The latest and greatest from around the web:

• Toxic fish- bad enough that many fisheries are in collapse (or near collapse around the world), but the catch you might be eating could be screwing your health.  Are you eating something really unhealthy?  Find out what to avoid. 
• Myles Allen of Oxford University and his team have produced a new model that links natural disasters with man-made greenhouse gas emissions.  This means that Russian heatwaves, Pakistani floods, and other weather anomalies can be traced back and analysed to see how much a role humans played in the occurence of these events.
• Non-profit Energy in Common has set up a dedicated facility to bring microcredit loans to bring green energy to people in need.  This is yet another great application of microfinance in developing countries.
• Want to get the lay of the land on green companies, orgs, and associations in Singapore?  Our colleague Eugene Tay has updated the Guide to the Green Landscape.  Free to download.

This week's resource roundup brings you some really good bits from around the internet:

First, Treehugger covers a quick and easy list of rebuttals for climate change deniers.  Yes, we know those people are annoying, but at least now shutting down the lame arguments is available in short form (links to science also provided in case you need heavy ammo).

Next up, check out some excellent coverage on the BP oil spill and its potential long term effects.  Think that the oil is really disappearing as quick as "experts" say it is?  Think again!   Some good on-the-ground reporting from Mother Jones as we'd come to expect.  One of our favourite mags.

Now, for those of you who may have seen the "Story of Bottled Water"...

... we'd now like to revert your attention to the bottled water industry's own not-so-clever videos which can be found

over here (along with a really good analysis of why they are so bunk). Good for a laugh, or to satisfy the cynic in you.

Finally, there are some people out there allegeding that environmental groups are banding together with certain industries to promote economic protectionism-- the knock on effect is people getting screwed in developing nations.  We report, you decide.

We've had a flurry of research come our way recently.  We'd like to take a quick moment to poke around some of it and point out some things that seem to be painfully missing.  First, let's have a look at McKinsey Global Survey on Biodiversity. 

Their survey asked respondents about what biodiversity means, how important it is to their businesses, and why, what specific risks their companies might face from reduced biodiversity, what actions they are taking to address issues related to it, and what kinds of regulations they would support to maintain biodiversity. 

What we were particularly bemused by: that in spite of the UN and others highlighting some 30%+ of species will be extinct by 2030, and that an unprecedented human-caused destruction of the biosphere is taking place, 59 percent of companies responding to the McKinsey survey see biodiversity as more of an opportunity than a risk for their companies. 

Not to go all gloom and doom, but how is this possible exactly?  If the locale where a company operates is environmentally degraded, if its core ingredients and materials are compromised-- how exactly is this an opportunity?

An opportunity to change business operation and focus of the company operations, an opportunity for a dramatic paradigm shift away from business as usual?  Sure. 

An opportunity to sell more business as usual and be Polyanna optimistic?  We think not.  In fact, we think a lot of the businesses responding were pretty naive: 32% came back on the survey saying that biodiversity was not at all important, and 4% said they didn't know. 

And getting back to that 59% of companies saying that biodiversity was more of an opportunity to their business-- the top reason why was "building, maintaining, or improving corporate reputation."

Sorry guys, we think you've missed the boat.  If your entire supply chain is challenged, your operations threatened, and business model made obsolete by a degraded biosphere, you're pretty stuffed-- nevermind the reputation.

We'd also like to take issue with another piece of research put out by Accenture with the UN Global Compact on Sustainability and Perspectives from APAC CEOs.  The study, as far as we can find, has one fundamental major flaw: they don't actually define what sustainability is before they go out to ask everyone about it and gauge the trends.  As we've explored a lot on Forward Thinking, the word sustainability has a very fluid definition, and is an oft abused term.  If we can't have a common definition of what we're actually talking about, how can we actually carry the conversation further to understand what it means and how it manifests in the real world?  

As you might expect, both reports feature bold corporate language and try to show that business is taking issues seriously.  (Side speculation: this might be to actually influence business to take the issues seriously!). 

If our recent experience late last year at Business for Environment Summit, or on-the-ground observations in various markets across APAC are any judge: in reality, business is slow to change to critical issues like climate change, biodiversity, and sustainability.  The reality is its more business as usual at a time when some critical shifts need to take place.

Ever since Singapore launched its Green Mark programme for green buildings five years ago, the city-state has experienced a concerted shift towards the development of green buildings.

The growing momentum for green buildings certified with the Green Mark has grown beyond Singapore’s shores into Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, and China, noted Dr Gao Chun Ping, Senior Executive Development Officer, Green Mark Department, Building and Construction Authority.

Speaking at the National Sustainability Conference organised by the National University of Singapore and the University of Sydney, Dr Gao noted that the explosion of green buildings will also lead to 18,000 green collar jobs for building professionals in the Republic.

Dr Gao on Thursday spoke on Singapore’s green building movement as a case study of how a combination of legislation and government incentive helped to spur the industry.

As some 30 to 40 percent of global energy use and associated emissions comes from buildings, it was an imperative to drive a shift towards leaner, more efficient buildings, he said.

Recent legislation had required all new developments and refurbishments on buildings in Singapore to meet the minimum Green Mark standards since April 2008.

The Green Mark Certification for Non-Residential Buildings currently covers new and some existing buildings in Singapore. The assessment criteria include energy efficiency, water efficiency, environmental protection, indoor environmental quality, and other green features such as renewable energy. There are currently three levels in the programme: Certified, Gold, Gold Plus, and Platinum.

Uptake of the certification has been steady due to government mandate for green buildings. The Inter-Ministerial Council for Sustainable Development (IMCSD) has a target that 80 percent of local buildings should be green by 2030.

