Last night’s SG+ on climate change was all about all the great things
Red Dot has done on climate change and saving mother earth. Everything
is so positive, green buildings, water conservation, new water, earth
hour, cutting down on wasteful consumption, reducing car population,
reducing carbon emission, encourage walking or cycling, saving waste
papers, plastics etc etc. Everyone in the panel of discussion was
patting himself and feeling so good that as a first world country we
were setting an excellent example for the less developed countries to
follow.
I was just a bit puzzled by some of the things that we are doing like
scrapping cars in 10 years or less when they can be used for 20 or 30
years. Is this wasteful or saving resources? What about pulling down
structurally sound buildings that could last another 50 to 100 years
just to rebuild even higher and higher buildings? Are these acts helping
to reduce consumption of energy and resources and material or wasting
them?
What about increasing the population from 3m to 5.4m and now proceeding
to 6.9m? Is the increasing population going to increase consumption of
energy and resources or the other way?
On the whole I think any one of these three items, premature scrapping
of good road worthy cars, pulling down of structural sound buildings or
population increases could outdo all the things mentioned in para one
added together to reduce consumption of resources but conversely has
more adverse effects on climate change in bigger ways.
What is the point of saving a glass of water but turning the aircon on
the whole night? Think how much airconditioning is needed to cool the
funny gardens for plants that would grow wild in their natural habitats?
Is the Red Dot really a good example in energy saving or reducing
consumption of resources to help in slowing down climate change? How
much more energy and resources would need to be consumed for every
million people added into the island, the food, energy, utilities, their
toys, the leisure and casual consumption for them to live and use?
Can we remove the red lens and look at the self perpetuating myths and
fallacies we created to make us look good and feel good? Our greed for
more people is so destructive that we didn’t even know or were aware of
it. We are so blind to our wrongs and so smug in blowing our own
trumpets. We are helping in the worse way to destroy mother earth by
destroying our little island first.
27 comments:
No plastic bags on certain days for supermarket purchases.
Save the Earth, off lights for one hour.
What hypocrites???
Throw concerts for Earth Hour, tons of rubbish to be cleared.
Burn the forests create haze- SAVE THE EARTH???
Military exercises- Bang bang boom boom all the smoke and arid gases.
Just like the South and North Koreas and the USA conducting war games shooting at eah others like small kids. SAVE THE EARTH???
Mother Earth gonna suffocated and KILLED by these JOKERS.
Please lah, one little plastic bag compared to the above and many more can SAVE THE EARTH???
BULLSHIT!!!!
What about our govt schools perpetually changing textbooks every other year so that they cannot be passed down from a student to his/her younger siblings for use in school? A big wastage of parents' money and bad for environment.
The emission, and run down parts do use more and the meatalic components can be recycle into other meatal parts.....not necessary cars!, but the rational is not for cars to run longer as after 10 years every cars still has to pay COE, insurance and road tax. The rational is that with such a small place, those that govern could tranformed it to a more economic and viable island that really can put in place a eco-friendly system just like the swiss.....many comparision was used of us with the swiss....but till now, we have only achieve, domes that house investational lizards, bridges that are the most expensive in terms of land space.
The trees brought in ages ago is showing more signs of harm as some could and have stuff the local species with their insects and diseases.....The experts should have foresaw this, that's why someone brought up we do not have quality tutors?.
Agree with Virgo49....not necessary his words but that there are a lot of BS around, the immature write up of a nasi padang, tampon chasing and thanking the public for understanding of the fare hike shows a huge amount of arrogance and "bo chap", attitude. The i do you follow way have existed since the father was here, now as billionares asked for more land and ft's eblowing their way in, we are being push to the edge, its follow or else, soon such blogs as mysingaporeans will be a thing of the past, perhaps remembered by a few old timers.
Many here have said, that the opps are not ready and some have defended with, "so what," they can't do any worse....it boils down to, to be run out or at least stop this onslaught and reboot or pay with your blood.
Wikia
Metal as it should be spelled.
