What is a green home?

When talking about green home, one may think that it is a home whose steeply slanted roof has been installed with solar PV panels that produce electricity, or a home whose yard is fully covered with green vegetations. Well, an environmentally friendly house construction needs to fulfill certain characteristics or criteria to be categorized as a green home.

1. A home that has minimal adverse impact on local ecosystem where it is built. For instance, the construction of the house did not cause a lot of forest clearing. Or the domestic wastes that are produced by from the house have to enter special treatment before they can be disposed off.
2. A home that is energy-efficient during its operation. If it is located in Europe or North America where the weather is cold, it will not need a lot of energy for indoor heating. If it is in the tropical region, the house must have enough ventilation holes to enable air naturally circulate from the outside into inside of the house and in reverse direction so that the cost for installing and operating air conditioning system can be minimized. For night lighting, the house uses LED lamps.
3. It has to be a house that has been constructed using environmentally friendly materials, both in the physical construction of the housing components and in its interior decoration. The construction materials for the house, if possible, should be taken from the local resource.
4. A home which has designed to have adequate natural lighting and ventilating system
5. And the last but not the least a home that is comfortable, safe, and healthy for its occupants.

If you plan to have your house designed by an architect or built by a home builder, don't forget to ask some of the above green home characteristics. You might only be able to fulfill small percentage of the above criteria but as long as you have tried any of them, you have helped the whole global community preserve this precious environment.

Also read:
Earthquake resistant wooden house
The ceiling and windows of wooden house

Eco Tourism and Souvenir Business in Manokwari

Here are the name of the artists and the kind of artworks which they make. I suggest that you buy souvenirs direclty from them instead of buying from shops. By buying directly from the artists, you can get cheaper products, give comments and encourage them to improve the quality of their artworks.
Xavier Bookstore - Selling Postcard and Watercolor Paintings
The artworks are made by Charles Roring and some Papuan artists
Address: Brawijaya Street next to SD Padma 1 Kompleks Missi Manokwari. Charles Roring and some of his Papuan friends can provide tour guide service for traveling to various tourist attractions in  and around Manokwari. He can be contacted through his cell phone: 081332245180 or email: peace4wp@gmail.com

Mrs. Marice Fatie-Fonataba
This widow is a master in cloth weaving. She lives in Komplex Missi behind Catholic Church St. Agustinus, Manokwari. Her woven cloth and pandanus bags are beautiful souvenirs which you can buy for your loved ones.

Mr. Lucky Kaikatui
He is an oil painting artist. He paints birds of paradise, the beautiful beaches of Papua, village life and forest. Mr. Kaikatui lives behind SMP Katolik (Catholic Junior High School) in Komplex Missi Manokwari

Mr. Awom - a wood carving artist

Address: Merdeka Street, next to Suri Bakery Shop

Mr. Awom makes small number but high quality wooden carvings. H

Mr. Asaribab - a school teacher who is also a wood carving and painter

Address: Anggrem

Carving and painting have been an integral part of Mr. Asaribab's family for generations.

Mr. Tony Mansiraken Krey

A Multi Talented Artist (a Papuan intellectual, a writer)

Address: Ketapang Boat Station, Kwawi, Manokwari

His friends like to call him Tonci Krey. This artist is considered as a brilliant artist. Most of the public statues in Manokwari were made by him. Art lovers who come to Manokwari must meet him if they want to know more about Papuan art and culture. You can buy paintings, carvings, and get various information about Papuan people, their stories and culture.

As a travel guide who frequently accompany tourists around this town and its surrounding forest, beaches and islands, I see that most of the visitors, after going around, will ask me whether there are souvenir shops in this small town Manokwari. Of course, there are. I know two souvenir shops in this town that sell various items ranging from string bags to Wamena's penis gourd. I also know several Papuan artists in this town that constantly make handicrafts both for domestic and foreign tourists. Although this is not their main source of income, their love of art continues to encourage them making artworks from time to time. For example, Mrs. Marice Fonataba who lives behind the Catholic church St. Agustinus in Kota area of Manokwari town. Her home is not located on a strategic street where tourists can easily find it. But she continues to manually weave traditional Papuan cloth as her past time activities. When I visited her home last week, I was surprised to see that she had made many artworks worth of millions of rupiahs.

There is also another artist whose home is on Jalan Merdeka next to Suri Bakery. He is a wood carving artist who has made high quality carvings. I brought three Russian eco-travelers to his home one night to buy some of his artworks. These Russians were amazed by the quality of the carvings and they were even surprised when he sold it for only Rp. 20,000 rupiahs each which is considered very-very cheap according to local standard. I immediately told them that they should give him better price as their appreciation for his hard works. They did. They paid 300,000 rupiahs for three carvings which they bought from him. He looked happy and smiled at us. It was drizzling that night but the Russians were satisfied with the wooden carvings which they had just bought.
Souvenirs that tourists must not buy
There are no rules but please, follow my suggestions as voluntary guidelines. When you go to a souvenir shop and you find handicrafts that are made of corals, please don't buy them. Coral reef is one of the most important species for marine environment. Due to global warming and the increased dumping of wastes at sea, these fragile species are dying. As tourists we must not buy souvenirs made of sea corals to discourage the destruction of coral reef around the world which is the home to thousands of species of fish and other marine creatures.
This also applies to Kuskus fur - an endemic animal from West Papua, to preserved skin and feather of bird of paradise and to other threatened animals in Papua island. By not buying such souvenirs we have practiced responsible eco-tourism principles in our life. 

The Environmental Impact of Marine Tourism

Sunbathing, snorkeling, scuba diving, wave surfing and water skiing are some of the activities that tourists typically enjoy when they go to the beach. These activities can bring positive and negative impacts to marine environment. To reduce negative impacts of tourism activities on the environments, people who work in this industry need adequate knowledge about conservation and coastal management.
Marine tourism is a business that generates big revenues during holidays and special occasions. Being a part of the tourism industry is a great way to make money because life seems like one endless holiday. Yes, it does have its downs like any other business, but for the most part, the going is good especially if you are well-established and your customers come back to give you repeat business. Marine tourism has come into its own with the advances that have been made in the field of technology. Locations that were earlier inaccessible or unsafe are now well-known tourist spots in marine environments. The seas and the coastlines of the world are much sought after destinations for tourists all over the world, and this makes marine tourism a booming industry.

But all this interest in water sports, cruises, underwater explorations and other activities that involve the marine environment are definitely having an adverse effect on marine ecosystems and animal species that live on or near the coast.

