16 posts tagged “environment”

Carrying on from a post that Jaklumen made on his blog, I went to look for the Lucy Lawless-headed Greenpeace campaign to reduce emissions. This is Lucy Lawless as Lucy Lawless, and her accent has changed a great deal since I saw her in the Shark in the Park episode ‘Double or Quits’. It has Americanized slightly, which is no surprise since she is married to an American and has a home in LA.

[Cross-posted from Lucire] Last year, we said the Fiat 500 would be the Car to Be Seen in—and this year, more people are getting on board the popular retro-styled subcompact car.
   After celebrating Barbie’s 50th anniversary with a pink 500 last week, Fiat has announced that British top model Jodie Kidd was the first Briton to take part in the company’s Eco test drive, highlighting the benefits of environmentally friendly motoring. (Continued at the Lucire website.)

[Cross-posted at Lucire] General Motors intends to overtake the Toyota Prius with its Chevrolet Volt—a vehicle that is an electric car first, with a petrol engine that only kicks in when extended range is needed. (The Prius, in layman’s terms, works the other way round, with a hybrid engine assisting the petrol one—though around town, the Prius tries to work on electricity only.) Sensibly, in these tough times, GM will sell the Volt as an Opel in Europe, a Vauxhall in the UK and a Holden in Australasia, and unveiled the Opel-badged version in Genève this week.
   Lucire TV will have more Salon de Genève footage, but for starters we feature Alain Visser, Chief Marketing Officer, General Motors of Europe launching the Opel Ampera, and talking about GM’s focus on electrifying the automobile. Other shots are of the Ampera, including its interior, filling up, and information on its propulsion system.
   It’s finally beginning to feel like the 21st century, rather than a hangover of the 20th.

[Cross-posted from Lucire] By Lucire’s editor-at-large and Planet Green host Summer Rayne Oakes, Style, Naturally is an eco-conscious guide to fashion and beauty, with responsible brands and tips for living sustainably. It’s the most comprehensive and accessible book on the topic—we had a sneak preview a few months ago. Out now; for more information, surf to Summer Rayne’s site at www.summerrayneoakes.com. Retail in the US is US$24·95—you can buy now via Amazon.com for a lower price of $18·96.

The first time I returned to Hong Kong (a.k.a. ‘Home’) in 2006, after a 30-year absence, I got to visit the street where I grew up, but I didn’t get to walk around the ’hood. Also, I didn’t take any digital shots, though a few rest on 35 mm film. Here, for Voxers, is Hong Kong this time around, as I flew back from New Delhi.
   You see, all the stuff about Central and how it’s all grown does not impress me, because I have no close connection to that. For the first years of my life, Kowloon was it. The Island—Hong Kong Island—was where family lived and we occasionally ventured across, and it is nice to see it on occasion, but if you have limited time to spare on a journey home, you want to revisit your old haunts.
   Your guided tour begins.

4 Victory Avenue

   This is the entrance to where I used to live, just underneath the Ace sign. Back then, this was a nice little neighbourhood of upper-middle-class families, and I do not recall a business set right in the façade of the building. While there were businesses along here, it was more residential. Let’s look across the road:

Across the street at Victory Avenue

In 1976, this was a building site. So, the building has been completed? You might ask. Yes, but since 1976 that new building has been torn down and other ones put up in its place. There were a bunch of same-again apartment blocks on this side of Victory Avenue, and it’s interesting to note that they are all gone.
   On my first visit back I noticed that despite this huge change, the character of the neighbourhood remained the same. In a way, it still is. Even communists dominating the Legislative Council have not changed the essential character of Kowloon and the Hong Kong people.

Steps up 4 Victory Avenue

   This is inside the apartment block. It’s pretty much identical, though it was cleaner in 1976. There’s a locked gate  right after this flight of stairs. I told my father that I was surprised at this but he assures me that the gate was there back then. I guess when you are a kid and your responsibilities did not include locking and unlocking the gate, you don’t commit its existence into your long-term memory.

Corner of Victory Avenue and Waterloo Road

On the corner of the street (other side of the road again): I could have sworn this was where the Fiat dealership used to be. If not this block, then one block down. In any case, Fiat is not as strong in Hong Kong today as it was then, though I did see a black 500 cruising around.

Waterloo Road 1

   Heading northeast down Waterloo Road, the main drag, which was the route I would have taken to get to kindergarten. The butcher is gone, as my grandmother used to shop there.

