Green voters hunting for green reps

by Gan Pei Ling / 22 August 2011 © The Nut Graph

green-votersRUMOURS have been rife since late 2010 that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak might call for the 13th general election by this year before the economy takes a worse turn. As such, not just political parties but civil society has been gearing up for an impending election.

Among the civil society groups are a group of environmentalists, who set up Green Voters in July 2011 to mainstream and highlight environmental issues at the upcoming elections. The collective has yet to finalise its action plan but the idea is to focus candidates and political parties’ attention on environmental issues.

It would be amazing if all contesting candidates in the next general election were posed key questions on the environment in their respective constituencies à la The Nut Graph’s MP Watch project.

It is difficult to narrow down the key environmental questions, considering the many environmental issues Malaysia needs to tackle, but here are the questions I would ask candidates standing in my constituency:

1. What’s your stand on nuclear power? Do you agree or disagree that Malaysia needs to go nuclear? Why?

Reactor Unit 3 (right) and Reactor Unit 4 (left) of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant (source: Wiki Commons)

Reactor Unit 3 (right) and Reactor Unit 4 (left) of the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant (source: Wiki Commons)

The federal government’s 2010 announcement to build two nuclear power plants in Malaysia by 2021 has received mixed public reactions. The Fukushimameltdown in March 2011 has caused a further negative dip in public perception towards nuclear power.

Germany plans to shut down its nuclear reactor by 2022 but China is going ahead with its plan to build 36 reactors within the decade while our Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said nuclear remains an “option” for Malaysia.

Regardless whether a candidate supports or objects to nuclear power, I’m more interested in the reasons for their stand.

2. Would you support an amendment to make public consultation compulsory before a forest reserve can be de-gazetted? Why?

Currently, forests, including those that have been gazetted as reserves can be cleared in the name of development for, say, highway construction without public inquiry except in one state. Selangor made history in April 2011 when it passed an amendment to the state’s Forestry Act to ensure a public inquiry must be held before a forest reserve can be excised. However, other states have yet to emulate Selangor’s move.

Our elected representatives should understand that sustainable development is crucial if we want to ensure tragedies such as the 21 May 2011 Hulu Langat landslide, 2008 Bukit Antarabangsa landslide and 1993 Highland Towers collapse do not recur. We need to protect ecologically-sensitive areas not just for conservation purposes but also for our own sake.

Damage caused by the Bukit Antarabangsa landslide of 6 Dec 2008 (Pic courtesy of Raj Kumar)

A properly implemented public consultation process would not only serve to promote transparency and accountability but also encourage participatory democracy among our citizens.

3. Would you support tax rebates for developers and property owners that incorporate eco-friendly designs such as rainwater harvesting systems and solar panels? Why?

This question was inspired by the Petaling Jaya City Council’s initiative to introduce a tax rebate scheme for “green” houses in the city, which is expected to be finalised by the city council by the end of 2011.

The tax rebate scheme would also complement the federal government’s feed-in-tariff system which would allow individuals to sell electricity produced from renewable energy back to Tenaga Nasional Berhad.

4. Would you work with the local council(s) to promote recycling and set up more recycling centres in your constituency?

Ideally, such initiatives should be done by local councillors but local government elections have yet to be restored. So it would not be too much to ask of our Member of Parliament and state assemblyperson to work with the appointed local councillors in their constituencies to promote recycling, would it?

There are other important questions that are more localised. For example, if I were a voter in Pahang, I would ask the contesting candidates on their stand on the Lynas rare earth refinery. If I were a voter in Sarawak, I would ask the candidates whether all the dams the state is constructing are really necessary.

For too long election issues have been determined by politicians and political parties, often centred on race, ethnicity and religion. If elections were to truly reflect the people’s will, then the rakyat needs to take the initiative to determine the agenda of an election instead of allowing politicians to steer public discourse along populist and often divisive and unhelpful lines.


