Thursday, September 10, 2009
Monday, April 7, 2008
Singapore RIver- A little research.
River is always the mother who nurtures man and civilization. Back to the earliest civilizations that ever known: they were all built along river. Also, Singapore River was identified as the earliest settlement in Singapore. Many artifacts that belong to 14th -16th century were found along river, especially its upper stream. These founding convinced that the river was served as the source of food and water that supported early inhabitants’ everyday life. Singapore or better to be addressed as Temasek during that period was playing a role as entrepot under the rule of Srivijaya, Majapahit etc due to its geographical location that lies in the water path between China and India. As an ideal place of rest for the merchants, the river provided drinking water which is highly essential for them. However, Temasek’s function as an entrepot was lost as the rise of Melaka followed by Johor-Riau kingdoms from late 16th to 18th century. Under the political circumstances that period of time, Temasek was sandwiched between different territories which caused it to be unstable from any kind of activities. After the colonial era began, it was finally the Dutch controlled the Malay Archipielago, but the Ducth was unable to discover the potential of Singapore as a perfect location of port. Singapore and of course, the Singapore river was kept silent and ‘disappears’ from any history record.
It was until 1819, a man with “extraordinary vision” - Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles landed on the island and assigned a role to the river (Chew, 2002). He signed a treaty with local ruler to gain the authority for the island development in order to build a world-class port city on the island. Under his systematically town plan, the river was only used as a nature boundary to separate different groups of people. He placed the European town and government at the north bank; ‘native’ population and Malay at the south of river bank; Chinese at the “ground below the bridge towards the river’s mouth” (Dobbs, 2003). It was obvious that Raffles had underestimated the true value of the river, but its significance cannot be hidden anymore as the time passed by. The river provided the wharf, shelter and store for the cargo that fit the commercial activities’ needs. As a Freeport that may maximize profit of merchants, more and more of them changed their base into Singapore. At the same time, Chinese, Indian and people from archipelago were migrated there and work as coolies, lighterman etc” (Dobbs, 2003). Warehouses were built along the bank; countless tongkang occupied the surface of the river especially the Boat Quay and Clark Quay. Eventually a lighterman industry was established; residential houses and hawker center were formed along the river bank. The population kept growing with an increasing rate. “Use of the river was pushed to its maximum between the opening of Suez Canal in 1869 and development of containerization in the 1970s” (Dobbs, 2003) .
At the late 1960s, the busy trading activities had polluted the river so much such that it was called ‘River of Death’ that unable to support life (Chan & Huang, 2005). Hence, starting in March 1969, the prime Minister- Lee Kuan Yew started his new policy to “clean-up” the river. Firstly, the cargo loading was relocated at Pasir Panjang and handled by PSA, since the lighter industry was identified as one of the major pollutant source. (Dobbs, 2002). Subsequently, hawkers, duck and pig farming were also being forced removed from the river side to eliminate the organic source of pollutant which turned the river water black in colour. After several years, the clean up mission was finally succeesful in 1987. In the effort of turning to ‘River of Death’ into a ‘River of Life”, the river therefore went through a redevelopment. “Under the Singapore River DGP (URA, 1994), the river was divided into 3 zones: Boat Quay that focuses on pubs, restaurants and boutique offices; Clarke Quay comprising a festival marketplace; and Robertson Quay as primarily residential” (Chang & Huang, 2005).
The most obvious observation which resulted from the history of the river is the distinct development between south bank and north bank at the river mouth during the colonial era. The residue old building showed that north bank is western denominated while south bank were occupied by Chinese, as the design style of the buildings shown. In addition, both old and present parliament house are located at the north bank, which is the legacy of Raffles’ town plan that the government base located at north bank. These historical buildings are now playing a totally different role they used to be, such as the old Parliament house is now the arts museum. Exception are religious places such as Po Chiak Keng temple that stand more than 120 years but still serving a relatively indifferent function. This is a typical example of culture heritage.
Singapore River definitely cannot be separated from the development of the Singapore. As Singapore exploits its strategic geographical location to serve as a port which forms the backbone of her economic, the river was indeed the main contributor until1980s. However, the boomed economic coupled with globalization change the fate of the river. The narrow river cannot afford the loading of cargo which kept increasing. As a result, the government took its original mission away and assigned another important role with it: build a new Singapore image and create a nationhood associated with it.