If you don't replace them they will replace you.
Hi Wikia, welcome to the blog. There are many things that are being done here are so destructive to our environment and mother earth. Just imagine adding millions and millions of people in this small piece of rock. They will damage and destroy our enviroment with more buildups, with consumptions and waste creation that will affect our flora and fauna.
Human existence is the most wasteful and destructive thing on mother earth. The most human beans there are, the more destructive is their presence and activities.
The crux of dealing with Climate Change (CC) is reducing green house gas emissions.
It has nothing to do with scrapping cars or limiting the growth of population. Those are all bullshit arguments coming from redbean.
All you have to do it move to a carbon-neutral energy economy. No one is saying to STOP using fossil fuels immediately. You can wind back the use of fossil fuels or move from coal and diesel to natural gas which has a very low carbon footprint. Then also consider uranium and thorium-based nuclear energy, thrown is some solar and wind where possible. The idea is to create an ENERGY MIX and slowly reduce the amount of carbon emissions.
The key is to bring these new tech to bear at an affordable cost. The #1 cuntree in the world is CHINA. They know that their cities are choking in smog. Something has to be done or their people will suffer all sorts of health issues, other problems -- like devastating floods, famines and earthquakes of which there are causal links to CC.
China doesn't need silly "binding agreements" of the Kyoto Protocol. China is one cuntree which understands the seriousness of CC, and what it can do to their cuntree. So they've been smart about it and are acting on their own -- and generating export revenue as a result. China, adopts free market solutions and entrepreneurship to solve problems.
Western cuntrees OTOH, are fucking TAXING and PENALISING citizens who use too much carbon. In Australia, the average family pays about AUD 10 per week in carbon taxes. That's over 500 dollars a year.
China ==> capitalist
Australia ==> socialist
Clap. clap, clap. Matilah, you are so clever.
The destruction of mother earth is not just about carbon emission and climate change. It is the imbalance of the ecological system with over population, exploitation and over consumption of resources.
Do I need to explain the A to Z of energy and resource consumption and destruction in the making and scrapping of a car? Do I need to do the same for every one person that is added to the system?
RB:
>> The destruction of mother earth
Please lah. There is no such "destruction" going on. There is CHANGE, but don't be so arrogant as to think that humans alone can "destroy" the planet. Humankind will destroy themselves first before it even makes a fucking significant DENT in the planet.
>> Do I need to explain the A to Z of energy and resource consumption and destruction in the making and scrapping of a car? Do I need to do the same for every one person that is added to the system?
No, because you'll screw it up. :-)
Sure, all human activity requires ENERGY. But you can do it with GREEN energy. If you buy a French car, that car was produced using -- for the most part -- zero carbon NUCLEAR energy. France's energy production is 75% nuclear. Japan pre-Fukushima was 30%, planned to be scaled up to 40%. S Korea, China, Russia are all going nuclear and reducing their carbon footprint.
You're not going to get rid of carbon fuels overnight lah. But, generally the world is becoming more greener. That is the TREND -- so your idea of "earth's destruction" is pure BULLSHIT.
the govt's attitude to climate change is the same as its attitude to other matters - talk only. in fact, most of what the govt does is contradictory to what it says, or pays it just lip service. or looks and sounds good but in reality has little impact.
why else are they cutting down forests all over Spore?
the forests at Pasir Ris have all gone. driving in ang mo kio, u'll see large swathes of forests being removed, or already gone. every spare plot, most with trees, is being targeted for devt.
a vicious attack is being planned on the central catchment area. bukit brown (here, spore's history too is hit majorly) is going to be cleared as well.
in fact, word is that all forests in spore will eventually be cleared.
en blocs of entire estates Which Have JUST Been Built - are allowed. we won't talk of buildings that are a mere 10, 20, 30 years old being sold collectively and pulled down.
when a house with a big garden is bought, it is Standard that the replacement home/homes will have much smaller gardens - if they have gardens at all. often, these are all paved up.