• Natural habitats are destroyed when hotels, restaurants and other entertainment and hospitality facilities are built along the coastline.
• Surrounding areas are also destroyed in order to provide access to these facilities. With the advent of roads, airports and sea ports, people begin to populate the area and drive out the natural wildlife whose habitat the area was originally.
• The level of pollution increases with the increase in population
• Essential resources like water become critical and are sometimes in shortage.
• The coastline is destroyed due to erosion and the sea also becomes polluted with effluents from hotels and other establishments in the area.
• Cruise ships produce and dump waste in mid ocean, leading to pollution in the high seas too.
• Sewage causes algae to form over coral reefs and damages and destroys them.

With all these detrimental effects, we must adopt techniques to manage the pollution and the destruction of ecosystems, not just because we need to save the environment, but because we need to save the tourism industry itself. The environment and its quality are very important if tourism is to survive and thrive; with polluted beaches and diminishing wildlife, the tourists are going to be few and far between. And when this happens, it is the end of marine tourism as we know it.
For man and nature to coexist in peace and thrive, it is up to us to ensure that we do not wreak havoc on the environment; for if we do, it will come back to haunt us in the form of global warming and climate change.
By-line:
This guest article was written by Adrienne Carlson, who regularly writes on the topic of construction management degrees . Adrienne welcomes your comments and questions at her email address: adrienne.carlson83@yahoo.com

Super-tanker and the risk of oil spill at sea

Super tankers have been part of oil trading since 1960s. They are responsible for delivering oil and gas from refineries or producing facilities to other ports around the world. The competition among companies and the increasing demand for oil and gas has been the driving force for the increasing size of the oil carriers.

Frequently these supertankers besides having to cross large oceans such as the Pacific and the Atlantic, they have to pass by narrow yet busy straits and ports. The availability of modern navigational equipment does not guarantee that the supertankers will be free from any risk of collision with other smaller ships or boats. It is the ships' crews who have to safely guard their ships to the unloading ports. Last year, there was a tanker accident in South Korea. Oil spill from this tanker caused huge environmental damage to the coral reef, the sea, the beach as well as the fisherman villages near the area of the accident. Early this year, a cargo vessel loaded with Portland cements, and full with fuel oil in its tanks, collided with a tug boat in Jakarta bay of Indonesia. The vessel sank and spill fuel oil into the sea. Some crews lost their lives. While beach clean up can be done immediately, the destruction in the coral reef environment takes tens or even hundreds of years to recover.

Naval architects, when designing, oil tanker are guided with rules from classification societies, marpol and state regulations. They usually design tankers that have several sections or cargo holds. Collision bulkhead is also drawn at the forward end of the ship. In addition, they also provide double bottom to ensure that the tankers are still safe in case of experiencing grounding. Double bottom, collision bulkhead and double hull are not fully safe in protecting the supertankers during incidents of collision or grounding. When a supertanker experiences severe damage on its collision bulkhead, cofferdam, and double bottom, it will definitely spill oil into the sea.

Another way that we can do to reduce the negative impact of oil spill at sea is to limit the size of supertanker. It is not wise to just follow the request of ship owner by designing 500,000 tons supertanker. Size restriction is needed to ensure that the tankers that we design will not cause massive pollution in busy ports or straights. 

by Charles Roring in Manokwari of West Papua - Indonesia

Also read: Fastship and Delftship for Naval Architects and Designing Lines Plan with Fastship

Coral Bleaching and Global Warming

Scuba divers and marine biologists observed that the global coral bleaching event had taken place between 1997 and 1998. During this time sixteen percent of the coral population died. Coral bleaching is caused global warming.

Human activities that burn fossil fuels produce large amount of CO₂ emissions and other green house gases that increase the temperature of the earth.

Coral bleaching does not only affect the scuba diving and marine tourism activities but also the whole world population. Coral is the source of food for fish. When corals die, many marine species will also die. So, the loss of healthy coral reef will also affect the fishing community around the world.

To stop the corals from bleaching, we must stop the global warming. It is not an easy task to be done. Reducing or stopping the global warming is the responsibility of everyone. Actions have to be taken in all such levels as governmental, industrial, domestic and even individual. The success of these actions lies on the changing of lifestyle.

Every concerned citizen can play his or her part in saving the coral reef environment. When going to the supermarket, shoppers can choose not to take plastic bag given by shop assistant. Instead, they can bring their own bags from home. They can also go to work by public transportation or riding bicycles. In addition, every concerned citizen can participate in beach clean up activities.

Large industries that produce huge amount of green house gas emissions must not only solve this problem by buying carbon credit from carbon reduction projects. They must seriously take actions that are aimed at reducing CO₂ and its equivalent emissions.

Diving resorts as the major player in marine tourism industry can play a leading role in cleaning up the beach and underwater environment. Resort and hotel owners need to organize regular beach clean up in their area as part of their corporate social responsibility programs.

The reduction of green house gas emissions will help restore the coral reef condition that is important to the marine environment and to mankind. by Charles Roring in Manokwari of West Papua - Indonesia.

How to be friendly with your surrounding environment

We will enter new year. What is your resolution for the coming 2009? Everyone of course needs a better life. More income. If you haven't find a soulmate, you hope to meet a nice prince or princess for your heart. Listen all your dreams or hopes are closely related to how you interact with other people, God and Nature. The followings are my tips to live a friendly life with nature.

1. Don't litter. A simple example, every time we go to a supermarket, we receive plastic bags where we put our goods in. When arrived at home, we throw these plastic bags into the garbage bin. More often these plastic bags fall on to the front yard and blown away. They then end up on the ditch and block the flow of water. When water cannot flow it will spill over the road. Later these plastic bags gathered at a river and run off to the sea. They cover to coral reef and block the sun light which is needed by the corals to carry out photosynthesis. When this happens the coral reef will die and the fish will leave the area. Your plastic bags have caused the death of corals and the fish. My solution, when you go shopping at a supermarket, bring your own basket so you do not have to bring plastic bags which would later become additional burden to our nature or universe.

2. Don't kill animals even though they are only insects at home. One day, your kitchen floor is covered with a lot of ants. Many of you will kill these ants. It is wrong. You are the ones who has to be blamed. Why you dropped food leftovers on the floor. The leftover attract ants. If you clean your kitchen or isolate your table by putting water in small containers at all four feet of the table, then the ants will not gather or occupy your kitchen. They will live on a tree outside your home or in little holes under ground. When a squad of termite come to eat wooden beams and pillar of your home thus bringing down the entire construction, then the ants will eat them. Ants as insects are natural predators for the termite. This is similar to lizard which is the natural predator for mosquito.