References:
Chang, T. C. & Huang, S. (2005, December). Recreating place, replacing memory: Creative destruction at the Singapore River. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, vol.46, pp267-280.
Chew, E. C. T. (2002). Raffles revisited: A review & reassessment of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles (1781-1826), Raffles Town Club, vol. 6 (Jan-Mar 2002).
Dobbs, S. (2002, November). Urban redevelopment and the forced eviction of lighters from the Singapore River. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, vol. 23(2), pp 288-310.
It was until 1819, a man with “extraordinary vision” - Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles landed on the island and assigned a role to the river (Chew, 2002). He signed a treaty with local ruler to gain the authority for the island development in order to build a world-class port city on the island. Under his systematically town plan, the river was only used as a nature boundary to separate different groups of people. He placed the European town and government at the north bank; ‘native’ population and Malay at the south of river bank; Chinese at the “ground below the bridge towards the river’s mouth” (Dobbs, 2003). It was obvious that Raffles had underestimated the true value of the river, but its significance cannot be hidden anymore as the time passed by. The river provided the wharf, shelter and store for the cargo that fit the commercial activities’ needs. As a Freeport that may maximize profit of merchants, more and more of them changed their base into Singapore. At the same time, Chinese, Indian and people from archipelago were migrated there and work as coolies, lighterman etc” (Dobbs, 2003). Warehouses were built along the bank; countless tongkang occupied the surface of the river especially the Boat Quay and Clark Quay. Eventually a lighterman industry was established; residential houses and hawker center were formed along the river bank. The population kept growing with an increasing rate. “Use of the river was pushed to its maximum between the opening of Suez Canal in 1869 and development of containerization in the 1970s” (Dobbs, 2003) .
At the late 1960s, the busy trading activities had polluted the river so much such that it was called ‘River of Death’ that unable to support life (Chan & Huang, 2005). Hence, starting in March 1969, the prime Minister- Lee Kuan Yew started his new policy to “clean-up” the river. Firstly, the cargo loading was relocated at Pasir Panjang and handled by PSA, since the lighter industry was identified as one of the major pollutant source. (Dobbs, 2002). Subsequently, hawkers, duck and pig farming were also being forced removed from the river side to eliminate the organic source of pollutant which turned the river water black in colour. After several years, the clean up mission was finally succeesful in 1987. In the effort of turning to ‘River of Death’ into a ‘River of Life”, the river therefore went through a redevelopment. “Under the Singapore River DGP (URA, 1994), the river was divided into 3 zones: Boat Quay that focuses on pubs, restaurants and boutique offices; Clarke Quay comprising a festival marketplace; and Robertson Quay as primarily residential” (Chang & Huang, 2005).
The most obvious observation which resulted from the history of the river is the distinct development between south bank and north bank at the river mouth during the colonial era. The residue old building showed that north bank is western denominated while south bank were occupied by Chinese, as the design style of the buildings shown. In addition, both old and present parliament house are located at the north bank, which is the legacy of Raffles’ town plan that the government base located at north bank. These historical buildings are now playing a totally different role they used to be, such as the old Parliament house is now the arts museum. Exception are religious places such as Po Chiak Keng temple that stand more than 120 years but still serving a relatively indifferent function. This is a typical example of culture heritage.
Singapore River definitely cannot be separated from the development of the Singapore. As Singapore exploits its strategic geographical location to serve as a port which forms the backbone of her economic, the river was indeed the main contributor until1980s. However, the boomed economic coupled with globalization change the fate of the river. The narrow river cannot afford the loading of cargo which kept increasing. As a result, the government took its original mission away and assigned another important role with it: build a new Singapore image and create a nationhood associated with it.
References:
Chang, T. C. & Huang, S. (2005, December). Recreating place, replacing memory: Creative destruction at the Singapore River. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, vol.46, pp267-280.
Chew, E. C. T. (2002). Raffles revisited: A review & reassessment of Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles (1781-1826), Raffles Town Club, vol. 6 (Jan-Mar 2002).
Dobbs, S. (2002, November). Urban redevelopment and the forced eviction of lighters from the Singapore River. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, vol. 23(2), pp 288-310.
Dobbs, S. (2003). The Singapore River: A social history 1819-2002. Singapore: Singapore University Press, 2003.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Waste disposal problem- How to slove it?
