absolutely alex’s adventures & times

It was the biggest cop-out ever.

The city of San Francisco, the sole US stop for the global Olympic torch relay, decided to chicken out rather than face the protesters.

Reuters photo

The city claimed that in the interest of public safety, it had to pull a bait and switch on both pro- and anti-China protesters who had lined the Embarcadero route that the torch relay was expected to go through. After delaying the start of the event, the route was changed at the last minute. The closing ceremony was also canceled, with the torch hurriedly leaving the city through the airport like a thief.

“We assessed the situation and felt that we could not secure the torch and protect the protesters and supporters to the degree that we wished,” San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom told the media. “As a consequence we engaged in subsequent contingency planning that we felt would keep people safe.”

Some people might argue that Newsom faced a damned if you do, damned if you don’t dilemma. But the option he took was the least satisfying.

If it was seriously that much of a problem, why not just scrap the whole thing and save public funds instead of taking the easy way out and playing hide-and-seek?

Since they decided to let the show go on, Newsom and the city’s police should have been brave enough and prepared to allow the dissent and protest that would have greeted the torch relay as it passed through the original route. Don’t they have confidence in their police forces’ ability to keep the peace?

This is San Francisco we are talking about here, not downtown Beijing. Free speech and dissent are part of the constitutional rights of this country, and San Francisco has always been known as a bastion of democracy in speech and action, so why the need for trickery and secrecy? If France and Britain could allow it, why not San Francisco?

Moreover, there were people and tourists who genuinely wanted to see the torch run. They were waiting all day and left disappointed. The torch relay was meant as a public event. What good is it if hardly anybody saw it?

What Newsom did was lame. It was the worst compromise and provided the Chinese government with the public relations, faux protest-free torch relay photo-op they would gladly use to show its poor folks back home who don’t know better. Newsom should not have dragged San Francisco into being an accomplice for propaganda.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Critics might label Earth Hour gimmicky and deride it as the work of a few activists which would not have much long-term effect on slowing down the earth’s destruction from global warming.

But with the pretty dire situation the earth is facing, they should instead look on the bright side — every little gesture can and should count towards raising awareness and spurring on more action to combat global warming.

Earth Hour, which was adopted by 27 cities around the world on Saturday at 2000 local time, was a symbolic gesture to turn off the lights in buildings and structures around the world to save energy and reduce carbon emissions.

The World Wildlife Fund-led initiative saw cities such as Sydney, Chicago, Bangkok, Copenhagen, Dublin and San Francisco flick the light switches off at 2000 local time.

To highlight the importance of the event, cities blacked out their most prominent landmarks or buildings, such as Sydney’s Opera House and Chicago’s Sears Towers.

“The main point is not to make a significant dent in climate change, but to demonstrate the need for people to take leadership on their own to address this problem,” Richard Moss, the Fund’s vice president for climate change, told the Washington Post. “It’s not about sitting in the dark, it’s about making a serious commitment over the next year and beyond over how we contribute to climate change.”

Critics may scoff but the “black-out” actually achieved some practical results. Chicago’s John Hancock building was using the time the lights were out to change their bulbs to energy-efficient ones. In Bangkok, the city saved 73.34 megawatts of electricity, which would otherwise have generated 45.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

First started in Sydney last year, Earth Hour was also shown to have reduced energy usage by over 10 percent during the one hour of lights out.

So detractors can boo all the want but they overlook the message it sends and the tangible, albeit small, results the experiment yielded.

Building on this, World Wildlife Fund could widen the initiative by recruiting more cities and government agencies to join in the next time.

And why wait for it to be just an annual event? Be bolder. For a start, make it a monthly event. The best thing to do, of course, would be to get kids involved. That way, perhaps the awareness could be translated into a norm in their thinking and become a way of life.

Earth Hour could become Earth Forever if everybody gave it a chance and pitched in. So why not?

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Tata Motors’ launch this week of the Nano, a little car that can seat 5 and costs $2,500, has attracted much attention for its potential to bring mobility to the masses.

Technologically, it is significant, capitalizing on India’s plentiful labor and cheaper materials to build a car that could be affordable to people of lesser means.

Aesthetically, it is pleasing, with its cute design that’s somewhat reminiscent of Swatch’s Smart car. Its small size suggests easy handling, especially in the crowded and chaotic streets of India, and of course, breezy parking on narrow streets.

For India, the birthplace of the car, the success of the Nano could boost national pride and translate into even stronger economic growth than it is already enjoying.

The vehicle is also priced attractively enough so that a family which could previously afford only a two-wheeler, such as a motorcycle or scooter, could seriously consider going for the Nano instead.

