Tuesday, March 31, 2009

All Fished Out


Human greed may spell the end for the magnificent Mediterranean tuna-
by fen montaigne
No more magnificent fish swims the oceans than the giant bluefin tuna, which can grow up to 4m in length, weigh more than 250kg and live for 30 years. It can streak through water at 50kmh and dive to over a kilometre in depth. Warm-blooded, it roams from the Arctic to the tropics. Another extraordinary attribute may prove to be its undoing: its buttery belly meat is considered to make the world’s finest sushi. Over the past decade, a high-tech armada, often guided by spotter planes, has pursued bluefin from one end of the Mediterranean to the other, annually netting tens of thousands of the fish, many of them illegally. The fish are fattened offshore in sea cages before being shot and butchered for the sushi and steak markets in Japan, America and Europe.

Once, giant bluefin migrated by the millions throughout the Atlantic Basin and the Mediterranean Sea. So many have been hauled out of the Mediterranean that the population is in danger of collapse. Meanwhile, European and North African officials have done little to stop the slaughter.

“My big fear is that it may be too late,” said Sergi Tudela, a Spanish ­marine biologist with the World Wildlife Fund. “We are witnessing the same phenomenon happening to giant bluefin tuna that we saw happen with America’s ­ buffalo.”

The decimation of giant bluefin is emblematic of everything that is wrong with global fisheries today: the vastly increased killing power of new fishing technology, the shadowy network of international companies making huge profits from the trade, negligent fisheries management and enforcement, and the in­difference of consumers to the fate of the fish species they buy.

The very act of procreation now puts the giant bluefin at the mercy of the fleets. In the spring and summer, as the water warms, schools of bluefin rise to the surface to spawn. Planing on their sides and exposing their massive silver-coloured flanks, the large females each expel tens of millions of eggs, and the males emit clouds of milt (sperm). From the air, this turmoil of reproduction can be seen from many kilometres away by spotter planes, which call in the fleet.

13 Green Questions and Answers


In public toilets, is it better to use a paper towel or an electric hand dryer?

Go for the hot air. The energy needed to heat and blow air at your hands is far less than the energy needed to make and transport paper towels and haul waste away. One US study found that nine fully grown trees are cut down to supply an average fast-food restaurant with paper towels over a year; the tossed towels then create over 450kg of landfill waste. The hand dryer is also more hygienic. Doctors at the University of Ottawa claim the hot air gets into more crevices in the skin, killing off germs quicker.


Should I do the dirty dishes by hand or use a dishwasher?

This one’s not so crystal clear, since it all depends on how you hand wash and on the model of dishwasher. According to Tanya Ha, the author of Greeniology, old-style washing, using one sink for washing and one for rinsing, consumes 15-20 litres of water. “However, the amount increases considerably if you rinse dishes under running tap water instead of using a filled sink or bucket.” Research by the British government’s Market Transformation Programme last year found that dishwashers get items cleaner and use about 75% less water. The key is having a modern model. Dishwashers built today use around 95% less energy than those built 30 years ago, says Ha. Older models can use up to 90 litres of water a load; modern two-drawer dishwashers use as little as nine litres. To be even greener, stick to full loads and use the no-heat or air-dry option.


Should I do my laundry in a front-loader or top-loading washing machine?

Front-loaders win, hands down. Top-loaders have faster cycles but they use much more water, energy and detergent. When you are buying a new machine, look for the labels listing its energy and water ratings. Also choose a machine size that suits your household. Even if you’re not planning on buying a new machine, you can still make your current washer more eco-friendly. Clean the filter, use the minimum amount of detergent, stick to cold water and stick with full loads.

What should I eat for dinner tonight?

Out of everything you do, what you choose to eat has the biggest impact on the environment, says Rebecca Blackburn, author of Green is Good: Smart Ways to Live Well and Help the Planet. “Farming uses more resources than any other industry: two-thirds of Australia’s land and more than two-thirds of our water. It also produces one fifth of our greenhouse gas emissions.” In fact, one third of the average person’s carbon footprint is due to their intake of animal-based food, which is far more than the impact of driving a car or the energy used in our homes.So should we turn vegetarian? Blackburn says you’ll be surprised at how much you can help the environment simply by reducing your red-meat intake even slightly. In fact, eating 3kg less red meat each year is equivalent to reducing household water use by half! Blackburn’s handy tip: go for Meatless Monday.


Is it correct that flicking fluoro lights on and off uses more energy?

