Archive for the 'environment' Category

“Lighting up our City Centre” and EarthHour

choongyong.koh March 27th, 2009

I am concerned about the Climate Change problem, and thinks that EarthHour is a good idea to spread the message to more people that we need to be more concerned about the effects of things we do to the only Earth we have.   However, while the Climate Change issue has gotten more recognition over the years, it is telling that some people/organisations just jump on the bandwagon to show the world that they too are ‘in it’, while not really having the heart to solve the problem.

In Feb, The Straits Times carried an article on the target of getting 1m people in Singapore to join in EarthHour this year.  On the same day, in the Life section, there was another article on the new Illuma shopping centre coming up in the Bugis area, and the Singapore Lighting Master Plan was mentioned in it.  Seeing such a coincidence, I decided to dig a little more into this.

What I found out is that in 2006, URA engaged some lighting consultants and launched a plan to light up our city centre.  Part of the plans is to incentivise owners of existing building to set up ADDITIONAL lighting and for owners of newly built buildings to incorporate more lighting into their plans, by either giving them a maximum of 2% of additional gross floor area or a maximum of S$500,000 to implement lighting in accordance to the master plan.  There was even an exhibition showcasing what the final result could look like (http://www.ura.gov.sg/lightingplan/).  The following image is one of the images used in the site.

The masterplan suggested that the owners light up the buildings from 7pm to 11pm on weekends.  

So, even if all the buildings along the the Singapore skyline signed up for EarthHour, we only saved 1 hour of electricity, but once this plan comes in effect, we are spending extra (4 x 2 x 52) 416 hours of electricity on lighting.  I wonder if this is an appropriate message fro the Government to the people on its attitude towards the Climate Change issue.

Is there anything wrong with the current skyline? From what I gather from the site, the Lighting Masterplan will “develop a signature image for the city, create a beautiful nightscape and enliven the visitor’s experience”.  In the larger scheme of things, signature image, beautiful nightscape and enlivened experiences would probably count for nothing when we have to bear with the consequences of Climate Change.

有趣但凝重的一段文字

choongyong.koh June 29th, 2008

翻查维基百科，看到以下对全球暖化的形容：

全球暖化者，天地日暖也。蓋百年以來，其勢日明，其害日顯，此固由人為也。工業日進，污染日甚，溫室氣體日濃，熱無以去，遂俳佪於天地間。萬物因而易，異象因而生。海面日漲、氣候突變、水旱交侵，致使農業廢失、物種亡絕、病蟲日增。萬民見害，苦之久矣。諸國遂盟，訂《京都議定書》，力減溫室氣體之釋，以緩此變。惟其成功與否，尚未可知。

有趣有趣，但文中的内容却叫人不寒而栗。

Saving Gaia ad again

choongyong.koh June 10th, 2008


So someone did complain to Mediacorp about this ad. (Wanbao article over the weekend) However, the response from Mediacorp (see insert at the bottom right corner) seems tell us that it is ok to have gory images on all other TV channels except for the kids’ channel.

Is that the same position that MDA holds? What about TCS 8 and TCS 5?

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Grey skies? Its not the haze, says NEA

choongyong.koh June 6th, 2008

Grey skies? Its not the haze, says NEA

“Poor dispersion of particulate matter”? Dispersion from where?  Why not elaborate further to give the people a better idea of what is happening?

In any case, even if it is not the haze, the particulate matter itself is still and air pollutant.  Does it mean that we only need to worry when it is the haze? Does it mean that NEA will only do something when it is the haze?

Saving Gaia ad, but what’s the message?

choongyong.koh June 6th, 2008

Screen capture of sad boy

MediaCorp launched its green initiative this year with the Saving Gaia site and the corresponding TV advertisement.

I applaud the effort to raise awareness, but questions the message behind the TV advertisement (see it on http://www.savinggaia.sg/). The ad started with an image of a toy boy figurine. Moments later, blood trickered down his face, followed by sawing of his head. The boy figurine faded away and give way to the image of a bright-eyed boy filled with sadness in his eyes. I searched my brain for a message behind all these, but after much thought I still cannot figure out what is being conveyed.

The problem is such kinds of images are actually quite troubling to small kids. In previous instances where ads that similarly are disturbing to the young, there was swift action either by the authorities to curb it, or some disturbed parent will write to the papers. This time, aparently the ad has already been running for a few days, including during primetime slots of 8pm and 9pm, without any sign that it is stopping.

I fear that with a “green message” out almost everyday from every angle, now that Global Warming seems to be a fashionable statement to be made by most, the message carried (or lack of message, as in this case) will continue to cloud and confuse people, so much so that the continual efforts to educate and create awarenesss is hindered.

Hopefully. when people intend to raise awareness, they think through what they plan to do, and get the facts/messages/signals right first.