koh Ban Heng said that by 2010, the company expects E&P activities to contribute up to 30 percent of revenue. 

 Environprotect: Positive steps taken by Singapore’s national petroleum company to invest in clean energy. Not only does it make economic sense for the company to engage in such activities with the increased emphasis of environmental protection and conservation, it also give better public perception of the company (Corporate Social Responsibility). However, this is just one small step in which the society/economy can move toward alternative fuels and environmental protection. Government should play an important and active role in the promotion of alternate fuels in the country. The higher road tax for diesel cars are not in line with the current clean technology that diesel engine offer to the environment. In many incidences, the use of bio-diesel and diesel engines produces less harmful emissions than petrol driven vehicles of equivalent capacities. The government should constantly revised its policies to keep itself relevant (and not stick to previously held beliefs that is not in line with technological or cultural innovations/changes). 

Enviroprotect: Drastic measures such as the proposed water pollution law amendment would be a positive step forward to addressing such environmental concern and maintain a sustainable environment for future economic growth. On a personal note, i applaud China’s recent awareness of the environment (even though i suspect that the authorities have long known that rampant pollution would put a dent to future economic expansion). However, at the back of my mind wonder if such environmental concerns are economically driven or are they expressing real concern about the environment. China’s rapid economic growth has put a strain on the country’s energy grid and the government has approve many ‘world’s largest’ projects to prevent random blackouts/brownouts in the more energy-starved regions of the country. However such energy projects (such as the three gorges project) have already caused massive human displacement and environmental destruction. As more and more countries are re-looking at Nuclear energy to provide ‘clean’, cost-effective energy for masses, we will reach a point where we will eventually question our need for more energy and the price(s) that we are willing to pay for it. It all boils down to – Economic progress; at what cost?

The host city Beijing’s air quality and grid-locked traffic have worried the local organizers and the IOC, but this was the strongest statement made by the IOC president so far and was sure to embarrass the local organisers as they prepare count down the one-year mark to the games.

  On-going efforts by Beijing’s officials to clean up the city buy spending billions closing facotires and moving others away from the city does not seem to have the desired effect. The pollution problems are made worst by non-strop contruction and the rapid increase of car-ownership in the city.