Disclosure: Gan Pei Ling was invited by forest conservationist Lim Teck Wyn to join Green Voters but has remained mostly a dormant member. Still, she is always inspired by citizens’ initiative to reclaim democratic processes, especially the elections, and thinks it’s definitely worth highlighting.

Wanted: Safe and eco-friendly cosmetics

by Gan Pei Ling / 25 July 2011 © The Nut Graph

BODY wash, hair shampoo, soap, facial cleanser, toner — most of us use these personal care products on a daily basis regardless of gender. Women are likely to use cosmetics as well in addition to these products, but have you ever stopped and looked at the ingredients contained in the products? The ingredients should be safe, right?

Not necessarily. It turns out that the multi-billion cosmetics industry might not always have consumers’ best interests at heart

Published in 2007, Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry exposed the pervasive use of toxic chemicals in personal care products. Written by former journalist Stacy Malkan, the book also exposed hypocritical cosmetics companies that brand themselves as pink ribbon leaders, yet continue to use hormone-disrupting chemicals or potential carcinogens in their products. The author is now one of the leading advocates for the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics in the US.

Another short film, The Story of Cosmetics, was released in 2010 to raise public awareness and rally support for the campaign. Although both the book and film were based on an American context, I think they are equally relevant to Malaysian consumers. Similar harmful products are being imported and sold in local stores, yet most of us remain ignorant of this.

So what are the ingredients that we should stay away from when shopping for personal care products? Are all products labelled “organic” or “natural” safe? And what are some of the local alternatives available to Malaysians?

Ingredients to avoid

“Cosmetics should be safe enough to eat,” Horst Rechelbacher, founder of one of the largest eco-friendly beauty salons Aveda, once told The New York Times in 1997. He was right, if you can’t eat it, why would you want to apply the ingredients on your body as the skin would absorb the ingredients and they would end up in your body anyway?

To help consumers search for safe cosmetics and personal care products, one of the key partners in the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics – the Environmental Working Group (EWG) — has set up a cosmetics database called Skin Deep in 2004Below is a list of ingredients to avoid in various personal care products compiled using resources from the database:

  • Soap
    • Bar soap — Triclocarban
    • Liquid soap — Triclosan
    • Toothpaste — Triclosan

Reason: Triclocarban and triclosan are chemicals used to kill off microorganisms such as bacteria and are toxic to aquatic environments.

  • Day-time moisturiser — Retinyl palmitate and retinol (Vitamin A)
  • Lip balm — Retinyl palmitate and retinol
  • Sunscreen — Retinyl palmitate and retinol, oxybenzone

Reason: Vitamin A is a nutrient but it may cause birth defects if pregnant women are exposed to excessive amounts of it. Oxybenzone is a common sunscreen agent that has been linked to hormone disruption.

  • Hair products – Fragrance, PEGs, ceteareths, polyethylene, parabens and DMDM hydantoin

Reason: Hundreds of chemicals can be included in the term “fragrance” while PEGs, ceteareths and polyethylene compounds are synthetic chemicals frequently contaminated with potential carcinogen 1,4-dioxaneParabens are commonly used as preservatives. Usually listed as methylparaben, ethylparaben, propylparaben etc, these chemicals may disrupt the endocrine system. DMDM hydantoin is another preservative. It releases the carcinogen formaldehydewhen it decomposes.

  • Nail products – Formaldehyde, toluene and phthalates

Reason: Formaldehyde is a carcinogen while toluene is a potent neurotoxin. Phthalates are a group of industrial chemicals that may disrupt our hormone and reproductive systems.

Having trouble memorising all the chemical terms? So did I when I first researched this subject. But it also made me wonder what all these chemicals were doing in personal care products, some of which we use on a daily basis.

It was not pleasant to discover methylparaben and ethylparaben as listed ingredients in my facial cleanser and body wash, so I went on a quest to look for paraben-free and safer products.