But therein lies the rub – is it progress or regression with the Nano’s imminent introduction to the market?

As the world worries about global warming and increased greenhouse gases and tries to work on solving the issue, the Nano could throw a spanner in the works, possibly causing car ownership to balloon worldwide as its accessible price attracts those who had previously never had the means of affording a car.

Furthermore, with India’s relatively less stringent fuel emission standards, this could mean the nightmare of even more greenhouse gases produced and more pollution to deal with. Even as many parts of the world fret over future air quality and tries to promote public transport as an alternative, is that endeavor doomed to fail as the Nano’s success condemns the efforts of reversing the damage done to the earth?

With more cars, imagine also the strain on the infrastructure of developing countries, which are primarily the Nano’s target markets. Existing roads, usually in poor condition with maintenance virtually non-existent, are already laboring to keep up with the present number of vehicles. I do not wish upon already frazzled motorists more traffic and congestion as too few roads and infrastructure fail to keep up with more cars in circulation. Traffic is already notoriously bad in places like Bangkok, Beijing, Mexico City and New Delhi. How much worse might it get if more cars were on the road as they get cheaper?

Safety is yet another dimension that could easily be compromised with a surge in the car population. Developing countries are often quite lax on the criteria for getting a driver’s license – if it is even strictly necessary. In Mexico City for instance, one only has to be 18 and above and have the fees ready to pay for the license, with nary a driving test in sight. The New York Times reports that in India, standards are similarly loose, with a license easily procured as long as one could afford it. More worryingly, the Nano reportedly falls short of US safety standards.

How about the price of oil? $100 per barrel is already upon us. How much more is gas going to cost in the longer term as demand for it becomes even more insatiable? And what consequences will that have on geopolitics, especially in the Middle East?

Like it or, Tata is pushing ahead with the Nano and it is likely to be successful, given that cars are status symbols in many countries. Which probably means that all the emission cuts that have been envisioned or agreed upon is likely to disappear into thin air.

Does shame really work as a deterrent?

Perhaps in Asian societies, it would both be a deterrent, and a negative incentive, to behave. Or at least not to get caught.

At least that’s the thinking of the new Thai acting chief of the Crime Suppression Unit in Bangkok.

In an acknowledgment that the police forces need policing themselves, the chief has introduced an element of shame and pop culture to the officers who turn up late at work or park in the wrong places. He’s issuing pink Hello Kitty armbands, adorned with hearts, to errant officers.

AP Photo

Hello Kitty is a worldwide phenomenon with children, especially girls. Known as the cartoon cat that has no mouth but allows fans to project all sorts of emotions onto it, it seems like a strangely inappropriate but also logical cartoon character to pick for shaming errant Thai male officers.

“This new twist is expected to make them feel guilt and shame and prevent them from repeating the offense, no matter how minor,” the acting police chief told the International Herald Tribune. “Kitty is a cute icon for young girls. It’s not something macho police officers want covering their biceps.”

True. But an earlier incarnation of the same idea — singling out offenders with an armband, previously in tartan fabric — didn’t work. Offenders actually took the armbands home as souvenirs.

Not that they won’t do the same with the pink Hello Kitty ones. Police officers’ daughters could be enamored with it. After all, Hello Kitty is a huge hit with young girls.

Tourists who might not be aware of the armbands’ implications, might also find the idea too cute and even start asking to take photos with the officers. It’s not too far-fetched. Last year, when the Thai military overthrew former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in a coup, soldiers on the streets of Bangkok were posing for photos with tourists.

Going back to whether shame is an effective deterrent, it might work for a short while. But as the practice becomes the norm eventually, it might lose its sting.

The Thai police ought to think of a combination of sticks and carrots, not just sticks.

It is well and good to shame offenders, but more effective would be rewarding them for good behavior.

Why not have special mentions of good officers? Or reward them with financial incentives? These are probably more likely to motivate people to better behavior, especially cash, in a developing country where the members of the police force are unlikely to make very much.

Positive reinforcements would be a much better way to change behavior and lift the morale of all those involved, spurring them on to good practices.

It’s time to cut the paternalistic attitude. Treat the officers like the adults that they are, and stop using guilt and shaming tactics. If they were treated with the right respect, and incentivized to work hard and follow the rules, it would be a much better thing for the Thai police force, and Thailand, as a whole.

It’s truly heartening to see the spread of the movement to ban bottled water in cities, with the cities’ governments taking the lead on the matter.

First, it was Los Angeles, whose mayor Antonio Villaraigosa made city agencies stop buying bottled water for employees in 2005. Villaraigosa was prompted to take that step after finding out that the city had spent nearly $90,000 on it. It was an embarrassing discovery for Villaraigosa, as around the same time, L.A.’s water agency happened to be financing a $1 million ad campaign on the merits of tap water.