3. Buy products that are environmently friendly. Environmentally friendly products are products that can unite with nature when they are returned or thrown away to the nature. For example: wooden spatula, cotton cloths and wooden chair. When you don't use or want them anymore, you can burry them into the ground and then they will decay and unite with the nature. Don't buy too many plastic things.

4. When you have a picnic, don't litter. This point No 4 is similar to point No. 1. More often when we have an outdoor picnic, we bring food and drinks that are kept in plastic or metal packaging. After drinking softdrink we just throw away the cans, or plastic bottles. Don't do that. Bring the plastic packaging and the metal cans back home. Put them in the garbage bins where they can be recycled. By doing that you have lived in a friendly life with the environment.

5. Don't just cut the trees or bush around your home. If there is a tree in front of or next to your house, consider it as a blessing from the nature. If it blocks sunlight into your house, just prun one or two of its branches. The green leaves emits positive energy into your house. Sometimes in the mornings or in the afternoons, birds stop by at the tree branches for a short brake before flying again to their homes. It is a natural blessing for you.

There are still many ways which you can do to live a friendly life with nature. You can do it. when you have done it, believe me, all your plans, works and efforts in your daily life will totally be supported by the whole universe.


by Charles Roring in Manokwari, Indonesia

Export of Non Wood Products from Papuan Forest Should be Encouraged

by Charles Roring

Theoretically, Papua has 31.5 million hectares of forest area. This figure is getting lower day by day due to irresponsible deforestation and conversion to palm oil and rice field.

In my previous article, I mentioned about the need to certify Papuan forests for carbon capture so that the carbon offsets from this island can be sold to global carbon market.

It needs experience company such as Global Carbon to help the indigenous people to achieve this goal.Other scheme which is possible to be implemented in Papua is the harvesting of non wood products such as masoi and kulilawang barks, red fruit, sarang semut and rattan, and gaharu. These commodities can provide sustainable economic improvements for most of the villagers living near the forest.To optimise the harvest of the products, we must help them in improving their products quality, harvesting practices that are not harmful to the environment. In addition, the non wood products which these indigenous people harvest from their forest should sell in good price. It means the distribution chains from the producers to consumers should be as short as possible.Papuan villagers can be organized to form community cooperatives so that all their non - wood products can easily be collected for export.Most of the complaints which I found among the villagers are related to the selling price which commodity traders gave to them for the masoi, kulilawang, and gaharu wood that they sell. They said that the price is low.On the other hand, commodity traders who came to Papua complain that the quality of the products the villagers sell are not high enough. They need to re-process them. For instance a very good quality Masoi oil is worthy of 200 US dollar/ kilogram. Such price is better than the recent leasing price of a hectare of tropical rainforest for palm oil plantation.

BP LNG Tangguh, Doubling Natural Gas Reserve Doubling Green House Gas Emission

by Charles Roring, Manokwari West Papua

Papua island has one of the most important last remaining tropical rainforests in the world. It is located in the Pacific region between Asia and Australia. This forest works as "respirator" that absorbs or captures huge amount of world's CO₂ emission produced by human activities. While it is shrinking rapidly due to irresponsible logging, in recent years, the burden the Papuan forest bears is getting heavier. It has to neutralize additional CO_2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) emissions from Berau bay.

The Location of BP LNG Tangguh Project

Source: Tangguh LNG Commercial Success in a Challenging Environment

One of the most important mining projects in West Papua - Indonesia is BP LNG Tangguh. It is located in Berau bay of birds head region of the island. Next year, it will begin exporting LNG to China, Korea, Mexico and probably other emerging markets in Asia. Although there are many problems related to environmental issues, and claims from indigenous tribes living around the bay over a fair compensation, BP considers this project a commercial success. This can be read in a paper written by Jim Egger, Vice President of Tangguh LNG Marketing entitled Tangguh LNG: Commercial Success in a Challenging Environment.

Source: Tangguh LNG Commercial Success in a Challenging Environment

In August 1998, subsidiaries of BG plc and ARCO announced in a press release that the proven gas reserves in three Production Sharing Contracts had more than doubled. From the previously certified 14.4 trillion cubic feet, the additional proved and probable reserve was 18.3 tcf. But this huge amount of natural gas stream contains approximately 12.5% or 4.08 tcf CO_2e.

When the LNG plant in Berau or Bintuni bay starts to produce LNG, it will have to separate the CO₂ from the natural gas stream. According to AMDAL study document, tens of thousand tons of CO₂ will be released annually by the project into the atmosphere. This green house gas will spread to the surrounding tropical rainforest of the island. When high concentration of carbon dioxide is found in the atmosphere, it will raise the temperature and create acid rain that may be harmful to plant leaves and animals in the region.

There has to be a win-win solution to this problem. There are several options which BP can choose, some of them are re-injecting the carbon dioxide to the ground or to deep sea; capturing the CO₂ for growing algae that can be used for making bio-fuel, or buying the carbon offset from the indigenous tribes who are the real owners of the forest around the LNG plant. The cheapest option will be purchasing the carbon offsets. The money that the indigenous tribes receive can be used to improve their education and health facilities or run businesses that are not related to logging activities thus preventing deforestation. Therefore, it is the moral obligation of the British Petroleum to help the local people in the bay certify their forests for Emission Reductions. Purchasing carbon offset from the indigenous tribes living in the Berau bay is a win-win solution or the most acceptable scheme which BP should do to answer questions related to its CO_2e emissions in Papua.

Irresponsible Logging the Main Cause of Rapid Deforestation in West Papua

by Charles Roring, Manokwari, West Papua

Papuan forest continues to shrink rapidly due to irresponsible logging. We definitely have to stop this. Here in Papua, logging is legal if loggers have got the license to do so. To obtain a license letter, loggers must pay certain amount of money to forestry agency as contribution to the state for every log they cut. Being a legal logger does not mean that somebody is a responsible one.In recent days the demand for wood in local market is getting higher caused by rapid increase of population in Papua. Such increase is not caused by the improvement in birth rate of native people but more on the massive influx of migrants from other parts of Indonesian islands. I said earlier that the higher the population, the higher the demand for wood as construction material. According supply and demand law, the price of wooden blocks and planks in local market is going up.Another factor for the increase of logging activities in Papua is the practice of logging companies that continue their operation using the reason of opening roads to remote villages in the isolated interior region. While the width of the roads is only four meters, in practice, the width made by the cutting of the trees can reach up to twenty or thirty meters.In my previous article I emphasized my rejection on the conversion of Papuan tropical rainforest into massive monoculture Sawit Plantation using a leasing scheme. The continuous rising of the price of fossil fuel has triggered the use of palm oil for making biodiesel. Supporters of biodiesel say that by increasing the percentage of bio-fuel such as bio-ethanol and bio-diesel in our vehicles, we can reduce our dependence on fossil fuel thus making significant reduction in CO_2e

emissions.