Local handmade personal care products

I stumbled upon two female entrepreneurs who make their own skincare products at a flea market at Jaya One, Petaling Jaya last month.

Shelby Kho, 30, is a doctor who makes bath scrubs, bath salts and other body products as her passion. She learned to make them during college and used to make these body products as gifts for her friends. It did not occur to her to sell the products at flea markets to a larger audience until December 2010.

She does not use any artificial fragrance, preservatives or colourings in her products. Natural ingredients such as manuka honey are used as preservatives and essential oils as fragrance.

Bisou Bon Bon (pic courtesy of Gan Pei Ling)

Kho calls her line of products Bisou Bonbon (which means “candy” in French). Best of all, her products are reasonably priced, ranging from RM9 for a lip balm to RM28 for a jar of body scrub.

RM40 trial set of a 3-in-1 facial cleansing powder, scrub and mask and a 2-in-1 toner and moisturiser.

Meanwhile, Sal, also 30, is a homemaker from Petaling Jaya. She started making her own facial products when she began to develop sensitive skin at the age of 25 and the condition did not improve after she tried different commercial brands.

After experimenting with various recipes, Sal developed her own skincare line called Back to Basicswhich includes cleanser, toner-cum-moisturiser, treatment powder and face serum. Similar to Kho’s body products, Sal does not use chemicals in her products.

“Sometimes I’ll modify my products to suit the customers’ needs as some of them have more sensitive skin,” she said when met at the flea market in June.

Apart from these handmade products, Malaysians may also find safer and biodegradable commercial products at The Body Shop and TNS Skin Lab but their products may of course be pricier.


Gan Pei Ling is still searching for safe and eco-friendly personal care products, especially local handmade ones. Drop her a line at editor@thenutgraph.com if you know of any.

Going solar and renewable

by Gan Pei Ling / 18 April 2011 © The Nut Graph

Have you ever wanted to install solar panels at your home, but couldn’t afford the capital cost? Once the Renewable Energy Act comes into force, this dream could become a reality.

Passed by the Dewan Rakyat on 4 April 2011, the Act will allow individuals to sell electricity produced from renewable sources like solar photovoltaic at a higher rate than traditional power producers to Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB).

This incentive is expected to boost renewable energy industries and its current electricity generation share in the country from under one percent to 11% by 2020. But how will this work? Where will the funds come from? And will home-owning Malaysians be willing to be part of the new system?

Feed-in-tariff

Following the footsteps of pioneering country Germany and our neighbours Thailand and the Philippines, Malaysia will be implementing the feed-in-tariff (FIT) system.

Solar panels (© Raebo | Wiki Commons)

Electricity produced from four types of sources — solar panels, small hydro, biogas and biomass — will benefit from the FIT mechanism under the Renewable Energy Act.

Among these four, residential homes would benefit most from solar photovoltaic as a renewable energy source.

The other three sources — small hydro, biogas and biomass, would be more suitable for implementation by businesses as the capital expenditure could amount to millions. The table below demonstrates the different costs involved in setting up the different sources.

Solar PV Small Hydro Biomass Biogas
Installed capacity 6kW 10MW 10MW 4MW
Expenditure RM90,000 RM90mil RM90mil RM40mil

Source: Adopted from Malaysia Building Integrated Photovoltaic Technology Application Project leader Ahmad Hadri Haris’s March 2011 presentation

 

Going solar at home

Breaking down the numbers: How your 4kW system will pay for itself in around 15 years.

A normal household would usually need about 4kW capacity worth of solar panels, which would cost around RM72,000 to install. That’s about the price of a brand new Toyota Vios.

Too expensive to go green? Think again. Your Toyota Vios’s commercial value will be depreciating at a rate of about 10% a year, but not the income that you would be receiving from installing solar panels on your roof.

Under the FIT system, TNB will sign a 21-year agreement with households and pay at least RM1.49 per kWh electricity generated. Assuming production of 400kWh per month, this would amount to a payout of RM596 per month.

