Indonesia launched second round Green Investment Campaign

In South East Asia region, Thailand seems the clear leader in green investment and initiatives towards promoting renewable energy. In Malaysia, there are clear indications that we are getting more serious in working towards achieving the goal to reduce greenhouse gas emission.

It is good that Indonesia is also working in tandem to go green.

Green Investment Towards Innovation and Productivity

JAKARTA -- Collaborative stakeholders have launched a campaign of the 'Second Round Green Investment Towards Innovation and Productivity in Indonesia' to support the Indonesian government in mainstreaming climate change issues.

The stakeholders consist of National Council on Climate Change (DNPI), Matsushita Gobel Foundation, Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the Indonesia Chief Editors Forum, Indonesian news agency ANTARA reported.

The Second Round Green Investment campaign is aimed at sharing ideas and experiences on potential for green investments and also attended by experts, scientists and environmental non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

DNPI executive chair Rachmat Witoelar said during the launch here Wednesday that the roots of climate change are anthropogenic and man-made problems need to be tackled by man.

"Stakeholders of all levels rely on partnership with the media to spread the message of climate change impacts and solutions to the citizens," he said.

President Director of PT Gobel International, Rachmat Gobel, said Matsushita Gobel Foundation has been supporting collaborative efforts towards green industry through the first round of green investment that provided technical roundtable on green technology and green industry.

"The second round green investment is launched to face new challenges to boost high economic growth and mitigation efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emission," he said.

"Efforts in reducing greenhouse gas emission have become a global market trend as is the increasing demand of eco-green products. Understanding green technology and implementation of the green industry is critical to increase competitiveness," he added. -- Bernama, March 28

US dentist put 7,000 patiens at risk of HIV and other diseases

This happened in United States but it can happen anywhere, including clinics at your backyard.

I'm not implying that your favourite dentist is guilty of dirty equipment but it is always wise to be observant and put up a wandering eyes the next time you go into the treatment room of a dental healthcare. The risk - contracting Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, and HIV.

Oh no!

US dentist put 7,000 patients at risk of HIV, other diseases

CHICAGO: A dirty dentist placed 7,000 patients at risk of contracting HIV and other infectious diseases after failing to properly sterilize equipment at his Oklahoma practice, health officials warned Thursday.

Officials do not yet know if any patients were infected but urged everyone who had ever been treated at the Tulsa oral surgery practice to be tested at a free clinic.

"We do not know how long these improper practices have been occurring, so we recommend that all patients of Dr. (Scott) Harrington's be tested for Hepatitis B, Hepatitis C, and HIV," the Oklahoma health department said in a statement.

"It should be noted that transmission in this type of occupational setting is rare."

Inspectors discovered a host of problems with the Tulsa dental practice earlier this month and Harrington voluntarily shut his doors until the investigation is complete.

In addition to the rusty equipment, inspectors also found expired drugs - including a vial that should have been thrown out in 1993 - and a host of other violations, the Tulsa World reported.-AFP

Further readings at: PHILLY.COM

IMF urges countries to cut energy subsidies

A case in point:
Malaysia's high car prices and subsidised fuel.

A 1.8E Toyota Altis (Corolla) would cost RM119,000 in Malaysia but only $18,180 (approx RM56,000) in the US. The difference is RM63,000.

We know that the fuel price in the US is much higher than our subsidised RON95 but the point here is that, we the consumers pay upfront subsidy of RM63,000. Take the government subsidy of RM0.82/litre (in the pic) and say you refuel 50litre/week, you enjoy subsidy of RM41 a week or RM2,132 annually.

If that is your refueling pattern, how long do you think the RM63,000 will last you? More than 20 years I reckon. So, would you support subsidised fuel or get a better car at lower price and manage your own fuel consumption. I think it is smarter that way.

The blanket subsidy that is practiced in our country benefits not the poor but the middle-income and the rich population. I read in The Star that 71% of fuel subsidy was enjoyed by the middle to high-income level groups (Source: Pemandu).

If it is up to me, I'd rather buy an Altis at RM56,000 and pay RM3.30 for my petrol; I'm still better off financially 20 years later.


Do subsidies on energy hurt the economy? And ultimately the masses?

"We have been hearing about countries that are finding that the fiscal weight of energy subsidies is growing too large to bear. In some countries budget deficits are becoming unmanageable and threatening the stability of the economy."
- IMF first deputy managing director David Lipton, in Washington.

Source: International Energy Agency, World Energy Outlook 2012, Energy Subsidies via IER website.

Cut subsidies on energy - says IMF

WASHINGTON – The International Monetary Fund urged countries to reduce subsidies on energy, saying they worsen government’s fiscal positions and eventually create more advantages for the wealthy instead of the poor.

In a broad-reaching report, the IMF said subsidies of oil, petrol and electricity are aimed at helping consumers, but end up costing them as governments struggle to shoulder the cost burden.

Moreover, the study said, subsidies encourage energy waste, discourage investment in energy-efficient industries, and exacerbate pollution and global warming.

Worldwide the direct subsidies on energy — when consumers pay less than the basic supply costs — amounted to $480 billion worldwide in 2011, according to the IMF.

If post-tax subsidies are counted — when the prices do not cover such things like the negative impact on the environment — the government support worldwide measured $1.9 trillion.

Most of the subsidies are in oil exporters, where they contribute to speeded-up depletion of a natural resource.But energy importers suffer especially as global oil and gas prices have risen over the past three years.

Many have not responded by adjusting domestic energy prices to match the increases — and so expanding the fiscal burden of subsidies, according to the report.

IMF first deputy managing director David Lipton, in an address introducing the report in Washington said that countries that have offered subsidies to help struggling populations “now find they suffer both fiscal paralysis and energy shortages.”

Lipton said 20 countries in the world maintain subsidies that top five percent of their GDP.Such subsidies “remain a stumbling block to higher growth by squeezing out much needed health, education and infrastructure spending,” he said.

But the report points out that, if post-tax subsidies are counted, the largest offenders are the United States, China and Russia — together their subsidies reach nearly $900 billion worth.
Source: Business Inquirer