The Green Building Council of Indonesia has been legally established and thier website is up on the link below . The Founder “Ibu Naning S. Adiningsih Adiwoso” is a really caring person who has worked for years to get support and participation from goverment , industry and building proffesionals. She has a hard job ahead of her and we wish her all the best.

http://www.gbcindonesia.org/

The President’s September 2009 announcement the country would cut its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has placed Indonesia in the limelight.

Many countries and multilateral organizations have been lining up to help Indonesia reach its objective.

Australia, Norway, the UK, the US, Germany, the Netherlands, Japan, France and Denmark have promised to help Indonesia address climate change, notably in the forestry and energy sectors, as well as in activities involving land use.

These countries, along with others, have also taken a growing interest in helping Indonesia, given it is home to the world’s third largest forest area and has substantially increased its energy demand.

Adequate, sufficient and sustainable financing from developed countries and multilateral platforms is required to significantly reduce GHG emissions in Indonesia.

Financial support from these entities is also necessary to signal, in particular to the private sector, the need to shift investment flows towards decoupling economic growth from increasing emissions, and towards a low carbon and climate resilient future.

Providing financial support is a critical factor to ensure a developing country like Indonesia succeeds in fulfilling its voluntary pledge.

However, crucial questions need to be addressed. Firstly, is the current and future financing promised — on top of the government’s own budget — sufficient to meet the costs required to mitigate climate change?

Secondly, how do we make sure this financial support addresses the real and strategic challenges identified to mitigate climate change?

Without a comprehensive assessment of the financial support coming from developed countries, important components might be overlooked and objectives to mitigate climate change may not be reached.

The devil is always in the details.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in its National Economic, Environment and Development Study (NEEDS) for Climate Change estimates the average annual cost of the potential mitigation measures proposed until 2030 at ¤12.84 billion, equivalent to approximately 5.6 percent of Indonesia’s GDP in 2005.

From 2010 onwards, this annual cost of abatement is expected to account for 0.9 percent of the country’s projected GDP in 2030 as a result of Indonesia’s rapidly increasing GDP.

In Indonesia’s Second National Communication (SNC) under the UNFCCC, published by the ministry of the environment, the government committed to implement 54 climate change projects in the next five years, which would cost around US$897 million.

In fact, the government allocated $213 million from the state budget in 2009 toward addressing climate change.
So, combined with the ministry of environment’s budget and the funds allocated to environmental development, the total amounts to $991 million.

Although the figure may seem impressive, it only amounts to 0.013 percent of the central government’s budget expenditure, and only 0.008 percent of Indonesia’s total budget expenditure.

The budget the government allocated toward addressing climate change was also far from the annual costs required to implement potential mitigation measures.

As reported in NEEDS, overseas development assistance (ODA) and climate Multilateral and Bilateral Assistance are expected to contribute around $1.17 billion per year toward climate change mitigation.

These figures — both from the government’s budget and overseas’ support — are far from adequate and sufficient.
Indonesia must convince developed countries they need to increase their financial support — as promised in a number of international forums — to help implement climate change actions in developing countries.

This will prevent much higher costs resulting from inaction, and shift the estimated $1.5 trillion of global annual private sector investment needed to spur a clean energy economy.

Once the private sector has been convinced to throw its weight behind clean energy, there will likely be significant new and additional investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, tackling deforestation and new climate-friendly technologies.

One must also carefully examine the objectives and types of interventions targeted by the financial
support.

Some financial assistance is directly targeted at specific sectors, investing in quick gains or low-hanging fruits.
There are sizeable interests in supporting projects on the ground (e.g. community forestry, REDD demonstration/pilots and micro-financing for rural electricity).

There are indications, however, that financial assistance is still shying away from supporting comprehensive work (i.e. cross-sectoral and multi-stakeholders’ approaches) that could ensure systemic and strategic changes in the country’s development policies, framework, governance and operations.

It is challenging for this country to implement long-term sustainable solutions without involving more sectors, layers of governments and stakeholders.

Trust built across sectors and between all stakeholders will foster synergies, which will prevent efforts from individuals and sectors from canceling each other out.

To reach positive outcomes from climate change actions in this country, it is imperative that any support provided is open, inclusive, transparent and performance-based.