If a household’s electricity bill is RM200 a month, there would still be a steady monthly income of RM396 for the next 21 years, which could be used to repay the loan taken to install the solar panels. The 4kW system would pay for itself and start turning a profit within 15 years.

It is also worth highlighting that one will get paid more under the FIT mechanism if locally-manufactured or assembly solar inverters or photovoltaic modules are used, and/or used as part of building materials.

Granted, the scheme doesn’t bring about huge profits all at once, but I think most middle-class families would now be able to afford to install solar panels should they wish to.

However, it should also be noted that there will be an annual degression rate of 8% for the solar photovoltaic system. In other words, the later one joins the FIT scheme, the lower the FIT rate one will receive. This is based on the assumption that the cost of solar panels would go down once more people adopt it.

The degression rate will be reviewed every three years by the soon-to-be-established Sustainable Energy Development Authority to ensure the rates remain reasonable.

Making renewable energy commercially-viable

Residential homes aside, commercial renewable energy producers are the ones who are set to benefit the most from the FIT mechanism and who seem most excited about the new scheme.

Prior to the Act, TNB paid the same rate of RM0.21per kWh for energy whether or not it was produced from environmentally-friendly resources or from fossil fuel.

Under the FIT scheme, biogas and biomass electricity producers will finally be rewarded for their pioneering efforts and get paid at least 28% more than fossil fuel producers, as shown in the table below.

Biogas Basic FIT rate (RM) Biomass Basic FIT rate (RM)
Up to 4MW 0.32 Up to 10MW 0.31
Up to 10MW 0.30 Up to 20MW 0.29
Up to 30MW 0.28 Up to 30MW 0.27

Source: Renewable Energy Bill

They will be signing a 16-year contract with TNB and enjoy the same competitive rates throughout the period.

In addition, those who use locally-manufactured or assembled gas engine or gastification technology will enjoy a bonus of one sen on top of their basic FIT rate.

Biogas electricity producers who use landfill or sewage gas as a fuel source will further enjoy a bonus of eight sen. Biomass players will enjoy an additional 10 sen for using municipal solid waste as their fuel source.

Already, a 26ha renewable energy park is being built on a remediated landfill in Pajam, Nilai, which would consist of a 2MW biogas plant and 8MW solar power facility, and is expected to generate RM12mil gross national income in 2020.

Meanwhile, small hydro producers enjoy less incentive at RM0.23 to RM0.24 per kWh but their contract with TNB will last for 21 years under the FIT mechanism.

Renewable Energy Fund

The government or TNB will not be forking out its own money to pay the higher FIT rates. The funds will come from consumers. There will be a one percent hike in the current electricity tariff, expected in 2012, the revenue of which will be used to finance the Renewable Energy Fund needed to finance the FIT scheme.

In other words, if your electricity bill is RM200, you will be paying an additional RM2 and that amount will go into the Renewable Energy Fund.

However, the FIT mechanism is not meant to last forever.

It is expected that the cost of producing renewable energy will eventually be cheaper than electricity currently produced by fossil fuel producers. This is also given the fact that current energy prices do not reflect the true cost of production due to subsidies for natural gas and the government-controlled electricity tariff.  Once the cost of renewable energy drops below fossil fuel energy, the Renewable Energy Fund will cease to exist.

At that point, TNB would be able to directly purchase power from renewable energy producers as it would be cheaper than electricity produced from fossil fuel like gas and coal.

(© Indymedia | Wiki Commons)

In the meantime, for the FIT mechanism to be implemented successfully, the government will need to widely publicise the new scheme to home owners and commercial producers and for many to participate in it. Only then will Malaysia be able to increase its renewable energy production to meet and hopefully, surpass its target of 11% by 2020. If Malaysia can push its renewable energy industries forward and make them cost-effective, not only would we be reducing our reliance on fossil fuel and carbon emission, we could even drop the idea of going nuclear, too.


Gan Pei Ling is looking forward to installing solar panels in her own home.