old streetside trees which provide shade and took decades to grow are replaced by palms and things which look like firs - that offer NO shade. the trees are being removed during the hot season and replaced Months down the road when the wet season begins.
has the water table fallen drastically with all the building and poor drainage? did this cause the browning all over the island in what was essentially a cool tho rainless period of about 5 weeks? the grass didn't turn brown so quickly for the lack of a few weeks of rain before.
a lot of hoo-ha is made over recycling paper and plastic bags, while all the major matters are ignored or glossed over.
so much of the wastage and destruction today has been due to just ONE policy - BRINGING IN MORE PEOPLE THAN THIS ISLAND CAN SUPPORT IN REALITY, WITHOUT WANTON DESTRUCTION OF WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.
corr to post: last line shld read WITH wanton destgruction of all that's important.
@1232:
>> why else are they cutting down forests all over Spore?
Fucking bullshit. You're a blind cunt lah.
Singapore is one of the greenest modern cities in the whole damn world lah. The city planners have done a great job in creating a vibrant, hip 21st century smart city to keep nearly 6 million souls secure and alive, incorporated with some of the best-kept greenery on the planet.
I am a cyclist lah. I ride everywhere. I do work(on laptop) in the many parks -- because they're peaceful and beautiful. The greenery in Singapore is AWESOME. National Parks board -- they've done a damn good job.
This is the standard Singapore formula.
First you destroy the forest, then you plant 1 tree and claim credit for green work.
First you raise prices everywhere, then you give one voucher and claim you are helping the poor.
A forest is not just trees. There is a whole ecosystem at work to keep everything, and living things, in balance. Planting a tree and a few grass patches cannot replace a forest and the whole ecosytem it is sustaining. Water level, holding the earth together like a lattice foundation....
Matilah, just give you a riddle assuming that all energy form is clean, nuclear, wind or solar and plus plus.
Then increase the population in this island to 10m or the earth's population to 10b. What would happen? No carbon emission, no greenhouse gas. Can the system be sustainable?
How many fish will be left in the oceans? You can wipe out all the ants or just butterflies, you will destroy the whole life sustaining ecosystem and eventually life forms.
RB @136:
Hahaha. Arrogant and ignorant humans think that they alone can destroy life on this planet.
When the 15 km asteroid screamed into the earth's atmosphere at multiple Mach speed, it hit Yucatan in Mexico. The explosion was so great it wiped out a significant amount of life on the earth. The greehouse gases produced by the impact which vapourised limestone (carbonaceous rock) releasing tons and tons of carbon into the atmosphere. The sun was blocked out by the debris. Plants which didn't burn up, died. The animals which eat the plants, also died as well as the animals which eat the animals which eat the plants. And so on.
Of the few species which did survive, were small mammals. Formerly they were mainly prey for larger predators like the dinosaurs.
Now the dinosaurs were dead, and small mammals dominated. Evolution continues, and those small mammals gave rise to US -- humans. If not for that asteroid, perhaps we would not have evolved. Of course, no one can say for certain, but that is a very plausible hypothesis.
Most of the species that once were, are now extinct. Every day, several species go extinct. But more come into existence.
Life is inevitable -- if the right physical conditions are met -- life will evolve; it is an extension of material physical processes like physics and chemistry.
Humans are just another species, in the "grand scheme" of things, where there is actually no scheme nor control. Wipe out all the humans and all the species, and within time -- geological time -- life will begin again.
So don't worry about planet earth. It is only one planet in one medium sized galaxy out of billions of other galaxies.
Better to just worry about yourself, and your kin. Afterall, your own existence is FINITE.
The earth has been around for 3.9 billion years. You're fucking lucky if you can make it to 100 years old :-)
Last word form George Carlin Enjoy.
"Global Warming" and "Climate Change" is the biggest scam since the Y2K bug.
First, they were warning about "global warming". When countries began to feel the big freeze, they now switch to "climate change".