I don't think such perception is true. I don't reject bio-ethanol and bio-diesel projects. What I reject is the deforestation of the pristine rainforest both in West Papua and Brazil and many other regions around the world where there are forests. Sawit is a native plant of Africa. It should not be introduced massively into South East Asia region. Such invasive plants will harm the whole ecosystem of the region.If bio-ethanol companies want to make environmentally friendly bio-fuel products and at the same time improve the living condition of the Papuans, they could take advantage the available Arenga Pinnata forest located along the rivers and the swampy areas in Southern Papua. Huge areas of Aren trees (Arenga Pinnata) can produce millions of liters of sweet sap every day. If bio-ethanol companies really want to take it. They don't have to cut any single tree from the region. They can harvest the sap to produce bio ethanol and at the same time hire the local people for collecting the sap. In addition, these plants are native ones and have thrived in the region for hundreds or even thousands of years. The taking of Aren sap will not destroy the environment.Or they can move on to another innovative project such as utilizing the CO₂ wastes for growing algae plantation in the Berau bay of West Papua. An LNG plant operated by British Petroleum produces 12.5% of its natural gas stream in the form of CO₂ that is released into the air. Bio-fuel company like PT Medco Papua Hijau Selaras should work together with BP LNG Tangguh in producing bio-fuel from algae that needs a lot of CO₂. I think this is one of the best alternatives that bio-fuel companies should do to achieve their goal and at the same save the earth from global warming.Technorati : deforestation

The leasing of Papuan Tropical Rainforest, too low for compensation, too stupid for conversion

In my previous post I criticized about how unfair and unwise the leasing of Papuan forest in Manokwari, West Papua is. A palm oil plantation company has reached an agreement with families of the indigenous tribes in Manokwari for the leasing of a total land area of 5,930 hectares for Sawit Plantation. The company has begun paying Rp. 450,000 or around 36 US dollars per hectare once for 35 years. It is the same as Rp. 45 per square meter. For me, it is CRAZY and it makes me angry.

Through this posting I appeal to environmental groups in local, national and international levels to take actions to save this last remaining tropical rainforest in the world beside the Amazon of Brazil.
Until now, the company has been preparing sawit seedlings. Next year they will begin logging and clearing the land and possibly start planting the sawit seedlings.
It seems that local government officials do not see this as a serious problem. As they don't have any comprehensive plan to lift these indigenous Papuan tribes from poverty, they tend to invite as many investors as possible to the area without looking into details of how these investors take advantage of the Papuan natural resources, for instance, from logging these 5,930 hectares alone, the company will get a lot  of profit. When the seedling starts to grow, they can sell the carbon offset to world market if they successfully get the certification for carbon capture.
Scheme such as eco-tourism where travelers can enjoy bird watching and orchid observation is considered not important due to its tiny or no contribution to government's budget. Another option such as selling carbon offset to carbon market is seen as a complicated one.
While Papuan rainforest has been the respirator that absorb million tons of the world's CO2e emission for hundreds years, the world has not done enough to protect it. We need immediate actions to provide alternatives to the conversion of tens of thousands of hectares of this pristine rainforest into a monoculture palm oil plantation.
We cannot only shout "stop logging the Papuan rainforest, stop converting it to sawit plantation, stop clearing the swampy sago trees area for rice fields." We have to move out from these old jargons. We know that these indigenous Papuan needs improvements in their living condition. We must help them from giving up their lands to sawit plantation and rice fields which are not native plants for Papua.
I know that some groups in Papua have begun extracting the wealth of Papuan forest by harvesting its  non-wood products such as Red Fruit, and Sarang Semut, and Masoi bark for medicinal products. Some travel agencies in Europe also have done their best by selling tour package to those who want to watch exotic paradise bird and bower bird perform their courtship dance or observe wild orchid. We need more sustainable schemes to support the indigenous people.
Well, more things need to be done ranging from helping the local indigenous people to certify their forest for selling carbon offset where the money can be used to improve their education and health facilities, to inviting more eco-travelers to Papua.
But the most important thing that we must do now is stopping the clearing of thousands hectares of this Papua forest into monoculture sawit plantation. Somebody out there, do something!
Also read:  