Indonesia must also actively guide programs supported by international public funding to concretely safeguard the global climate, the country’s economy, people’s livelihoods, as well as the country’s ecosystems and biodiversity.

Clear rules and mechanisms are therefore required to show how and where the money will be spent, and how it will be monitored.

In the end, financial support must be sufficient and well allocated. Now, it is up to the country to ensure this happens.

The writer is program director of climate & energy at WWF-Indonesia, and adjunct lecturer at Paramadina Graduate School of Diplomacy. He can be reached at fardiansyah@wwf.or.id

Some catch: Officers from the Bali Police and Conservation Agency (BKSDA) carry a green turtle (Chelonia mydas) rescued in a raid of a warehouse in Denpasar on Wednesday. In the raid, the police arrested Jero Mangku Budha, who was allegedly storing 71 protected green turtles taken from Sulawesi and butchering them for meat. All of the turtles found at the warehouse are thought to be more than 70 years old. JP/Zul Trio Anggono

Bali Police officers arrested Jero Mangku Budha, 50, for allegedly stocking 71 protected green turtles in a warehouse on Jl. Pulau Enggano in Pamogan village, Denpasar, Bali, on Wednesday afternoon.

Bali police detective chief Sr. Comr. Andi Taqdir said the suspect had also been allegedly selling a traditional dish called nasi lawar in which he put turtle meat.

“The suspect opened a nasi lawar stall in front of the warehouse. He said that he was using pork in the dish, but actually he was using turtle meat,” he said, adding that his team had been following Jero’s movements for over three months.

Andi said that the captive turtles were believed to all be more than 70 years old and weigh more than 100 kilograms each.

Jero faces five years in prison under the 1990 Law on conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems.

http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/05/19/bali-police-arrest-illegal-turtle-meat-seller.html

President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono pledged on Monday to make Indonesia the world’s biggest user of clean, renewable geothermal energy, and urged private investors to back him.

The archipelago of 234 million people and more than 200 volcanoes is estimated to possess around 40 percent of the world’s geothermal energy potential, or around 28,000 megawatts.

It already has plans to double its geothermal energy output but analysts say the high costs associated with converting underground heat into electricity is an obstacle to investment.

After the United States with close to 4,000 megawatts and the Philippines utilising approximately 2,000 megawatts, Indonesia is currently only using 1,100 megawatts [of geothermal energy].”, Yudhoyono told a conference here.

This is only some 4.2 percent of our geothermal reserves, which constitutes about 40 percent of the world’s geothermal potential. This is going to change. It is my intention that Indonesia will become the largest user of geothermal energy.

Within five years Indonesia aims to add 4,000 megawatts of geothermal capacity to the existing 1,189 megawatts to help meet national energy needs, he said.

By 2025 the country plans to generate 9,000 megawatts from underground heat sources including volcanoes, with help from the private sector and partners.

Geothermal energy generated from natural heat trapped under the Earth’s surface is far cleaner than the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, one of the main contributors to greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.

Yudhoyono told the gathering that geothermal and other clean energies would help the country cut greenhouse gas emissions by 26 percent over 2005 levels by 2026.

Coal and oil are by far the biggest sources of Indonesia’s growing energy needs, reportedly accounting for almost 70 percent, followed by natural gas and hydropower on about 18 percent each.

Geothermal contributes only three percent to state-run energy company Perusahaan Listrik Negara’s power capacity.

Indonesia is one of the fastest growing economies in the world but currently only 65 percent of Indonesians have access to electricity. The goal is to reach 90 percent of the population by the end of the decade.

The fourth World Geothermal Congress opened on Sunday in Nusa Dua and is expected to attract some 2,000 people from more than 80 countries over six days.

http://www.thebalitimes.com/2010/04/26/indonesia-energy-yudhoyono/

Indonesia is hosting what is being called the world’s biggest Geothermal energy conference.

The congress in Bali is an attempt to look at how to better develop geothermal power as an environmentally friendly fuel for the future.

Geothermal power is energy extracted from the heat stored in the Earth, and environmentalists say it could be the key to using cleaner forms of fuel.

Representatives from 80 countries are attending the talks.

Expensive endeavour

It is often dubbed volcano power but the correct scientific explanation for geothermal energy is power extracted from the heat stored in the Earth’s core.

Indonesia has ambitious plans to tap geothermal power and in particular the energy created by its volcanoes.