Actually no. New data suggests frequent switching doesn’t shorten the life span of bulbs or waste energy. Compact fluorescent bulbs are basically energy-efficient versions of the strip lighting we used to put in laundries and bathrooms. Manufacturer Osram is now selling a bulb that it claims can be switched 500,000 times – equivalent to 91 times per day over its 15-year life.


When it comes to grocery shopping, should I do a big shop each month or fortnight, or should I shop every few days?

Australians admit to throwing out a whopping $5.3 billion worth of food a year. Not surprisingly, the majority of the wasted food is fresh: $2.9 billion worth. “It’s not just money that’s being wasted, it’s the resources that went into making the food,” says Blackburn. “Do an audit of the fridge before you go shopping and figure out what’s left behind, what went off and why you didn’t eat the food.” So by all means do a big monthly shop of durables and non-perishables, but buy your fresh fruit and vegetables every couple of days so they don’t sit in the crisper unused.


Are the new hybrid cars that much better than small, fuel-efficient, conventional cars?

Hybrid cars are not the be-all and end-all. “Choose the smallest car that you can manage and choose the most fuel-efficient car in that range,” says Blackburn. New vehicles are rated by website http://www.greenvehicleguide.gov.au/based on greenhouse and air pollution emissions. “You can make a big difference without buying a hybrid,” says Blackburn. “If money’s an issue, you’d be far better off spending the extra money on a rainwater tank, solar hot water, insulation and energy-efficient appliances.


What’s best: curtains or venetian blinds?

When it comes to keeping your house insulated, curtains win hands down. Venetian blinds don’t reduce heat transfer at all; a close-fitting, lined, floor-length curtain with a pelmet will reduce heat loss in winter by one third. To keep the radiant heat out in summer, install outdoor shutters, awnings or miniature louvres. Window films provide some protection from summer sun but are less effective than external blinds, and they also don’t protect against heat loss in winter.


When it comes to baby, what’s best: disposable nappies or cloth nappies?

Let’s call this a draw. Several independent studies – taking into account all the environmental factors such as raw material and energy usage, emissions of air and water pollution, and even waste management – conclude that both have roughly the same environmental effect. But the dollar cost is another equation.


I’m thirsty. Bottled water or tap?

Australians drink 150 million litres of bottled water each year. And Clean Up Australia reckons just 35% of all plastic bottles are recycled – the rest end up as landfill.When it comes to tap water, there are no transportation costs or carbon emissions. Buy your own water bottle. Instead of spending $2 per bottle, factor in just 2c and decide now if the taste is OK.


Solar hot water and solar panels: what’s the difference?

A lot of people get confused about this. One is taking the sun’s energy and heating up hot water. The other is taking the sun’s energy and producing electricity.If you can imagine going camping with a big black barrel filled with water sitting in the sun, when you had a shower from the barrel, the water would be warm, says Blackburn. That’s essentially the same as the process in a solar hot water system. Solar electricity is more complicated. It’s still quite expensive so the federal government has introduced a rebate of up to $8000 if you install solar panels, which practically halves the cost. Says Blackburn, “It’s not cost effective to install solar panels as a way to reduce your greenhouse gas emissions. For much less money, you can install energy-efficient appliances, lights and insulation and reduce your emissions by about half.


Rechargeable versus disposable batteries?

Rechargeables. No question. They work out better on the hip pocket, too. “You buy them once for about $4, versus a normal alkaline battery for $1, but get to use them about 1000 times.” And for those who think rechargeable batteries are too fiddly to use and take too long to charge: remember, you’re already using them in your mobile phone and laptop. “If you were using throwaway batteries in your mobile, it would cost more than your phone bill.


Scraps. Should I compost them or throw them straight in the bin?

Up to 50% of domestic waste is food scraps and garden waste that could be composted. Make it easy for yourself: keep a little plastic bin on the kitchen bench, or use a stainless-steel cooking pot and line it with newspaper so it cleans more easily.You can compost the strangest things: vegetable oil, tea bags, coffee grounds, vacuum dust, eggshells, hair clippings or hair removed from a brush, ash from wood fires, shredded paper and cardboard, even dried flower arrangements. If you live in an apartment, consider a Bokashi bin. It sits under your sink and the fermentation process doesn’t produce smells. When full, visit the communal garden or enrich a friend’s garden

Driving Towards a Greener and Cleaner Future


Converting water into fuel is one solution, but making sure we get from A to B as efficiently as possible is the true future of transport

Widespread concern for the environment and record fuel prices add up to one thing – healthy profits for companies that can make cars which are less polluting and cheaper to run. Manufacturers are acutely aware of the opportunities. "Oil consumption is not sustainable right now, plus, we’re compounding the problem with growth," says J. Gary Smyth, director of powertrain research at US carmaking giant General Motors. "We [the car industry] are the major contributor, we are the problem, we have to solve this problem." The likely solution would not please Henry Ford, who famously wanted all his cars to be black, to suit mass production. Instead, variety will be spice of life on the road this century. The number of different fuels, engines, body shapes and materials is set to multiply.
"It is likely that vehicle types will diversify, broadening our concepts of the recent past," says Professor John Heywood of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "Size and weight may well change too." Some of the innovations are already on the road, and others will be in a showroom near you very soon, displaying imaginative ways to reduce petrol consumption. Lighter cars burn less fuel so alloy frames and plastic bodies are on the cards – and cutting four wheels down to three is a growing trend on urban run-abouts like the Clever (Compact Low Emission Vehicle for Urban Transport) two-seater designed by a European engineering consortium, which includes German industry titan BMW. Eliminating internal combustion engines altogether is another approach. Take electric vehicles: They emit no pollution where they are used and are very quiet, which is precisely why the historic French port of La Rochelle has a fleet of electric cars for hire and why most of its municipal vehicles run on amps not octanes. Nissan plans to start selling battery-powered cars in Japan and the United States within two years and the Port of Los Angeles has already introduced a heavy-duty electric truck to haul cargo containers. The prototype cost US$527,000, but plans for an assembly plant to build a fleet of the electric trucks are at an advanced stage. All being well, the truck will be sold worldwide. Paradigm shifts like this always allow smart players to enter the game and there’s a host of eager innovators keen to plug in and switch on. Venturi, from the Mediterranean principality of Monaco, aims to start selling its $40,000 Eclectic threeseater next year. It has solar panels on the roof to turn sunbeams into electric power and a crowd-stopping optional extra – a wind turbine to top up the batteries

Earth-friendly eating

Food that’s good for your body also turns out to be good for the environment

Substitute chicken, fish or vegetables for red meat and dairy just one day a week, and your family of four will eliminate greenhouse gases similar to the amount produced by a 1200km car trip, say researchers from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, who studied the impact of dozens of foods. Other ways to do your part:

Buy local and fresh Local isn’t better if the food is stored for long periods, using up more energy. Fresh-picked fare not only avoids long trips in fume-spewing trucks, planes and boats, but it also packs more nutrients and requires no preservatives.

Choose sun-ripened fruits and vegetables They generate fewer emissions than produce raised in heated greenhouses.

Cut back on processed foods A lot of truck kilometres go into foods with artificial sweeteners, additives, and preservatives because these ingredients are often shipped to the manufacturer from other locations.

Tiger Woods is Back


Tiger Woods needed just three tournaments to prove he’s still the hottest property in world sport – and worth every cent of the $3m it usually takes to persuade him to play events which don’t figure on the US PGA Tour schedule.
The hard-pressed governors of Victoria must have chuckled into their cornflakes as Woods sealed an astonishing fightback with a 16-foot putt for birdie and victory on the final hole at Bay Hill.
Their decision to underwrite Tiger’s invite to next November’s Australian Masters raised howls of anger and derision Down Under – but it doesn’t look so dim now.
Meanwhile, Tiger’s rivals face a sobering question in the run-up to next week’s US Masters. What if Woods brings his ‘A’ game to Augusta National?
Get the calculators out. Should Tiger marry the ball-striking and shot-making we saw from him at Doral to his unworldly chipping and putting at Bay Hill, his record 12-stroke winning margin at the 1997 US Masters could come under threat.
No question, Woods, on his ‘Second Coming’ is stronger mentally and physically at age 33 than the toothy youngster who took the sporting world by storm 12 years back.
It’s a big ask. No normal human could be expected to win a Major on only his fourth outing after eight months on the injury list.
And at Augusta National next week, Woods won’t get away with the errant shots which frustrated him at Arnie Palmer’s place. Yet with venues like Bethpage, Pebble Beach and St Andrews on the roster over the next 16 months, don’t bet
against Tiger achieving his lifetime ambition and equalling Jack Nicklaus’s record of 18 professional Majors.
Of course, the weekend’s sixth win at Bay Hill is an enormous boost to Tiger’s morale as he heads home to prepare for his first Major since June’s staggering US Open success.
Standing on Bay Hill’s first tee on Sunday, Woods, the defending champion, was five strokes behind Sean O’Hair, yet he posted a final-round 67 to clinch his 66th win on the PGA Tour and 90th worldwide.
Though his 26-year-old opponent held out stubbornly to the last, the self-assurance which had underpinned O’Hair’s performance over his first three days at Bay Hill had evaporated.
In truth, Tiger wasn’t playing well enough to obliterate his opponent with one of those famous final-day charges – but he’d still close to within one stroke by the par-three seventh, where the jittery O’Hair three-putted for a telling second bogey in four holes.
Of course, it cannot have helped when several spectators, as keen as the rabble at the Roman Colosseum for the Tiger to spill blood, cackled audibly at O’Hair’s misfortune there.
Sunday would be the fourth time O’Hair failed to seal the deal after leading into the final round on the PGA Tour, including last year’s Arnold Palmer Invitational when he also played in the final group with a rampant Tiger.
Yet Woods had to scramble hard on occasions, most notably on 14 when he sank a phenomenal 14-footer for par after his approach shot had plugged under the lip of a greenside bunker. His magical putter then helped Tiger draw level for the first time at 15, where he holed from 25 feet for an unlikely birdie and the bell tolled ever louder for his opponent at the next when O’Hair’s approach fell short into the water. O’Hair’s bogey put Woods ahead but Tiger dropped a shot out of yet another plugged lie tight to the lip of a greenside bunker at 17.
So they were all-square, until Woods rolled home that clutch putt for birdie and victory on the final green. For the second year on the trot, Bay Hill witness an explosion of elation from Tiger, only this one had been eight months in the making.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Hibakusha