• Birding in Minahasa Peninsula

New Threat to Papuan Tropical Rain Forest in Manokwari West Papua

by Charles Roring The photographs that you see below were taken in the Prafi area of Manokwari. The first photo was about the palm oil plantation that belongs to PT Perkebunan II and the second was about the logging business in the concession area of PT Medco Papua Hijau Selaras. Logging both legal and illegal has been a major threat to tropical rainforest in West Papua and Papua New Guinea. Logs taken by timber companies are sold in markets of Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia and even to China. I am sad to see that day by day Papuan tropical rainforest continues to shrink rapidly. While timber companies enjoy high profit from this wood business, the indigenous people only receive very small fraction of the revenue their forest creates from logging. Actually, there is no revenue sharing in logging business in West Papua. What the indigenous people receive is tiny compensation compared to the price of wood in national and international market. Besides threat from logging, the increasing influx of migrants in West Papua creates increasing demands in wooden planks and blocks for housing material. More people mean more houses. The price of 1 cubic meter of merbau wooden blocks is around 120 US dollars in local market or even several times higher than that. This amount of money is considered high. As a result more people decide to enter the logging business. To get higher profit, they prefer to bribe the security personnel and smuggle the logs to towns late at night. By doing this they don't have to pay contribution to the forestry agency. It is not surprising to see that the illegal loggers have never faced severe punishment.   Another threat to Papuan forest is conversion to Palm oil plantation. National companies began opening Palm or Sawit oil plantation in around 1990s in Arso area of Jayapura and in Prafi valley of Manokwari. Again very little compensation was paid to the land owners. In recent video interviews made by Kevin and Darcy from Canada, the tribal chief in Prafi expressed his regret of selling his land in very cheap price for the sawit palm plantation. He said that the local people do not get significant benefit from that business. Many return to their vegetable and sweet potato patch. Although the sawit plantation run by PTP 2 - a state owned palm oil company in Prafi Manokwari, has shown its failure, another company named Medco has entered the region and began leasing thousands of hectares of land in Manokwari only for Rp. 450,000 or 36 US dollars per hectare for 35 years. The company will enjoy millions of rupiahs from logging the huge forested land areas that is rich of natural biodiversity before converting it into monoculture sawit plantation. This does not include the possibility of selling carbon offsets once the sawit seedlings start to grow. The pristine tropical rainforest in Sidey Manokwari will soon be jeopardized and converted into massive palm oil plantation with very little benefit to the local people. According to Cahaya Papua, a local newspaper in Manokwari, Medco has began paying 850 million rupiahs for the leasing of 1,896 hectares in Sidey of Manokwari West Papua. In 9-11 December 2008, it will pay 1.3 billion rupiahs for the leasing of 2,890 hectares in Masni of Manokwari. There will be another leasing of 280 hectares of land area in Pantura of Manokwari regency of West Papua.  Through this posting in my blog, I appeal to Green Peace, Down To Earth and any green support groups around the world to take serious actions to prevent this pristine Papuan forest from being converted to Palm Oil Plantation.  Also read:   The Leasing of Papuan Tropical Rainforest - Too Low for Compensation Too Stupid for Conversion Irresponsible Logging the Main Cause for Deforestation

Carbon offset from West Papua, an attractive business yet complicated one

by Charles Roring in Manokwari West Papua
Papua island has one of the best tropical rainforest in the world beside Amazon of Brazil. It absorbs million tons of CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) while at the same time emits oxygen which all the living beings need. Papua island administratively is ruled by two states i.e. Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. The tropical rainforest of Papua as one of the world respirators or air filters attract carbon trader to buy its carbon offsets and sell it again in the voluntary market where multinational companies can buy them. One carbon offset equals to one metric ton of CO2 equivalent emission. The price for one offset is between 21 and 24 Euros according to European emission allowances for 2008 - 2012. It is considered cheaper for multi national companies that release tens of thousands tons of CO2 emission into the atmosphere. They can continue running their factories, or refineries without have to install expensive carbon capture and reinjection plant.

When carbon traders are looking eagerly to buy Carbon offset from Papua island. The indigenous tribes who are the real owner of the forest do not know about it. Indonesia recognize and respect the communal rights of the Papuan tribes who have lived in this densely tropical rainforest for years. These tribes do not know if they can get money by selling carbon offset. From all the tribes that I know, only one tribe in South Sorong whose chief is an intellectual knows about it. He has written a letter to a multinational company that operates in Berau bay asking about the priority to buy carbon offset from the indigenous people who live in the bay as the real owner of the forest and whose rainforest is much affected by CO2 emission the multinational company has released.
It is important of traders who want to buy carbon offset in West Papua to also involve the tribal chiefs who own the land and the forest. They cannot only approach local government officials and university staff for buying the carbon offset of Papuan forest. I just read a news story in local newspaper, Cahaya Papua which says that Global Carbon intends to buy carbon offset from West Papua. I have to inform them through this blog that they also have to know the real owners of the forest to avoid any conflicts in the future. Papua island consists of tribes whose territories had been delineated by Dutch anthropologist. Local government know the territorial boundaries of every tribes. It is better to know these boundaries before deciding to buy the carbon offset. The last thing which I have to say here is that large portion of the money has to go to the indigenous people who own the land and the forest.

Technorati : carbon offset, papua Del.icio.us : carbon offset, papua Zooomr : carbon offset, papua Flickr : carbon offset, papua

Beach Travel versus Marine Ecotourism

by Charles Roring
Many travel deals offered by tour operators invite tourists to have vacations at the beach. The tour package includes usually one week staying in a nice beach hotel overlooking the blue ocean, snorkeling, diving and wind surfing activities. Countries like Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philipines are favorite destination for the beach travelers. Tourism has been a booming industry for years.

a crowded beach

Tour and travel agency aggressively promote travel deals in many developed countries to buy attractive tour packages. Beach hotel, and many other facilities are being constructed along white sandy beaches to accommodate the increasing number of tourists.
On one side the increasing number of travelers going to the beach area will give significant economic contribution to the host countries but on the other side, beach tourism has put increasing pressures to marine environment. If not properly managed, the coral reefs ecosystem will face severe destructions from the development of tourism industry at the beach area.
Therefore it is very important for all stakeholders of marine tourism industry to develop awareness on the marine conservation so that the destruction of marine ecosystem can be minimized to its lowest point.
Marine ecosystem can bring positive impact to the beach and marine environment if it can educate beach travelers about the importance of marine ecosystem to global environment. This includes improvements in the practices of servicing the tourists. In addition, tourists must also be informed about how to behave properly at the beach and underwater.
Travel agency can make special brochure which explains safe diving practices that will not harm the fish, corals reef habitat.
Beach travel will give significant contribution to the marine environment if the stakeholders in the marine tourism industry can encourage the travelers to participate in beach clean-up activities, turtle conservation and in reducing the number of debris thrown to the sea.
Technorati : beach hotel, diving, marine, travel Del.icio.us : beach hotel, diving, marine, travel Zooomr : beach hotel, diving, marine, travel Flickr : beach hotel, diving, marine, travel

Sea and Coral Reef the source of art inspiration, the case of Dore people

by Charles Roring from Dore bay, Manokwari

Coral reef is a term which is now increasingly related to diving and eco-tourism. Breathing underwater with the help of regulators, air bottles, fins and BCD among the corals and the fish is a unique experience. Recreational divers, when diving underwater, like to take pictures, or make videos of underwater life. All these recordings are shared with their loved ones at home, at work and of course on the internet. The beautiful pictures of hard and soft corals combined with various ornamental fish are displayed in modern art media i.e. photos, film and internet screen.