San Francisco followed suit last month.

Now, New York has a campaign to get New Yorkers to drink tap water instead of buying bottled water. It’s even roped in restaurants to serve tap waters to customers instead of selling them bottled water.

Cost-cutting might have spurred L.A. and San Francisco to stop buying bottled water for city employees. But the true beneficiary emerging from these developments will be the environment.

A staggering billion of plastic bottles, or even more, that are used to contain water end up in California’s landfills annually. And that’s just California alone. Recycling efforts may be in existence but that is clearly not keeping up with the rate at which bottled water is consumed and the plastic bottles being disposed.

Besides the waste generated from the plastic bottles, the development of the plastic for the water bottles, and eventually, the transportation, distribution and the cost of the water, all make huge environmental impact. SF’s mayor says it takes more energy to transport bottled water than a barrel of oil. Environmental groups also cite the statistic that four out of five plastic water bottles end up on landfill sites while its production process contributes to global warming.

If only people would realize that tap water is usually as good, or if not better, than bottled water. Plus it’s cheap.

More cities should follow on the path taken by these three cities, not only as a cost-cutting measure but as a serious environment-benefiting step.

They shouldn’t stop there.

The next object of their target ought to be plastic bags — get supermarkets and stores to stop using them and have people use reusable bags instead. That would be another great step in the fight for the environment.

China’s Great Wall, Rome’s Colosseum and Peru’s Machu Picchu were the top choices of around 100 million global votes cast in a contest to decide which landmarks worldwide are worthy of being anointed the title of the “New Seven Wonders of the World”.

The world’s most famous ode of love by a Mogul emperor to his wife, India’s Taj Mahal; Brazil’s Statue of Christ Redeemer that looms over Rio de Janeiro; Jordan’s ancient city Petra in the desert and Mexico’s Chichen Itza pyramid complete the lineup of the other architectural marvels emerging tops in the global contest. 20 sites in total were the finalists from which the top seven were chosen.

The winners were announced today in Portugal, which didn’t have any of its landmarks in the running, after the campaign was launched by the private organization New7Wonders Foundation in 1999. Beginning last year, people were encouraged to have a say in the naming of the new seven wonders either online or by phone. The contest ended at midnight yesterday.

Some countries have taken the contest seriously, such as Jordan, which lobbied hard for votes for Petra, going as far as to select a beauty queen, Miss Petra, as its mascot. Its hard work seems to have paid off.

Egypt’s Great Pyramids of Giza is the only structure that still exists today from the list of original seven wonders of the world, which counted the Hanging Gardens of Babylon and the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus amongst the list. The list was first established by Greek scholars, the most notable being Antipater of Sidon in the 2th century B.C.

Given its venerable status, the Egyptian pyramids were exempt from the contest and were made an honorary new seven wonders member. But that was only after Egyptian officials complained of the “insult” to the pyramids to have to compete in the contest.

Other controversies the contest had stirred up included disapproval from UNESCO, which isn’t endorsing it, and critics that say the contest is gimmicky and profit-oriented.

But all that certainly hadn’t stopped around 100 million people from participating and countries from campaigning for their nominated sites, culminating in the results today.

“Slow down, you move too fast.
You got to make the morning last.
Just kicking down the cobble stones.
Looking for fun and feelin’ groovy.”

- Simon and Garfunkel

Singaporeans are in a great hurry.

They beat folks from 32 other cities to win the dubious honor of being the fastest walkers, outpacing those from bigger cities like New York or Tokyo, even as the pace of life worldwide has sped up by 10 per cent since 1994.

Singaporeans took just 10.55 seconds to walk along a 60 ft stretch of pavement, clocked by researchers who conducted their tests on wide, busy streets in each city.

Studies have shown that as people move faster they become less likely to help others, while also becoming prone to having higher rates of heart disease.

But the hurried street-crossing is just the latest disturbing sign of the frenzied pace of life there. It’s been so deeply embedded in Singaporeans – you can’t let up or the competition will catch up and leave you in the dust. So forget about slowing down. You’d better hurry if you want to make those millions to buy that swanky downtown condominium overlooking the water. And don’t even talk about having fun. There’s no time for that.

Underneath the shiny skyscrapers and the prosperity, Singaporeans have been fuelled by the twin demons of fear of being overtaken and materialism. I don’t know how much this study will make them stop and think, but it really is time Singaporeans stopped the relentless pursuit of material gain, smell the flowers and do something good for their health, and their soul.