To increase certifications in the years ahead, the Government had launched a $20 million Green Mark Incentive Scheme for New Buildings. This scheme offers financial incentives per square meter to encourage high certification levels for development projects, explained Dr Gao.

Another carrot available to developers is the Green Mark Bonus GFA Incentive Scheme. This offers up to 2 percent additional gross floor area (GFA) for Platinum rated projects, and additional 1 percent GFA for Gold rated projects.

The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) also has an awards programme to recognise leaders in the industry. Called the Green Mark Champion Award for Developers, this accolade honours excellence in the area. It has previously been won by City Developments Limited (CDL), widely recognised as a local pioneer in green buildings.

Mr Lee Chuan Seng, President, Singapore Green Building Council (SGBC) also spoke at the conference on upcoming developments in the Green Mark Certification tool.

The ratings system will be upgraded to a higher standard, lifting the bar for green buildings in Singapore.

According to the BCA 2nd Green Building Masterplan, there is also an upcoming shift in focus from new buildings to include existing buildings. To that end, the Green Mark tool will be updated to Version 4. This new version will come into effect at end of 2010 with both residential and non-residential building criteria.

“Singapore has 210 million square meters of existing building stock, and approximately 2-4 percent new buildings developed every year,” Mr Lee said. “The main users of energy are commercial buildings.” As a result of this, the Singapore carbon intensity per dollar of gross domestic product (GDP) is a notable 0.35 tonnes. While this number has leveled out in recent years, Singapore’s greenhouse gas emissions are still an upward march.

Thankfully, changes made to the building industry locally in Singapore are sped along by an effective public-private-partnership, Mr Lee said, and this applies to the green building space. This close partnership ensures that regulatory changes can be implemented rapidly, and is advantageous compared to many other countries like Australia which are more fragmented.

Addressing the perceived additional cost of developing a green building, Mr Lee noted the latest statistics. Green Mark Platinum buildings may sustain an extra project cost of 1-2 percent, but have payback in approximately 2-4 years, demonstrating even faster payback than noted in recent years.

Several Green Mark Platinum rated buildings already are demonstrating large resource and operational cost savings. Some include Ocean Center, Goodwood Residences, and City Square Mall.

In one innovative example, Lend Lease created a Green Lease programme limiting the amount of energy used by mall tenants and measures to increase energy efficiency.

“We invest resources to develop a calculator to help determine the energy use and carbon footprint of every fixture, and the cost it poses to the tenant,” said Mann Young, Head of Sustainability, Lend Lease Asia. “We then work with collaboratively with tenants to optimise their store fit-outs and cut their energy use.”

Manufacturing industries in countries worldwide are steering towards cleaner technologies to stay competitive. For Singapore to maintain its competitiveness, its manufacturing sector must also take a low-carbon path, said Dr Song Bin, director of the Sustainable Manufacturing Centre, SIMTech.

Speaking at the National Sustainability Conference on Thursday, Dr Song noted that countries such as South Korea, China, Japan, Germany and the United States have already begun this move.

Global drivers for this shift include the raised awareness of environmental concerns, greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets, and increased customer awareness.

Business considerations such as branding opportunities, energy and raw material prices, supply chain management, and cost savings are also some factors.

Across these areas, both public and industry awareness has been on the rise since 2007, said Dr Song. While awareness is increasing, there is a need for more successful business case studies to help highlight the gains made by pioneering projects.

Specifically in manufacturing, elimination of waste, a push for energy efficiency, and closed-loop processes were areas that needed attention. Some improvement measures include KPIs which centre on materials, processes, and the carbon footprint of these operations.

According to Dr Song, businesses increasingly understands that waste should be viewed as a resource. In this light, waste can be a value-add through resource recovery. Many companies in Singapore are beginning to awaken to this commercial opportunity, he said.

A case study of LHT Holdings demonstrated how a local company engaged in wood recycling from demolition turned out useful products from waste. Some of the company’s finished recycled wood products include flooring, doors, and shipping palettes, Dr Song highlighted.

He also flagged significant potential for energy efficiency, especially through heat insulation and heat recovery. He noted that real-time visualization systems exist to monitor the energy consumption and production volume of manufacturing. These systems allow manufacturers to adjust their processes, and optimise it for energy efficiency.

Securing new investment in technologies is often tricky especially if using traditional models. Dr Song questioned the typical calculations for return on investment (ROI) which are critical in swaying investment decisions.

“Is the ROI correct?” he asked, noting that assumptions should include potential for return from branding impact, long term strategic advantages, and operational cost savings. Taking a broad-level, strategic view of technology investments will help enable a shift towards cleaner manufacturing, he said.

In concert with Eco-business.com, we're pleased to announce the next Forward Thinking Thursday will be held on Thursday 12 August at Fou De Fa Fa from 7-9 p.m.  The venue boasts a wide range of healthy food and drinks (wine too!) and is just steps off the Tanjong Pagar MRT.  Please join us for an evening of making connections, progressing ideas, and being inspired.  We try to keep the crowd small and meaningful, so please RSVP if you'd be so kind.  (psst Forward clients: If you join us, your food/drink is on us!) 

See you there!

Venue details are as follows:

Fou De Fa Fa - 168 Robinson Road - Phone 6327 9418

Restaurant reviews can be found here, in case you're wondering.

View Larger Map

Electronic waste (or E-Waste) is a big problem worldwide.  All those used computers, monitors, mobiles have to go somewhere.  Often enough, it is to a developing country where the dangerous components are broken down with the release of all sorts of toxic nasties.  Thankfully, the process can be handled correctly.  Here's a look inside how to properly recycle E-Waste: