Singapore and Carbon Emission Cuts

Being an environmentalist, I keep an eye on the proceedings of the Copenhagen summit this coming December. Being a Singapore too, I am interested in observing the response of Singapore to this conference and its probable promise of emission reduction targets.

So I am somewhat amused at two Straits Times reports on the government's response to emission cuts. The first (Climate change a challenge) revolves around a statement by the prime minister:

'Therefore, provided other countries also commit to do their part in a global deal, we will reduce emissions from 'business-as-usual' levels and do what we need to do with other countries to reduce humankind's carbon-dioxide emissions.'

Sounds good? But just one day before, he had his minister set the tone first (in this aggressively-titled S'pore rejects emission cuts),

'Whatever we do, we cannot compromise our ability to grow. So how we find a balance will be a continuous process.'

Of course, Singapore has no official obligation to obey any emissions deal, since we are not what is called an Annex I party under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Non-Annex I parties are mainly developing countries and a few which have economies that are vulnerable to emission cuts.

One can understand why Singapore, with a huge oil refining/trading economy, is quick to emphasise its non-responsibility. But doesn't that make the prime minister's words,

'But as a responsible member of the international community, we have to bear our fair share of the collective global effort to reduce carbon emissions.

a bit hypocritical?

350? Too Audacious a Target?

Again, on climate change, on 350.org's International Day of Climate Change.

Feels Like Hell

I'm not sure if it's just me, or is the weather blazing hot today. I was sweating as I was reading despite my faithful fan spinning at its fastest capability. According to Yahoo! Weather for today, it's supposed to feel like 37 °C today.

The highest temperature was 32 °C, but it was revised: earlier in the afternoon, it was reported as 35 °C. Interesting that the pressure was indicated as rising. Imagine instead if it said

Feels Like: 37 °C and rising

Now that'll be a real horror.

The Right to be Right

The promised post for Blog Action Day 2009: The Right to be Right.

One Blog Post on 15th Oct

Next Thursday, 15th October, you can expect one blog post on The Bosonic State.



It will be my little part for Blog Action Day 2009. The topic this year is climate change. I have a rough idea of what I'm going to say, based on some scrambled musings rumbling in my brain, but you'll have to visit my commentary blog that day to find out more.

And if you care enough about the environment, how about a post on BAD09?

A Hasty Nobel Peace Prize

It's screaming all over the airwaves and fibre optics cable (yay to Charles Kao!): Obama seized the Nobel Peace prize. From the citation of the Nobel committee, it seems that they admire his world vision and hope to use the prize to cement his conviction in that area.

I dunno about that, but it sounds so lame. I mean, I bet there are people with way better world vision than Obama and have committed more (and, for some, achieved more). Even previous winners awarded for their vision, like Aung San Suu Kyi, has achieved something (in her case, winning a biased election by emphasis on nonviolence protest). Giving it to Obama reminds me of the case of Henry Kissinger, US Secretary of State during Nixon's and Ford's time, who also won the Peace prize in 1973. He was praised for his role in the negotiation for a ceasefire between North and South Vietnam, which, of course, as we all know, was broken very soon and developed into a full scale war with the eventual defeat of the latter.

It doesn't appear that I'm the only one to think this way. BBC's reader feedback seem to be flooded with disparaging comments, mostly towards the Nobel committee. If that's indicative of the general mood towards this decision, then I think the reputation for the Nobel committee for Peace is gonna take a bad hit.

This award for Obama is at best premature, at worst blinded. At the time of writing, Obama has yet to step forth to accept the prize. I dunno about him, but if I were him, I would've rejected the prize.

Nobel Prize Lands on Photonics

Just fresh: the Nobel Prize for Physics 2009 is awarded to researchers in photonics, on two separate technology: transmission of light through optical cables and capturing light precisely on electronic sensors.

Briton Charles Kao is lauded for his work in helping to develop fibre optic cables, the slender threads of glass that carry phone and net data as light.

Willard Boyle and George Smith, both North Americans, are recognised for their part in the invention of the charge-coupled device, or CCD.

It appears to me that the recent Prizes for physics have been leaning towards technology. I mean, it hardly needs to be mentioned the tremendous impact of optical cables and CCDs in modern society. It's just like how two years ago, it was awarded to giant magnetoresistance, which forms the basis of our hard disks.

In fact, if you compare it with Prizes given to fields in applied physics decades ago, it's a sharp contrast in terms of social applicability. Then, they were bestowed onto researchers working on neutron scattering, superconductors and stuff like that, which has a great impact in physics but not so much in terms of practical technology. Of course, there's always the exception - such as the transistor - but I think there is a greater emphasis on technology.