Currently, Malaysia is still using traditional waste method, mainly landfilling, as a way of disposing waste. However, no matter how much land the country owns, it will be exhausted one day. In other words, Malaysia might end up with no more area for landfilling. Clearly, now is the time of a systematic way in disposing waste should be introduced and well devolpoded in Malaysia.
First of all, the three-stream collection system shoud be introduced in Malaysia. Acccording to Collins.J (2002), this method is currently used in those high-achieving cities, such that waste being seperated into organics, dry recyclables and tricky residual. From there, we can make use of these wastes accordingly. For instance, orgainic waste may be used in producing fertilizer or even generates electricity. By the means of advanced technology, hydrocarbon which is the main composition among organic waste may be extracted from organic waste and then used as fuel to generate electricity, while the remaining residual may still be used as the raw material of fertilizer.
Meanwhile, dry recyclables will be sent to a collecting center and be further seperated to paper, plastic, metal, etc. These valuable resources will be sent to respective recyling center for direct recycling purpose. At the same time, the tricky residual, which composed by mainly chemical ingredient, should be handled carefully. Unlike the dry recyclable waste, most tricky residual can not be recycled. Hence, they should be chemically treated until they do not pollute the environment when disposed.
Also, according to Collins.J (2002), New Zealand is quite successful in the zero waste ambition. Malaysia should send a team there to learn their way of disposing waste, and apply what is practical to fit Malaysia's needs. It is always better to learn from other who is more experience, especially the succeed one.
Despite the technology used, what Malaysia really needs to learn is how to educate its people. This highly efficient way of disposing waste can't be used as long as people there do not take the initiative to seperate the waste themselves.
First of all, the three-stream collection system shoud be introduced in Malaysia. Acccording to Collins.J (2002), this method is currently used in those high-achieving cities, such that waste being seperated into organics, dry recyclables and tricky residual. From there, we can make use of these wastes accordingly. For instance, orgainic waste may be used in producing fertilizer or even generates electricity. By the means of advanced technology, hydrocarbon which is the main composition among organic waste may be extracted from organic waste and then used as fuel to generate electricity, while the remaining residual may still be used as the raw material of fertilizer.
Meanwhile, dry recyclables will be sent to a collecting center and be further seperated to paper, plastic, metal, etc. These valuable resources will be sent to respective recyling center for direct recycling purpose. At the same time, the tricky residual, which composed by mainly chemical ingredient, should be handled carefully. Unlike the dry recyclable waste, most tricky residual can not be recycled. Hence, they should be chemically treated until they do not pollute the environment when disposed.
Also, according to Collins.J (2002), New Zealand is quite successful in the zero waste ambition. Malaysia should send a team there to learn their way of disposing waste, and apply what is practical to fit Malaysia's needs. It is always better to learn from other who is more experience, especially the succeed one.
Despite the technology used, what Malaysia really needs to learn is how to educate its people. This highly efficient way of disposing waste can't be used as long as people there do not take the initiative to seperate the waste themselves.
Source: Collins.J (2002, Oct 3rd). Radical plans for waste could herald a big clean-up. The Guardian Weekly. p.25
Monday, March 17, 2008
The Chernobyl disaster. [ Upgraded ]
Essay Prompt: Choose one recent "engineering disaster" that has affected the environment in one country and explain how could it be avoided.
The RBMK-1000 reactor, which was designed in 1954 and operated safely for over 30 years, had several inbuilt design faults(Park, 1989). The combination of water coolant and positive void coefficient of the RBMK was the biggest design fault since that made the reactor just like a “time-bomb”(Park, 1989,p149). A modern reactor is either using gas coolant or set to negative void coefficient, which guarantee no repetition of Chernobyl-like explosion. Furthermore, the RBMK reactor should has more automatic safety features that could not be disabled by an operator, in order to minimizes man-made mistake, just like a modern reactor today. For instance, the control rods should be inserted into the reactor at once automatically when the temperature or pressure goes beyond the standard range, while ensuring the power supply of the control rods and the monitoring system. Therefore, the chance of explosion in modern nuclear plant that triggered by the reactor itself is almost nil.