Just what the heck is "climate change". Of course the climate change all the time. In the northern and southern countries, there are 4 climate changes each year - summer, autumn, winter and spring. Even in equatorial Singapore, we have climate change all the time - rainy, sunny, and now hazy.
Growth based on population growth is the worst nightmare mother earth wants. They should make a point for countries to reduce not carbon emission but population growth especially countries where people breed like pigs. They must have a two-is-enough policy. They will also tend to care for their people more since it is no longer unlimited resources and thus they will not be exporting them all over the earth inconveniencing others and themselves. The only winner in this population growth via third world migrates is the rich elite class. The migrates, locals, mother earth are the victims.
Furthermore, huge mansions and structures being built should be heavily fined. They are using excessive limited resources and are very negative to the environment.
How much energy to maintain the two buildings at garden by the bay?
Save the Earth. With 6.9 million population, we are sunk. Save Singapore. VTO before it's too late.
I agree it is all bullshit from the mouths of those telling us to switch off lights, use less platics, cycle etc.
Why don't they tell the big indistries, factories and car manufacturers to close down? Would they give up their big cars thenmselves? Why is there a need to hold all night parties and light ups to celebrate big occasions creating pollution. There is one big splash on Sinkieland's 50th anniversary coming up. Too important and too big to censure? So, just put the blame on the small people using one extra plastic bags, switching on one more light or having one more scoop of water for a bath? You know how much water is wasted by farmers growing sugar cane and corn?
I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of this nonsense. I hope Mr Fish do not mind my quoting him.
The amount of hot air and manure released in parliament is definitely not environmentally friendly.
Singapore is such a small place and therefore easier to be Green.
However more can be done:
- Building over highways is not a brand new idea. It was suggested before and now JTC is final looking at it.
- Instead of reclaiming land and destroying some Indonesian tiny islands, we can build all our shopping malls underground and apartments on top.
- Instead of so much land allocated for gold courses, buy and build over in S. Johor and convert the land for public parks.
- Instead of scattered factories, stack them up 20 stories high. With good design, fire cannot be spread to upper levels.
etc.
Instead of wasting so much money on all the abovementioned, we will have a lot more land for every Sinkie if we cut down our population.
Anonymous of 10:02 a.m. above said, "Instead of wasting so much money on all the abovementioned, we will have a lot more land for every Sinkie if we cut down our population."
That's exactly my sentiments too.
If all the energy-saving measures help the govt to bring in more foreigners, then it is unpatriotic to do so!!!
I salute anyone who has the resources to do the exact opposite - guzzle away all the energy and water until the PAP govt realize they have to stop increasing our population. They will be my hero.
Ladies and gentlemen, a junior minister said proudly recently that our foreign population increase is now half of previously. WTF!
Our hospitals are putting beds in outdoor canvas tents, out MRT are choking full and break down at least every week. And they are still cramming more foreign workers into the country??? Read the preceding paragraph again - they are still increasing the foreign population! The junior minister said so proudly. They are a bunch of lunatics!
“Having imported a reported 517 million tonnes of sand in the last 20 years, Singapore is by far the largest importer of sand world-wide and the world’s highest per capita consumer of sand at 5.4 tonnes per inhabitant.” (United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP)
And the environmental consequences can be devastating.
The UNEP says, referring to a report by the New York Times in 2010:
“Export of sand to Singapore was reported to be responsible for the disappearance of some 24 Indonesian sand islands. It is reported that this triggered political tensions regarding maritime borders between the two countries.”
@RB:
So what? Singapore bought the sand fair and square. Because of the demand for sand, the near-worthless all of a sudden has economic value.
Indonesia has thousands and thousands of islands. 24 sand islands -- WTF? Even if was double that the number is only a fraction of one percent, you can ignore it.
If the islands were destroyed by naturally rising sea levels, no one other than "the sky is falling" militant greenies would say shit.
But since rich Singapore BOUGHT their sand -- to put it to economically "better" use -- the UNELECTED kay poh kias in some global wannabe control-freak agency gets upset.
Fuck them. Buy more sand!
Post a Comment