Canoe prow, wood, paint, and cassowary feathers, from Geelvink Bay, Irian Jaya; in the Basel (Switz.) Museum of Cultures. Basel (Switz.) Museum of Cultures (Vb 5980); photograph, P. Horner

As a matter of fact indigenous people, whose life depend on the generosity of the sea in providing food, have long been using the sea and the coral reefs as their sources of art inspiration. This can be seen from the writing of a famous naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace. After making an expedition to Dore bay in 1858, a small bay which is part of Geelvink bay, he wrote his appreciation to indigenous people's love of art despite "their low state of civilization". In a book entitled "The Malay Archipelago," he wrote:

It is curious that a rudimental love of art should co-exist with such a very low state of civilization. The people of Dorey are great carvers and painters. The outsides of the houses, wherever there is a plank, are covered with rude yet characteristic figures. The high-peaked prows of their boats are ornamented with masses of open filagree work, cut out of solid blocks of wood, and often of very tasteful design, As a figurehead, or pinnacle, there is often a human figure, with a head of cassowary feathers to imitate the Papuan "mop." The floats of their fishing-lines, the wooden beaters used in tempering the clay for their pottery, their tobacco-boxes, and other household articles, are covered with carving of tasteful and often elegant design.

Did we not already know that such taste and skill are compatible with utter barbarism, we could hardly believe that the same people are, in other matters, utterly wanting in all sense of order, comfort, or decency. Yet such is the case. They live in the most miserable, crazy, and filthy hovels, which are utterly destitute of anything that can be called furniture; not a stool, or bench, or board is seen in them, no brush seems to be known, and the clothes they wear are often filthy bark, or rags, or sacking.

Along the paths where they daily pass to and from their provision grounds, not an overhanging bough or straggling briar ever seems to he cut, so that you have to brush through a rank vegetation, creep under fallen trees and spiny creepers, and wade through pools of mud and mire, which cannot dry up because the sun is not allowed to penetrate.

Their food is almost wholly roots and vegetables, with fish or game only as an occasional luxury, and they are consequently very subject to various skin diseases, the children especially being often miserable-looking objects, blotched all over with eruptions and sores. If these people are not savages, where shall we find any? Yet they have all a decided love for the fine arts, and spend their leisure time in executing works whose good taste and elegance would often be admired in our schools of design!

One hundred fifty years have passed and todays Dore people do not know him. I try to tract whether the love of art still exists among them. There are still some people who decorate their houses and canoes with paintings of fish and coral ornaments but their number is significantly reduced. I wonder why such wonderful talents of art have lost. Many planks look empty now - no relief, carvings or paintings. They have to race against the time, working for money. No time for carving and painting.

Dore bay has now become a rapidly growing town, Manokwari. It is the capital of the province of West Papua. The economic demands, the pressure of capitalism, the increasing pressure of life competition might be the cause of the lost of love of art among the Dore people. They do not live in a relax life like what Wallace had reported 150 years ago. It is so regretful.

Dore bay still offers its attraction to foreign tourists. Here lies around twenty wrecks waiting for divers to dive them on. But the beauty of the carved canoes has disappeared. There is a West Papuan artist, a prominent one - I dare to say, who works day and night to preserve the talents of the people living in this bay. He records design styles, ornaments, carving, and painting styles of the Papuan people in hundreds or even thousands of pages. His name is Thonny Mansiraken Krey. Unfortunately, most of his manuscripts haven't been published waiting for philanthropists to help him fund the publications of books. If you happen to read this article and intend to help him publish his works, you can contact him at his mobile: +62 852 44 7680 18
I am afraid that if we don't support the publications of his books, the art styles of the Geelvink people will disappear and be forgotten forever as if they never exist.

Don't take away the traditional rights of the villagers over the exploitation of coral reefs

by Charles Roring

 

Coral reefs are beautiful underwater environment that increasingly related to diving activities. In other words, healthy coral reefs that are rich of various kinds of fish are the object of lucrative tourism industry. Investors always want to build resorts, hotels and other recreational facilities near these coral reefs hoping that they can get more money from innocent eels, sea horse, fish, and fragile hard and soft corals.

To secure their positions, with their lobbying skills and money, they can even approach the local and national governments using such terms as "marine conservation, coral reefs preservation, and sustainable tourism industry" to implement MPA act to coral reef areas which previously had been the source of food of the surrounding villages.

Irrespective of "their destructive fishing" methods, the villagers living near the reefs are the ones who have to enjoy special privilege in exploiting the sea and the food which coral reefs have provided for them for hundreds of years. Tourists and resort owners cannot ignore these traditional rights.

Actually, traditional villagers are not lack of knowledge and experiences on sustainable fishing. Even though they are not familiar with the term "sustainable fishing, or coral reefs protection", they have certain mechanisms that are closely related to this matter. In my previous article entitled: Preserving coral reefs and marine environment through sustainable fishing and artworks, I wrote about how fishermen in Maluku islands control the fish stock of their waters through the implementation of sasi. When certain waters is in sasi, it becomes a temporarily no take zone. In West Papua, islanders in certain villages around the Cendrawasih bay (formerly known as Geelvink bay) do not eat dolphins believing that their ancestors originate from this kind of fish. The protection of such fish helps maintain the balance of marine ecosystem.

The existence of hotels, diving resorts should not stop the fishermen from exploiting their traditional fishing areas which mostly among the coral reefs.

When certain coral reef regions are turned to Marine Protected Areas or No Take Zones, the villagers who live in the nearby regions must get compensation. We cannot jeopardize their subsistence fishing with lucrative ecotourism business which can only employ small number of villagers. The villagers do not need English skills, certificates from schools of hospitality, or even divemaster certificates to earn a living from the sea. What they need are boats, hook and line, kalawai spear and fish trap.

The application of No Take Zone and the existence of modern fishing fleet have forced the traditional villagers to abandon their sustainable fishing methods. They turn to blast fishing to get more fish so that they can sell them at cheaper price in the market. Sometimes the traditional fishermen use destructive methods as cheaper ways to compete against modern fishermen, or to survive from the increasing pressure of nearby city living.   

Ecotourism businesses and No Take Zones can only be accepted if they give direct contribution to the traditional fishermen. Entrance fee which the tourists pay must be allocated to income generating programs for the villagers.

Cleaning up bunaken diving site

Scuba diving is a fun under water activity. We can dive through colorful sea corals and at the same time see various kinds of ornamental fish.

