Looking for ‘real’ change

2009-02-25T09:43:00Z

Grace Chua wants environment conferences to be evironmentally-friendly.

AT every environment conference I attend, someone invariably makes a snide comment about how nippy the air-conditioning is.

It’s a cheap shot, but they’re usually right. After all, these are conferences about saving energy, reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and rescuing the earth.

The same sort of cheap shot was made at this weekend’s National Sustainability Conference, organised by the National University of Singapore.

Frankly, though, this conference was better than most.

Not a plastic bottle in sight, food waste was composted in the NUS kitchens and the conference programme was not only double-sided, but half-sized to save paper. The meeting even claimed to be the first carbon-neutral conference held in Singapore.

This was a step up from other conferences I’ve attended, where plastic bottles (ok, of Newater) were handed out like...water, programme notes were on fat single-sided sheets and every participant was given his or her very own styrofoam box of delicious, well-travelled (in food miles) lunch.

And each year, policymakers and climate-change negotiators are derided for holding their United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change talks in places as far-flung as Bonn and Bali.

How many thousands of air miles do these administrators travel, detractors cry, and how much CO2 do they emit in the process? How much paper do they use? How many trees?

I’m going to propose a double-barrelled solution.

First, I think conference organisers should at least be conscious of the environmental costs and take the sort of steps that the National Sustainability Conference took to reduce waste and emissions.

And second, let’s look at a conference in a whole new light.

Never mind its environmental footprint (though this should be as small as possible), what is its final outcome?

How much real progress is made as a result of a conference, compared to its environmental impact?

With all the air miles and food miles and plastic waste and trees felled, the academics, administrators and policymakers (and the journalists) should have some real changes to show for it.

The bigger the environmental footprint, the bigger the policy change I’m going to expect.

That’s what I call bang for my buck.

Race to reach Antarctica

2008-09-07T22:00:00Z

Grace Chua gets shortlisted to get to the bottom of the world.

THREE weeks ago, I filled out the online application for the Commonwealth Women’s Antarctic Expedition.

If selected for the trip, I would ski more than 800 km to the South Pole, in well-below-zero temperatures, dragging a sledge that weighed the same as I do. Sort of like mushing sled dogs, only without the dogs.

"You don’t have any natural insulation! You’ll freeze," my friends squealed.

"It’s so dangerous," my father said.

Even I thought I was insane. The sum total of my athletic experience consisted of trudging up a couple of Malaysian mountains and falling over my cross-country skis while at university in New Hampshire. Forget marathons, I was content to run a few kilometres on Sunday mornings if I could get out of bed.

Then came the e-mail telling me I’d been shortlisted for an interview. Insanity turned into a spark of hope. The actual possibility of going to the South Pole sank in.

Yesterday, I didn’t make the final cut, and the spark of hope faded again. Sure, I was disappointed, but the experience drove the point home: I could and should dream big, test my physical and mental limits.

For two of my fellow applicants, Sophia and Lina, that dream is still alive. They’re ordinary women like the rest of us - attempting extraordinary things. I’ll be watching their journey and cheering them on every step of the way.

And as for me? I think I’ll sign up for that half-marathon now.

Read more about the Commonwealth Women’s Antarctic Expedition in today's edition of The Straits Times.

The Straits Times Blogs - Grace Chua

Looking for ‘real’ change

Race to reach Antarctica