Taking on the MRT

by Gan Pei Ling / 21 March 2011 © The Nut Graph

Click image to view larger version (source:kvmrt.com.my)

Touted as the new “backbone” of public transport in Klang Valley, the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) has been the talk of the town since its first line of its overall scheme was revealed on 13 Feb 2011.

An estimated 51km long, the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line will have 35 proposed stations. Total construction cost will only be known in May, Parliament was told on 15 March. But Land Public Transport Commission (SPAD) CEO Nur Ismail Kamal has said it could reach RM50bil.

While most people have expressed support for the MRT, those whose lands would be acquired for the rail line are understandably worried and upset. Just as disturbing is the lack of information about the total MRT master plan. Without this, can the public really make an informed assessment about the project, especially for those who stand to lose their properties to make way for the rail line?

Troublemakers or legitimate victims?

“Jika saya tak kena, saya [akan] support [project ini] juga,” a civil servant whose home in Cheras would have to make way for the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line, told me during a MRT briefing in Kajang on 10 March.

Part of his land has already been taken for the Cheras-Kajang Expressway. This time, his entire family will be displaced by the rail line once the alignment is confirmed. The 55 year-old government servant did not want to openly oppose a government project and so declined to be named.

“Put yourself in their shoes. Those who aren’t [directly] affected are of course happy to support the project, but we can’t be that selfish,” Taman Tun Dr Ismail (TTDI) residents’ association Hatim Abdullah said in a phone interview.

TTDI, Taman Suntex and Kampung Batu 10 Cheras are some of the “critical areas” that would be affected by land acquisition, according to the detailed environmental impact assessment released on 14 Feb.

But residents from Kampung Sungai Balak, Kajang are probably the most unlucky. The shrinking Malay reserve land is going to be affected by land acquisition for the third time in a little over a decade.

Silk highway (© diablo | Wiki Commons)

They have had to give up some of their land for the Cheras-Kajang Expressway in 2000, the Silk highway six years later, and now for the 25ha MRT depot.

It is uncertain yet how many people in total would be displaced by the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line as the railway’s alignment has yet to be finalised.

Nevertheless, it should also be noted that the planners are trying to minimise land acquisition and cost by building the MRT line mostly along roads and highways utilising existing road reserve lands.

It is also commendable that the government agency supervising the MRT project, SPAD, has been organising dialogues with residents to brief them about the project and to collect feedback.

Lack of information

Despite that, there are still complaints from members of the public that they lack access to information.

As public display of the project plan at the local councils is only available during office hours, those working have to take time off to view it. In addition, the information officers in charge of the public displays are generally not available during lunch time, when most working people would choose to visit.

There are also niggling doubts among those to be affected by land acquisition of their properties, that the government would listen to their feedback and adopt their suggestions for alternative routes.

This is because while the railway’s alignment has yet to be fixed, it has been announced that open tender is expected to be called in April. Land acquisition is scheduled to take place in May and June, and construction starting in July.

Since the public consultation period only ends on May 14, isn’t it too soon to call for open tender in April, acquire land by June, and start construction in July? All this smacks of a rushed job and begs an explanation.

The rush to begin the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line is puzzling to say the least, more so when the 20-year master plan for Greater Kuala Lumpur / Klang Valley public transportation system is only expected to be ready by this September. Why can’t the entire plan be revealed for public feedback before rushing to begin just one rail line?

Holistic planning needed

With declining public transportation usage from 34% in 1985 to a low 18% in 2009, I understand the urgent need to revamp our public transportation system. Indeed, as a “greenie”, nothing is more exciting that seeing a comprehensive transportation plan that would drastically reduce the number of cars on the road.

An LRT station (© two hundred percent | Wiki Commons)

However, we all know that the MRT itself is insufficient to boost public transportation system in the Klang Valley. It needs to be integrated with buses, taxis, the Light Rail Transit (LRT) and KTM commuter system.

Really, until that 20-year master plan is unveiled, the public would not be able to scrutinise the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line effectively. Especially since the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line is only the first MRT line, and the public has little idea about how the second and third line would look like and where it would run.

Meanwhile, the least we could do is to make sure that the voices of those affected by land acquisitions are heard and their concerns taken into account.

And when the final alignment of the Sungai Buloh-Kajang line is revealed in May or June, hold the government accountable to see if they have included the workable alternative routes suggested by these communities.


Gan Pei Ling would support any public transportation plan, with the conditions that they are planned properly and executed with care to ensure minimal disruption to the people’s lives during and after construction.

Forests in Selangor under threat

by Gan Pei Ling / 21 February 2011 © The Nut Graph

THERE was much cause for celebration when Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman announced on 16 Feb 2011 that the plan to build a 30 megawatt coal plant in the state’s pristine east coast had been scrapped.

Instead, the government is now considering gas and other cleaner energy options like biomass. Activists, particularly those from environmental coalition Green Surf, ought to be commended for their tireless campaign, since 2007, against the proposed coal plant.

Postcard protesting the coal plant (© Postcards to PM)

I wish the same were happening for the forests in Selangor. The state has been delaying its decision on a proposal to convert the Kuala Langat South peat swamp forest to an oil palm plantation. Additionally, the federal government has been turning a deaf ear to civil societies’ opposition against the Kuala Lumpur Outer Ring Road.

Indecisive Selangor

It was in late 2010 that the Selangor Agriculture Development Corporation proposed to develop the 7,000ha Kuala Langat South forest reserve into oil palm estate. The clearing of the forest could potentially generate RM1bil in timber revenue.

Map of Selangor State Park, with permission from Treat Every Environment Special (TrEES).

It is troubling that the Pakatan Rakyat-led state did not reject the proposal immediately. After all, it announced that it would impose a 25-year moratorium on logging when it came into power in 2008.

To the Selangor government’s credit, however, it did commission an audit in December 2010 to assess the forest’s biodiversity value. In addition, it has engaged environmental non-governmental organisations as well as government agencies in its biodiversity audit.

The audit report was expected to be presented to the state in January 2011 but it was postponed to early February. To date, the Selangor government has yet to make an official announcement on the matter.

When asked by reporters recently if a decision was made at the Selangor Economic Action Council’s meeting, executive councillor Elizabeth Wong, who is in charge of the environment portfolio, skirted the issue.

Granted, commissioning an audit to assess a forest’s biodiversity value before clearing it for plantation or other development purposes would be unimaginable under previous state administrations. But the state’s current indecision on the Kuala Langat South forest reserve also seriously raises doubt about whether the state might revoke the status of other forest reserves when there is further pressure for development.

It should be noted that the Kuala Langat South forest reserve can be deemed as the most important peat swamp left in southern Selangor as almost all others have been lost to development.

Putrajaya’s silence

Another lingering threat to Selangor’s forest reserves is the KL Outer Ring Road which would cut through the ecologically-fragile Selangor State Park.

A federal government project, the highway is being proposed to ease traffic congestion on the Middle Ring Road Two. Construction near the Kanching Forest Reserve has already begun but the road alignment that would slice through the Selangor State Park has yet to be confirmed.

Photo of Klang Gates Dam at dawn in 2010 (by Gan Pei Ling)

Gazetted in 2005, the 108,300ha park is an important water catchment area for the Klang Gates Dam and Ampang Intake. Ironically, Putrajaya and Selangor have been wrestling over the construction of the Langat 2 plant to source water from Pahang to avoid potential “water shortage” in the state. Yet, little attention has been given to the highway’s potential impact on Selangor’s water supply.

To date, the federal government has yet to respond to civil societies’ objections against the KL Outer Ring Road.  The Selangor government has said it is not within its power to scrap the highway.

An election issue?