Japanese man wins recognition for surviving two atom bombs

Tsutomu Yamaguchi, 93, was caught in second world war atom bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki,93-year-old Japanese man has become the first person to be certified as a survivor of both US atomic bombings at the end of the second world war, officials said today.

Tsutomu Yamaguchi had already been a certified "hibakusha," or radiation survivor, of the 9 August 1945 atomic bombing in Nagasaki. Now it has been confirmed that he also survived the attack on Hiroshima three days earlier.

Yamaguchi was in Hiroshima on a business trip on 6 August 1945 when a US B-29 dropped an atomic bomb on the city. He suffered serious burns to his upper body and spent the night in the city. He then returned to his hometown of Nagasaki.

"As far as we know, he is the first one to be officially recognised as a survivor of atomic bombings in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki," said Nagasaki city official Toshiro Miyamoto. "It's such an unfortunate case, but it is possible that there are more people like him."

Certification qualifies survivors for government compensation including monthly allowances, free medical checkups and funeral costs. Miyamoto said Yamaguchi's compensation would not increase.

Japan is the only country to have suffered atomic bomb attacks. About 140,000 people were killed in Hiroshima and 70,000 in Nagasaki.

Yamaguchi is one of about 260,000 people who survived the attacks. Bombing survivors have developed various illnesses from radiation exposure, including cancer and liver illnesses. Details of Yamaguchi's health problems were not released.

Thousands of survivors continue to seek official recognition after the government rejected their eligibility for compensation. Last year, it eased the requirements for being certified as a survivor, following criticism the rules were too strict and neglected many who had developed illnesses that doctors have linked to radiation.

China Takes Aim at Dollar

China called for the creation of a new currency to eventually replace the dollar as the world's standard, proposing a sweeping overhaul of global finance that reflects developing nations' growing unhappiness with the U.S. role in the world economy.
The unusual proposal, made by central bank governor Zhou Xiaochuan in an essay released Monday in Beijing, is part of China's increasingly assertive approach to shaping the global response to the financial crisis.

Mr. Zhou's proposal comes amid preparations for a summit of the world's industrial and developing nations, the Group of 20, in London next week. At past such meetings, developed nations have criticized China's economic and currency policies.
This time, China is on the offensive, backed by other emerging economies such as Russia in making clear they want a global economic order less dominated by the U.S. and other wealthy nations.

However, the technical and political hurdles to implementing China's recommendation are enormous, so even if backed by other nations, the proposal is unlikely to change the dollar's role in the short term. Central banks around the world hold more U.S. dollars and dollar securities than they do assets denominated in any other individual foreign currency. Such reserves can be used to stabilize the value of the central banks' domestic currencies.

Monday's proposal follows a similar one Russia made this month during preparations for the G20 meeting. Like China, Russia recommended that the International Monetary Fund might issue the currency, and emphasized the need to update "the obsolescent unipolar world economic order."

Chinese officials are frustrated at their financial dependence on the U.S., with Premier Wen Jiabao this month publicly expressing "worries" over China's significant holdings of U.S. government bonds. The size of those holdings means the value of the national rainy-day fund is mainly driven by factors China has little control over, such as fluctuations in the value of the dollar and changes in U.S. economic policies. While Chinese banks have weathered the global downturn and continue to lend, the collapse in demand for the nation's exports has shuttered factories and left millions jobless.

In his paper, published in Chinese and English on the central bank's Web site, Mr. Zhou argued for reducing the dominance of a few individual currencies, such as the dollar, euro and yen, in international trade and finance. Most nations concentrate their assets in those reserve currencies, which exaggerates the size of flows and makes financial systems overall more volatile, Mr. Zhou said.

Moving to a reserve currency that belongs to no individual nation would make it easier for all nations to manage their economies better, he argued, because it would give the reserve-currency nations more freedom to shift monetary policy and exchange rates. It could also be the basis for a more equitable way of financing the IMF, Mr. Zhou added. China is among several nations under pressure to pony up extra cash to help the IMF.
John Lipsky, the IMF's deputy managing director, said the Chinese proposal should be treated seriously. "It reflects officials' concerns about improving the stability of the financial system," he said. "It's interesting because of China's unique position, and because the governor put it in a measured and considered way."

China's proposal is likely to have significant implications, said Eswar Prasad, a professor of trade policy at Cornell University and former IMF official. "Nobody believes that this is the perfect solution, but by putting this on the table the Chinese have redefined the debate," he said. "It represents a very strong pushback by China on a number of fronts where they feel themselves being pushed around by the advanced countries," such as currency policy and funding for the IMF.

A spokeswoman for the U.S. Treasury Department declined to comment on Mr. Zhou's views. In recent weeks, senior Obama administration officials have sought to reassure Beijing that the current U.S. spending spree is a short-term effort to restart the stalled American economy, not evidence of long-term U.S. profligacy.


"The re-establishment of a new and widely accepted reserve currency with a stable valuation benchmark may take a long time," Mr. Zhou said. In remarks earlier Monday, one of his deputies, Hu Xiaolian, also said the dollar's dominant position in international trade and investment is unlikely to change soon. Ms. Hu is in charge of reserve management as the head of China's State Administration of Foreign Exchange.


Mr. Zhou's comments -- coming on the heels of Mr. Wen's musing about the safety of China's dollar holdings -- appear to be a warning to the U.S. that it can't expect China to finance its spending indefinitely.

The central banker's proposal reflects both China's desire to hold its $1.95 trillion in reserves in something other than U.S. dollars and the fact that Beijing has few alternatives. With more U.S. dollars continuing to pour into China from trade and investment, Beijing has no realistic option other than storing them in U.S. debt.

Mr. Zhou argued, without mentioning the dollar by name, that the loss of the dollar's de facto reserve status would benefit the U.S. by avoiding future crises. Because other nations continued to park their money in U.S. dollars, the argument goes, the Federal Reserve was able to pursue an irresponsible policy in recent years, keeping interest rates too low for too long and thereby helping to inflate a bubble in the housing market.


"The outbreak of the crisis and its spillover to the entire world reflected the inherent vulnerabilities and systemic risks in the existing international monetary system," Mr. Zhou said. The increasing number and intensity of financial crises suggests "the costs of such a system to the world may have exceeded its benefits."

Mr. Zhou isn't the first to make that argument. "The dollar reserve system is part of the problem," Joseph Stiglitz, the Columbia University economist, said in a speech in Shanghai last week, because it meant so much of the world's cash was funneled into the U.S. "We need a global reserve system," he said in the speech.


Mr. Zhou's idea is to expand the use of "special drawing rights," or SDRs -- a kind of synthetic currency created by the IMF in the 1960s. Its value is determined by a basket of major currencies. Originally, the SDR was intended to serve as a shared currency for international reserves, though that aspect never really got off the ground.
These days, the SDR is mainly used in the IMF's accounting for its transactions with member nations. Mr. Zhou suggested countries could increase their contributions to the IMF in exchange for greater access to a pool of reserves in SDRs.


Holding more international reserves in SDRs would increase the role and powers of the IMF. That indicates China and other developing nations aren't hostile to international financial institutions -- they just want to have more say in running them. China has resisted the U.S. push to make an immediate loan to the IMF because that wouldn't give China a bigger vote. Ms. Hu said Monday that China, which encourages the IMF to explore other fund-raising options, would consider buying into a bond issue.

The IMF has been working on a proposal to issue bonds, probably only to central banks. Bond purchases are one way for the organization to raise money and meet its goal of at least doubling its lending war chest to $500 billion from $250 billion. Japan has loaned the IMF $100 billion and the European Union has pledged another $100 billion.