The archipelago of more than 17,000 islands sits on the Pacific “Ring of Fire” – one of the most active regions in the world for volcanic activity.

Indonesia does not have the resources to be able to provide a consistent supply of electricity to all of its population, so finding an alternative source of energy is critical for south-east Asia’s largest economy as it rapidly expands.

This will be one of the major talking points at the world geothermal congress in Bali this week.

Scientists say that in theory the planet’s geothermal power is enough to supply mankind’s energy needs and could certainly help to solve Indonesia’s fuel problems.

But the issue is cost. While environmentally friendly, the harnessing of geothermal power is also a very expensive endeavour.

Indonesia currently uses mostly coal as a source of power, which is cheap but is also considered harmful to the environment.

It is thought that a geothermal plant could cost about twice as much as a coal one and take many more years to build.

It is being reported that Indonesia is keen to raise more than $1bn (£650m) in investment as a result of this conference so that it can develop geothermal energy as a source of power for its future.

THE Bali climate conference had everything, from beaches to the UN’s top climate diplomat fleeing the platform in tears. There were charges that the science underpinning the event had been reduced to a footnote, and even a rescue mission from the UN secretary general as the all-night final session extended long into the following afternoon. To top it all, a booed and humiliated US delegation was forced into a U-turn after being unable to find a single supporter in the face of a vitriolic attack from Papua New Guinea.

Between the tears and ultimatums, the conference may also have ensured that both the US and China become fully engaged in humanity’s most pressing task of the 21st century – reining in climate change.

On the face of it, nothing happened that will immediately affect the atmosphere. Almost 24 hours after the scheduled close, with ministers already leaving for the airport, a deal was reached on the “Bali roadmap” – a document setting the agenda for two years of negotiations that should culminate in a Copenhagen protocol to govern global greenhouse gas emissions after the Kyoto protocol lapses in 2012.

The key question is whether the roadmap will prevent dangerous climate change. European nations wanted it to state a “destination” – a target of emissions cuts by industrialised countries of between 25 and 40 per cent by 2020, and for total global emissions to peak within 15 years and halve by 2050.

The US – in its one clear victory of the fortnight – joined with Canada, Japan and Russia to veto this text, saying it prejudiced the coming negotiations. They secured a compromise reference to the necessity for “deep cuts”, with a footnote mentioning several pages taken from a recent report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change describing scenarios for reducing emissions.

Here the story gets murky, with the science repeatedly being taken in vain. The EU and many environmentalists claimed at the meeting that the 25 to 40 per cent plan was the recommendation of the IPCC, and that to reject it was to reject the science. In fact the referenced pages do not make such a recommendation. They simply say that cuts within that range would likely be required to limit concentrations of greenhouse gases in the air to the equivalent of 450 parts per million of carbon dioxide. They give equal prominence to two other targets – 550 and 650 ppm – that require less stringent cuts.

Most delegates left the meeting believing that the footnote embraces a 450 ppm target. The Americans know better.

There is a further complication. Delegates repeatedly asserted that keeping atmospheric concentrations below 450 ppm would prevent global average air temperatures rising by more than 2 °C from pre-industrial levels, which is often seen as a threshold beyond which dangerous climate change will occur. It might. But according to studies presented in Bali by the UK’s Met Office, there is only a 20 per cent chance of 450 ppm delivering that.

Uncertainty about the climate’s sensitivity to extra greenhouse gases is still so great, said Vicky Pope of the Met Office, that 450 ppm could cause warming of 4 °C or more (see Graph). The best that can be said is that the significance of keeping below 2 °C is more a political construct than a scientific fact.

None of this detracts from the urgency of dramatically lowering emissions of greenhouse gases. Once in the air, the lifetime of CO2 is measured in centuries, so climate scientists in Bali argued that only near-zero emissions by mid-century or soon after will begin to make the world safe from climate change.

It is not an impossible target. Three nations publicly committed themselves to bringing their emissions to zero: Norway, New Zealand and Costa Rica. The last says it can get there by 2021.

This was the first UN climate conference at which countries talked confidently about making emissions cuts on such a scale. They are being pushed by the remorselessly alarming science, but also drawn by the assurances of large corporations that such cuts are feasible. Germany last week announced plans to cut its emissions by 40 per cent below 1990s levels by 2020. “This is not altruism, the German economy will benefit from the plans,” said the environment minister.