Compared to the proposed coal plant in Sabah, which has been going on for a few years and also attracted international attention, the threats to the Kuala Langat South forest reserve and the Selangor State Park have received much less media attention.

However, if there are some lessons to be learnt from the anti-coal activists, it’s that with persistence and a persuasive campaign strategy, governments may be compelled to listen to civil society after all.

In the end, the people are the boss in a democracy and if the government-of-the-day wants to be re-elected, it had better learn to listen to the people — not just wealthy developers, but environmental groups and concerned citizens, too.


Growing up in the Klang Valley, Gan Pei Ling didn’t know until recently that around 30% of land in Selangor is still forest reserves. She hopes most, if not all, of these reserves will still be around in 2050. Would that be too much to ask?

Green issues: Top 10 in 2010

by Gan Pei Ling / 24 January 2011 © The Nut Graph

WHAT were the environmental highlights and low points of 2010? Do we stand a chance in conserving Malaysia’s amazing biodiversity and rich natural resources?

With the help of several “greenie” friends, I made a list of 10 major environmental happenings in Malaysia in 2010. These events give us an indication not only of how the environment continues to be under threat in Malaysia, but also how efforts are being made to combat that threat.

What stood out for you environmentally in 2010? What appalled, encouraged or enlightened you? List them down so that we may have a better picture about how we Malaysians are caring for our environment.

Power

1. Nuclear power plants

(Pic by merlin1075 / sxc.hu)

The federal government decided to go nuclear, announcing in May 2010 that Malaysia would build a nuclear power plant by 2021. Serious concerns were raised regarding safety and feasibility, considering the disastrous effects of accidents and shoddy radioactive waste management. Activists also questioned whether the government had exhausted renewable energy options, especially solar and biomass.

Despite this, Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Peter Chin announced in December 2010 that Malaysia intended to build two plants, the second expected to be ready a year after the first.

To date, the government has not made public its nuclear waste management plan or emergency plan detailing what steps it would take in the event of a radioactive leak or natural disaster.

2. Sabah coal plant

Meanwhile, the federal government is planning to build a 300-megawatt coal plant on Sabah’s pristine east coast. Environmental coalition Green Surf and other activists have been campaigning tirelessly against the plant, reminding the government to consider cleaner alternatives like biomass and geothermal.

The plant’s detailed environmental impact assessment was rejected by the Environment Department. However, Chin said last December the proposed coal plant would go ahead, claiming it was the best option to ensure uninterrupted power supply.

3. Bakun Dam

The flooding of the Bakun Dam began in October 2010. The flooding of the 69,000ha area, roughly the size of Singapore, to the top of the Bakun Dam wall, about half the height of the Petronas Twin Towers, is expected to take over seven months.

Disputes over compensation for the approximately 10,000 indigenous peoples displaced from their land remain unresolved. The construction of the Bakun Dam began in 1996, and its cost was reported to have ballooned from RM4.5bil to RM7.5bil due to cost overrun and compensation for delays.

Despite that, Bakun is just the beginning. The 944-megawatt Murum dam is currently being constructed, and it was announced in February last year that five more dams with a combined capacity of 3,000-megawatts are in the pipeline.

4. Renewable energy bill

(Pic by ronaldo/sxc.hu)

The long-awaited Renewable Energy Act was finally tabled in Parliament in December 2010. Once passed, the Act will enable the public to sell electricity generated from renewable energy, most likely solar, to the power grid through the feed-in tariff scheme. Tenaga Nasional Bhd (TNB) will buy user-generated electricity at above-market rates. Concerns, however, are that TNB might pass on the cost to consumers by raising general electricity tariffs.

Other than the feed-in-tariff, it is unclear how the government intends to fulfill its target of generating 11% electricity from renewable energy by 2020.

Rivers

5. Rejang river logjam

This bizarre incident last October involved Malaysia’s longest river, the Rejang. Logs and debris choked the mighty river for 50km, making many places inaccessible by boat.