At the same time, a nuclear power plant should not be built at a densely populated area to prevent people from the exposure of radioactive toxic. “A nuclear reactor site must have a population exclusion zone, for example, no population within 800 meters” (Ramsey & Modarres, 1998, p180). However, the initiative to prevent the material from spreading should be taken, as the disaster taught us. Hence, a fallout shelter which performs that task should be built in any nuclear based facilities, not just at a nuclear power plant. Meanwhile, the possibility of any external factors that affecting safe operation such as aircraft crashing or natural disasters should be taken into account in the design of a nuclear plant( Ramsey & Modarres, 1998). The plant building structure must have some ability to absorb external forces, for example the collision of aircraft or earthquake, and protection against fire in order to gain some buffer time for the automatic safety features to operate.
Another approach to prevent such a disaster from happening again is to ensure that all plant operators are familiar with the safety guidelines, in addition to the knowledge of nuclear science. Take UK as an example: their nuclear plant operators are highly trained graduates who need to work in Central Electricity Generating Board for several years before they receive strict training of nuclear plant operation (Park, 1989). Any newly constructed nuclear power plant should hire those experienced operators as their first badge operators. Also, all experiments with the reactor should be approved by more than one nuclear expert so that the experiment can be done safely. Since the disaster was begun by an unauthorized experiment with the reactor.
In conclusion, no matter how ‘safe’ a nuclear plant it declared, it is still a risky tool for human beings. Therefore, the ultimate method to prevent the disaster is, of course, not to build a nuclear plant at all! This is possible with the development of alternative energy source such as solar power and fuel cells.
References:
Mark Resnicoff.(n.d.) My visit to Chernobyl : 20 Years After the Disaster .Retrieved March 10, 2008, from
http://www.chernobylee.com/articles/chernobyl/my-journey-to-chernobyl-1.php
Park, C.C. (1989). Chernobyl: The long shadow. London and New York: Routledge.
Ramsey, C. B. & Modarres, M. (1998). Commercial nuclear power : Assuring safety for the future. Canada: John Wiley & Sons, INC.
Uranium Information Centre. (2008, Feb). Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper 22: Chernobyl Accident .Retrieved March 10, 2008, from
http://www.uic.com.au/nip22.htm
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Draft
In Singapore and Malaysia, people pronounced 'tree' and 'three' in the same way which is totally wrong. When i showed this to one of my friend from China, he simply don't understand it.
save trees /= save 3s
"Saving Nature, But Only for man"-Charles Krauthammer
I would raise up both my hands for it.
Civilization is a process that destroy nature in order to cater human needs. Its motive is to build an environment that more comfortable for man. Human work hard for centuries to achieve that goal. Sarcastically, it also build an environment that not suitable for human at the same time. Polluted air, polluted water, polluted land, chemical composed food, climate change , and ozone depletion are typical examples.
Therefore, somebody realized it and shout out: " Hey, we can't let this continue; we must save the world! ". So, man began to study what is wrong. Since then, man created a new word-'recycle'. Recycling is recognized as a symbol of environmental friendly action. But is it just because of we want to preserve virgin forest? The answer is no. A simple answer is the cost of recycling is much more cheaper than if we produce the same thing from the raw material. It is a definite result from economic. Also, how many people are using solar power water heater which is more environmentally friendlier? You know the answer, since solar power heater is expensive.
After being educated, most people would agree 'green' is good and essential. But they will only practice it if and only if convenient and economical benefit.
Civilization is a process that destroy nature in order to cater human needs. Its motive is to build an environment that more comfortable for man. Human work hard for centuries to achieve that goal. Sarcastically, it also build an environment that not suitable for human at the same time. Polluted air, polluted water, polluted land, chemical composed food, climate change , and ozone depletion are typical examples.
Therefore, somebody realized it and shout out: " Hey, we can't let this continue; we must save the world! ". So, man began to study what is wrong. Since then, man created a new word-'recycle'. Recycling is recognized as a symbol of environmental friendly action. But is it just because of we want to preserve virgin forest? The answer is no. A simple answer is the cost of recycling is much more cheaper than if we produce the same thing from the raw material. It is a definite result from economic. Also, how many people are using solar power water heater which is more environmentally friendlier? You know the answer, since solar power heater is expensive.
After being educated, most people would agree 'green' is good and essential. But they will only practice it if and only if convenient and economical benefit.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