One of world class diving sites is Bunaken. It is a famous diving site located near the Manado city of North Sulawesi. The Bunaken sea park is always full with travellers from around the world. Bunaken sea park is exposed to harmful marine pollutants produced by city dwellers of Manado. Wastes from the city drift to the sea park and cover many of its live corals.
City authority must take serious actions to prevent more destruction of the corals. So far, the bombing practices of the fish have been banned for years but the amount of waste from the city flowing out to the sea has not been reduced. It takes tens of years to restore the condition of coral reefs. Citizens of Manado and scuba divers can cooperate to protect the Bunaken sea park. Citizens should demand the municipality authority to install incinerators for burning the waste and produce electricity from it. In addition, the citizens must regularly do the cleaning up activites along the coastal areas of Manado and Minahasa regions and the nearby islands of Manado Tua.
Scuba divers can also be asked to participate in the cleaning up programs of underwater Bunaken coral reefs for lifting up plastic bags, metals and other waste materials that cover the corals.
Through this kind of cooperations among the government, citizens, and scuba diver tourists, we hope that soon we will be able to create healthier environment both above and under water. Eco-tourism which has become the goal of todays modern tourism industry will effectively be implemented in Minahasa region. - by Charles Roring

Harnessing Energy from Trash

Britain is taking another important step in reducing its dependency on fossil fuel as energy resource. This summer this country is constructing its first gasification plant worth of 16 million US dollar with a capacity of 2.3 MW in Isle of Wight . The plant will turn 30,000 tons of rubbish a year into gas and burn it to produce electricity for 2,000 homes. The plant will be constructed by Energos, a Norwegian energy company.

During the gasification process, the waste will be mixed with small amount of oxygen, and then heated at high temperature of around 1,830 degrees Fahrenheit. The technique is similar to the gasification of coal to produce syngas.
Last year Britain tossed 16.9 million tons of trash into landfills - this amount is higher than any European countries. Although Britain has allocated 109 square miles for waste burial, it may run out of space within nine years. Landfills release methane which is a major greenhouse gas.
Engineers stated that the trash the UK throws away could produce 17% of its energy needs. Britain might build incinerators but besides they are expensive, they also release many pollutants from their smokestacks. Many environmentalists object to waste to energy schemes instead they recommend more recycling efforts. However, there are economical and practical limits to how much waste can be recycled.
Burning city waste to produce energy does not mean that city dwellers can enjoy cheap electricity. The installation of gasification plant costs a lot of money and the company has to sell the electricity in a price where it can make a fair return of investment. by Charles Roring

My Position on Climate Change

Hendrik Tennekes;

Filed under: Guest Weblogs - Roger Pielke Sr.

QUOTE: The political dichotomy about climate change is fueled by gross exaggerations and simplifications on both sides of the fence. There is no evidence for a catastrophic sea level rise or an irreversible loss of Greenland's ice cap.

QUOTE: the predictive capabilities of global climate science are practically nonexistent.

QUOTE: up to now global climate change does not cause severe problems requiring immediate emission reductions. Successive IPCC reports have presented no scientific basis for dire warnings concerning climate collapse.

The so-called scientific basis of the climate problem is within my professional competence as a meteorologist. It is my professional opinion that there is no evidence at all for catastrophic global warming. It is likely that global temperatures will rise a little, much as IPCC predicts, but there is a growing body of evidence that the errant behavior of the Sun may cause some cooling in the foreseeable future.
It is also my professional opinion that the severely limited predictive capacity of the natural sciences is no adequate basis for globally orchestrated mitigation efforts concerning greenhouse gases. Any political basis for global mitigation efforts, such as a cap-and trade system for fossil fuel consumption, is outside my professional competence.

Opportunities for local and regional mitigation and adaptation projects, however, are plentiful and promising. Societies have a long track record on adaptation and mitigation on local and regional scales, often with considerable success.
The political dichotomy about climate change is fueled by gross exaggerations and simplifications on both sides of the fence. There is no evidence for a catastrophic sea level rise or an irreversible loss of Greenland's ice cap. Other human interferences with the climate system are ignored or dismissed. Political interest in the causes of local and regional climate change seems to be minimal, though local and regional climates may change considerably under human impact, even if the globally averaged temperature remains unchanged.
I wish I could join those who believe that global climate change is of catastrophic proportions, but my personal interpretation of professional integrity forbids me. I refuse to join the crowd.
On occasion I tend to dream of a strong and fair World Government, which would have the power to curtail the negative impacts of the unbridled globalization of free enterprise. However, I know this is an illusion, because nation states will not yield their sovereignty as long as there is no imminent danger of global collapse. Also, I am not at all confident that democracy would prevail. However, since I believe that no climate collapse is occurring, I cannot join those who use this imaginary threat to advance their political goals.
We should keep in mind that local and regional climates respond not only to greenhouse gases, but primarily to changing land-use patterns. Civilization has a long history of dealing with unintended regional climate change caused by large-scale deforestation. The present deforestation in the Amazon basin and in Indonesia threatens to repeat the many mistakes made in the past. The incessant emphasis on CO2 and its effects on globally averaged temperatures leads many to ignore the fact that changes in the distribution of precipitation are far more threatening to agriculture and biosphere than any slight temperature changes. In precisely that part of the problem, however, the predictive capabilities of global climate science are practically nonexistent.
Here in the Netherlands, where I happen to live high and dry, some forty feet above sea level, the threat of catastrophic sea level rise has anchored itself in the public mind. This threat is imaginary, too. I concur with Dr. Marcel Stive, a civil engineering professor at Delft University and member of a blue-ribbon panel that advises Holland's government on the maintenance of our coastal defense system.
In a recent interview with the alumni magazine Delft Integral, Dr. Stive said: "Fortunately, the time rate of climate change is slow compared to the life span of the defense structures along our coast. There is enough time for adaptation. We should monitor the situation carefully, but up to now climate change does not cause severe problems for our coastal defense system. IPCC has given lower estimates for the expected sea level rise in four successive reports."
This statement deserves to be generalized. I venture this:
"Fortunately, the time rate of climate change is slow compared to the rapid evolution of our institutions and societies. There is sufficient time for adaptation. We should monitor the situation both globally and locally, but up to now global climate change does not cause severe problems requiring immediate emission reductions. Successive IPCC reports have presented no scientific basis for dire warnings concerning climate collapse.

Local and regional problems with shorter time scales deserve priority. They can be managed professionally, just as the Dutch seem to do."

This is where I stand.

http://climatesci.org/2008/07/14/my-position-on-climate-change-by-hendrik-tennekes/

Nuclear power is the only green solution

"Nuclear power is the only green solution" is a direct quote from famed British environmentalist and atmospheric scientist, James Lovelock, father of the Gia theory of a living planet earth.