Waterloo Road and Pui Ching Road intersection

   I still remember some of these intersections. Just that my vantage point was several feet below this.

Crossing Waterloo Road 2

Man Kee Mansion sign below bus stop sign

   The kindergarten is gone. Man Kee Mansion is still there, just as it was—but Man Kee Kindergarten is history. It used to be around here, but I could not even locate the old driveway. It must have been totally levelled to build some of the new buildings.

Model car toy shop

   There are still plenty of model car shops, but once upon a time, I am pretty sure they sold cheaper fare. Those little Playart miniatures used to be available around this area. While this won’t be the exact location of that store, it is very close.
   One negative thing I will say is that the pollution was terrible. Far, far worse than my walks around New Delhi. That was one change that was not welcome over the last 32 years, and even the locals said it had got to a low point.
   To conclude, a shot of airport food. I ate at Food Junction, a take-out place, when heading to New Delhi; flying back it was Maxim’s, my customary yum char spot.

Chinese food is just called food here

You can’t beat Hong Kong yum char, and even so-called cheap airport stuff is better than what you can find at the best Chinese restaurants in New Zealand. It was great to relish food that didn’t taste like warmed-up leftovers, which is the best expats can rustle up while eating out in Enzed.
   Best moment: asking a lady where the old 大大 stores were. Her reply: ‘You must have been away for a long time. That place closed decades ago. You must have been away for a long time!’ All in Cantonese, of course. But at least she picked up that I was local, as many did. Some didn’t, speaking Mandarin to me (do I look like a northerner?).
   Overall, it was still very easy to fit back in, but one sad thing to note was that I would not choose to live back there now. Even two years ago, visiting when it was less polluted, I entertained the possibility. Not any more, not with the environment the way it is. I’ve gotten too used to the good life.

Ecofont preview cropped

[Cross-posted] A typeface getting a lot of attention lately is the Ecofont (acknowledgements to Jim Donovan), a design from SPRANQ based on Bitstream Vera (which went open source under GNOME). The claim: that by putting dots into the characters, one can use up to 20 per cent less ink or toner.
   The idea of omitting a part of a character or even manipulating outlines is not new, but what SPRANQ has done is, to my knowledge, original. Typeface designers have done ink traps for years—these are most obvious on designs like Bell Centennial, which are to be used at small sizes for phone books. Ink traps are where ink can go in a less-than-ideal printing environment (e.g. high-speed presses, low-grade paper) and “fill in” the rest of the letter.
   And people have been doing funny things to characters for ages, including putting holes in the design, but that was always for ornamental purposes, not for sustainable ones.
   SPRANQ claims that the result of its roman-only design works at small sizes, and that it should display all right at 9 or 10 pt.
   It’s not a bad idea and I am not surprised it has taken the Dutch, who have been turning out excellent type in the last 25 years, to have thought of it.
   ‘After the Dutch holey cheese, there now is a Dutch font with holes as well,’ jokes the website.
   However, is it the best solution for the environment?
   The company claims that it won’t do a serif version of Ecofont, because seriffed letterforms use more ink. I’m not sure if that holds true always.
   A typical serif design has greater contrast between verticals and horizontals. Seriffed typefaces tend to be more compact when it comes to copyfitting (how many letters per line). There are, of course, many exceptions.
   If you take in the contrast (knowing that the horizontal strokes are going to use less ink) and accept that seriffed characters are narrower (in general), you might still be helping the planet. Notably, better copyfitting means less paper. Ecofont, being wide, uses more paper.
   The only way to test these claims about ink is scientifically—maybe someone with way more time than me can put it all to the test? (The problem: you use more ink or toner and paper doing it. Not good.)
   So I hope SPRANQ might consider Ecofont Serif, with holes through the verticals, but keep the horizontal strokes more intact (or use smaller holes). It has already employed a similar idea, anyway: the holes in the horizontals in the existing Ecofont are necessarily smaller, because there is still some contrast between their and the verticals’ thicknesses. And they should make it more compact.
   As for the sans serif, intuitively the idea works and it certainly makes for some deserved press. I only wonder if the rasterizers for computer printers will pick up that the holes are there and allow the ink or toner to cover them. I assume SPRANQ has that covered, or perhaps someone can inform me of how that process works.
   All in all, I take my hat off to these guys.

[Cross-posted from Lucire] We like this idea: Above + Below London, a new footwear label, uses fabrics that have been reclaimed from London buses and Underground carriages from the 1950s through to the 1990s—with the permission of Transport for London. Some are rare and will likely take wearers back to an earlier era. Continued at Lucire.