The Sarawak government tried to pass off the incident as a “natural” disaster due to floods. A BBC report, however, quoted the blog Hornbill Unleashed, which blamed poor infrastructure and excessive logging for the logjam.

Animals

6. Capture and trial of wildlife trafficker Anson Wong

In August 2010, Wong was caught with 95 boa constrictors in his bag at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport. I, personally, was delighted when the High Court substituted a Sessions Court sentence of six months’ jail and a RM190,000 fine with a five-year jail term. The heavier sentence will be more likely to serve as an effective deterrent.

In addition, Parliament passed a tougher Wildlife Conservation Act, which came into force in December 2010. Punishments include fines of up to RM500,000. and up to five years’ jail for smugglers of protected species like tigers and rhinos.

7. GM mosquitoes

(Illustration by Nick Choo)

Dengue, carried by the Aedes mosquito, has been endemic in Malaysia for years. Genetically modified (GM) mosquitoes have been proposed as a solution to curb its spread. The mutant male mosquitoes do not produce any offspring and help lower the mosquito population.

Great fears, however, have been expressed over this experiment as experts say removing the mosquito from the ecosystem could wreak havoc on other species, and ultimately, the environment.

Despite these concerns, the Health Ministry intended to release GM mosquitoes in Bentong, Pahang and Alor Gajah, Malacca. Protests from local and international groups resulted in a cancellation of the programme.

Forests

8. Selangor State Park

The federal government intends to build the Kuala Lumpur Outer Ring Road (KLORR) through the Selangor State Park to ease traffic congestion. This is in spite of the park being categorised as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (Rank 1) under the National Physical Plan-2. It serves as an important water catchment area, and as such, no development, except for eco-tourism, research and education purposes, should occur there.

The highway was originally designed to cut through the park and a potential Unesco World Heritage site,  the Klang Gates Quartz Ridge. The Selangor government convinced the developer to dig a tunnel to avoid damaging the quartz ridge last November. But it remains to be seen whether they can persuade the developer to re-route KLORR away from the state park, too.

Public outcry, not just from environmental groups but also concerned residents, continue. It remains to be seen whether the federal government will scrap its plans.

9.  Kuala Langat South peat swamp forest

Wong (front) visiting the Kuala Langat South peat swamp forest in December 2010.

The Selangor Agricultural Development Corporation proposed in 2010 to convert the 7,000ha Kuala Langat forest reserve into oil palm plantations. The clearing of the forest could reportedly generate RM1bil in timber revenue.

Selangor executive councillor for the environment Elizabeth Wong has led opposition to this proposal. A biodiversity audit, done with the assistance of environmental groups, found tapirs, sun bears, white-handed gibbons and rare trees.

The audit report has yet to be presented to the menteri besar, but I’m hopeful he will make the right decision. After all, the Pakatan Rakyat-led government promised to ban logging for 25 years when it came into power in 2008.

Reduce, Reuse, Recycle

10. No plastic bag day

The no plastic bags campaign, pioneered in Penang in 2009, is now nationwide. Plastic bags are no longer free on Saturdays except in Penang, where they’re not free every day.

Plastics manufacturers’ indignant reactions amuse me. Although the campaign may reduce our reliance on plastic bags, it is mainly symbolic. The campaign helps us rethink the impact of our use-and-throwaway consumption on the environment, but is unlikely to eliminate all use of plastics bags, or plastics, in our lives. Perhaps the manufacturers need to start listening and evolve in accordance with consumer demand for more sustainable products.

Although I initially found the above list a bit depressing, I realised that the story of public resistance against potential ecological destruction echoed throughout. And there are many more environmental heroes that did not make it into the list. A rural Kelantan community that successfully solved the human-elephant conflict in their village, for example. Or the Bukit Koman community that continues their attempts to protect their village from pollution from a gold mine.

And I’m sure there are many, many more such stories.


Again, Gan Pei Ling finds herself more inspired by grassroots communities and individuals than governments in 2010.