British scientist James Lovelock, father of the living earth Gaia theory, has stated that nuclear power is the only way to have a large human population on planet earth without causing global warming and destroying the environment. Please read James Lovelock's public statement on nuclear energy, Nuclear power is the only green solution. Lovelock states that "We have no time to experiment with visionary energy sources; civilization is in imminent danger." Nuclear power is the only technology that can produce an extremely high volume of energy using just a tiny amount of land and at reasonable cost, all without emitting significant amounts of greenhouse gases.

Every year the human race burns the equivalent of 400 years worth of total planetary vegetation in the condensed form of fossil fuels, so it is obviously impossible to replace all of that concentrated biomass energy by growing a relatively small volume of biofuel crops. The one and only energy source large enough to replace that massive fossilized energy reservoir is nuclear power. The mass of an atom is in its nucleus, not in its electrons, and as E=MC2 the nucleus is where the really BIG energy is stored. The tiny energy potential created by bonding and unbonding electrons through chemical reactions in the growth of vegetation must be amplified over centuries by the gradual process of fossilization in order to make it strong enough to power a heavily populated, industrialized planet.

We can slow global warming by creating an infrastructure based on nuclear energy, improved electric car battery technology, and the use of new technology to make superior quality, sulfur free gasoline and jet fuel from atmospheric carbon dioxide. [see Green Freedom 1.8mb pdf] This new energy scheme is cheaper and more practical than using hydrogen as fuel, because it is completely compatible with current vehicles and our existing energy distribution infrastructure. Intense heat from lower cost, higher temperature helium cooled prismatic block and/or pebble bed reactors is used to break down carbon dioxide into its component parts, carbon monoxide and oxygen. The carbon monoxide can then be combined with water in a catalytic process to make either pure hydrogen gas or more easily transportable liquid synthetic fuels that can be burned in ordinary automobile engines. Initially, the viability of this scheme could be demonstrated by using electrolysis of water to produce the needed hydrogen gas, using electricity generated from lower temperature water cooled nuclear reactors.

Nuclear power currently produces only 19.4% of our nation's electricity, so we need to build more nuclear power plants now using mass production techniques if we want to slow global warming. Nuclear fuel can be reprocessed over and over again, because only a tiny portion of the nuclear material is actually used up during each fuel cycle. When you reprocess fuel there is very little high level waste that needs to be stored at the Yucca Mountain Repository because the "waste" is reused as fuel. If you consider current stockpiles of nuclear fuel leftover from weapons programs, the amount of uranium easily available in the earth's crust for mining, the use of abundant thorium as fuel, and the benefits of using breeder reactors for recycling, then the world has enough nuclear fuel to last for at least 10,000 years.

Current nuclear power plants efficiently output 93 times more energy than they consume over their lifespan, including the energy used in their construction and decommissioning, but even that impressive figure can be improved upon. The art of nuclear power plant design has the potential to advance by leaps and bounds, becoming more efficient, cheaper, and safer. [see Generation IV nuclear power plant concepts] Even beyond the latest fourth generation nuclear power plant designs, there are credible proposals to use nanotechnology to achieve the direct conversion of nuclear energy to electricity without the use of turbines, making nuclear power plants stable, essentially solid state devices that run cold and have few moving parts. These advanced design concepts include electronically controlled nuclear reflectors for ultra-light radiation shielding, which would reduce the size and cost of nuclear reactors to a tiny fraction of today's designs. These developments could eventually lead to a portable 1 gigawatt or larger reactor that could be constructed in a factory and shipped to site on a single truck. [See Nanomaterial turns radiation directly into electricity (more details)]

The fears Americans have about civilian nuclear power plants are largely unfounded. One lone disaster that occurred at an obsolete Ukrainian reactor is insufficient reason to be eternally afraid of all nuclear power plants across the board. The old Chernobyl reactor used a dangerous design that has never been used in the West, and which did not even have a containment vessel. The 1986 Chernobyl accident was caused by Soviet engineers conducting irresponsible experiments that were unrelated to normal civilian power production, and which would never be allowed in the West. The Chernobyl accident killed a total of 56 people, a great tragedy, but not a nation killing disaster.

Nuclear power plants in America have an excellent record for safety and pollution free operation. By contrast, the over 600 coal burning power plants which produce 49% of our nation's electricity unleash tremendous pollution. They emit acid rain creating sulfur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, tons of toxic mercury, and an enormous skyward bound river of carbon dioxide gas which represents 10% of all CO2 emissions worldwide. Coal power plants also spew out thorium and uranium (see article), both radioactive metals which naturally accumulate in coal. Incredibly, the potential nuclear energy value of these trace metals far exceeds the energy value of the combustible carbon content of the coal itself. Coal power plants release microscopic particulate matter, which clogs the lungs and is attributed to causing approximately 24,000 premature deaths in the United States every year; 428 times the Chernobyl death toll!

Prismatic block and pebble bed reactors are inherently meltdown proof due to the basic laws of physics. If the reactor's cooling system should fail, the core temperature automatically lowers itself to safe levels without mechanical intervention. Building new, more efficient standardized nuclear power plants using mass production techniques for major structural and control components can make nuclear power a bargain. Just like manufacturing television sets, the more you build using the same proven design the cheaper they become. If we build enough standardized reactors, it is conceivable that we could cut the cost of nuclear power in half, which could mean an essentially endless supply of sulfur free synthetic gasoline that sells for $2.00 a gallon at the pump.

Christopher Calder - http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html

Nuclear power is the only carbon free energy source that can replace fossil fuels, ...period!

From my web page at: http://home.att.net/~meditation/bio-fuel-hoax.html

We go nuclear, or we go extinct!

SEE - http://www.ecolo.org/media/articles/articles.in.english/love-indep-24-05-04.htm

Hydrogen refuel station unveiled

ITM Power's Jim Heathcoate demonstrates a car fuelled by home-brewed hydrogen

A hydrogen refuelling station which could be installed in the home as an alternative to visiting a petrol station has been unveiled. Users will need a hydrogen-powered car to go with it although the system can also be used for heating and cooking. Hydrogen has long been touted as an alternative energy source to carbon-hungry fossil fuels. One of the biggest obstacles to wider adoption of fuel-cell vehicles is the lack of hydrogen fuelling stations. To be used as a fuel, hydrogen must first be produced using another energy source. While some scientists are hopeful of the fuel uses of hydrogen, many others are sceptical because it is inefficient to produce, expensive to transport and to convert into electricity. A home refuelling station could provide much needed infrastructure to kick-start a hydrogen-based economy, thinks Sheffield-based ITM Power, the firm behind the system.