[Cross-posted] In January 2006, I predicted petrol would hit NZ$2 per litre but attributed it more to the Labour Government’s mishandling of New Zealand currency rather than oil prices. Now that the price has come to pass—consider that when I made it, $1·40 per litre was unheard of—I am surprised that no one in the mainstream media or even politics has brought up the parallels with the 1970s and New Zealand’s solution to the fuel crises.
   It seems a very obvious thing to bring up, so I have to question what people are afraid of.
   Responding to the volatility of international fuel prices, the Muldoon administration of 1975–84 embarked on energy projects in an effort to make New Zealand less vulunerable. The various Synfuel projects and energy exploration resulted in an era where New Zealanders drove around in natural gas vehicles, and we even produced our own petrol after converting it from gas.
   By the late 1970s, the New Zealand Government was subsidizing gas conversions and certainly by the early 1980s, many (most?) petrol stations offered compressed natural gas or liquefied petroleum gas alongside petrol and diesel. It was just considered normal.
   New Zealand was saving its foreign exchange and people were driving environmentally friendly cars.
   In 1984, the right-wing policies of the Labour Government saw most state assets relating to the venture sold off to corporations and Muldoon’s venture was passed off as a folly by the new administration, the technocrats of the Business Roundtable and, shockingly, by the National Party itself as it changed leaders.
   Even a bid to market LPG as an environmentally friendly fuel in the 1990s could not save it as the National Government taxed it tremendously—something that was clearly not done in the national interest.
   The winners of the destruction of this energy venture were the corporations, predominantly foreign-owned, buying in to outmoded, socially irresponsible technocratic thinking that has brought a widening rich–poor gap.
   That gap can only increase today with the cost of petrol, now refined offshore and imported by those same corporations, spiralling out of control.
   There’s not a peep from National, now in opposition, to say that it had been right in the 1970s as the only party prepared to shield a little country, so easily swayed by global economic forces, from oil company greed.
   The only logical and cynical conclusion is that National are as big a sell-out of New Zealanders as Labour and Roger Douglas were in the 1980s. And that they are suckers for monetarist theory, all the time closing their minds to the mere possibility that Muldoon—whose policies were adored by successful national leaders such as Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, who did all right with them—might have been right.
   It’s election year—and National’s John Key is silent. Again.
   There’s a lot Sir Robert Muldoon got wrong but on the alternative-energy policies, I can’t find too much fault.
   First, New Zealand is a little country that is too drastically affected by global economics. Even Malaysia in 1997 could not protect itself properly against them. Hence, the technocratic, monetarist movement cannot be left unguarded.
   Secondly, energy prices are unstable and New Zealanders need to be protected against them.
   Thirdly, environmental policies demand that we look at alternative fuels.
   Fourthly, this is something that needs a governmental push to ensure alternatives are available nationwide, or at least somehow create incentives for the infrastructure.
   Faced with these basic facts, the development of our own energy sources for the long term seemed to be the only way forward.
   Sure it was cumbersome and expensive to develop, and there were missteps along the way, but where would we be today? Certainly not paying $2 a litre.
   Little did Sir Robert foresee that it would be so gleefully dismantled by his successors—with the same arguments of efficiency so cleverly used by the technocrats of the Slater Walker era in the United Kingdom.
   In spite of all the English expats here, we bought the arguments hook, line and sinker.
   One would have hoped that today, we would remain shielded from these energy crises offshore, with our fleet of natural gas-powered cars. That we would be leading the world in showing how alternative fuels worked, and foreign countries would be coming to us to license our technology.
   We gave up that lead, that advantage, in 1996 to follow the American example of gas guzzlers and SUVs.
   The General Election is mere months away, this is the hottest issue on the book, and no one dares bring up Muldoon. It’s because no one dares offend a few rich bastards making money off working New Zealanders by bringing up a leader who dared stand up to foreign corporate interests.

General Motors’ latest video, on its new Chevrolet Corvette ZR-1 and the Cadillac CTS-V, emphasizes the new cars’ green credentials. I’m not convinced. There’s a greater commentary over at Lucire, but telling me that a supercar is greener than its competition is like saying a small blade is less harmful than a large one during a knife attack. The ’Vette and its rivals are unlikely to ever see 20 mpg, while the video is a bit light on just why the Caddy is green, with 550 bhp and 550 lb ft.
   They look fabulous on the outside, as many American cars do, but marketing them as green is really optimistic.