Bali was also the first UN climate conference to take place without a chorus of industrialists warning of economic doom if emissions are corralled. Instead, many are demanding firm long-term emissions targets to help them plan future investment. For them, the failure to enshrine a 25 to 40 per cent cut is a blow.

Bali was also the moment when large developing nations such as China for the first time committed themselves to what the roadmap calls “measurable, reportable and verifiable… mitigation actions”. This did not amount to pledging actual emissions cuts, but it was at least divergence from business as usual.

This commitment, unthinkable only a couple of years ago, did not happen easily. It nearly derailed the conference at the start of its unscheduled final day. In return for their promise, developing countries demanded that they also receive “measurable, reportable and verifiable” help from the rich world, in the form of money and technology. The European Union swiftly conceded the point, but a suspicious US blocked it.

Just a few hours before, a procedural cock-up had resulted in a chastised and sleep-deprived Yvo de Boer – executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change – leaving the platform in tears. Then the UN secretary general Ban Ki-Moon entered to read the riot act and demand a deal from bickering delegates. Coming after such a tense and fractious morning, the US’s one-nation attempted veto caused outrage.

It seemed set to wreck the deal. But then, in a moment of unscripted high drama rarely seen at UN conferences, Papua New Guinea’s head of delegation Kevin Conrad rose above the barrage of appeals to the US delegation and simply commanded them: “If you are not prepared to lead, get out of the way.” And they did. If the world finds a way to counter climate change, that will be a moment for the history books.
Papua New Guinea simply said to the US delegation: ‘If you are not prepared to lead, get out of the way.’ And they did

The scale of global emissions cuts now regarded by scientists as essential means that developing nations including China, India and Brazil will need to curtail their emissions sooner rather than later. US delegate Jim Connaughton put the emissions maths most succinctly.

Assuming even a conservative rate of global economic growth, business-as-usual energy technologies will raise global CO2 emissions from 22 billion tonnes to 37 billion tonnes by 2050. Meeting the Bali aspiration of halving global emissions will require cutting emissions to 11 billion tonnes. That is a reduction on business as usual of 26 billion tonnes – more than current total emissions.

The scale of the task was so great that “even if developed countries went to zero, it would still require major developing countries to halve their [projected] emissions,” Connaughton said.

One barely discussed element is that the Kyoto protocol appears to have been consigned to the dustbin of history even before its main provisions come into force in January. Nobody talks about a second round of Kyoto targets any more. The Bali roadmap mentions the protocol only once, noting that the new negotiations “shall be informed by… experience in implementing the… Kyoto protocol”.

This provides a face-saving way back into the climate fold for Kyoto-refusenik, the US. Nobody is saying so, but it may also wipe the slate clean for countries likely to fail their Kyoto targets. Canada in particular is expected to have emissions 38 per cent above 1990 levels by 2010, rather than the promised 6 per cent cut. Moreover its government has said that it will not, as required by the protocol, buy carbon offsets to make up the difference.

Under the protocol, Canada faced swingeing penalties in a future round of emissions targets. It may now escape them. Likewise Australia, which finally signed up to the Kyoto protocol in Bali seemingly unconcerned that it has no hope of even approaching the target it agreed back in 1997.

Meanwhile the “Berlin Wall” within the Kyoto protocol, which divided the list of industrialied nations with targets and the rest, has disappeared. The roadmap text talks simply of developed and developing nations, without defining them. De Boer says this creates greater flexibility. It also creates new complications.

The one unquestioned promise in Bali was that negotiations on the successor to the Kyoto protocol will be concluded in 2009. That could prove the hardest thing of all to achieve.

source: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19626353.900-analysis-how-the-climate-drama-unfolded-in-bali.html

Paolo Righetti, a 45-year-old Swiss national and co-owner of the Bali Buddha chain of health-food stores and restaurants, spoke with Carla Albertí de la Rosa about the importance of awareness and how Bali still has a long way to go.

The Bali Times: You took over Bali Buddha after it had been struggling for a number of years. How much was your investment and why were you interested in Bali Buddha?

Paolo Righetti: I was always a good client at Bali Buddha and knew the owner very well. It used to be a normal restaurant and then the owner left. My idea when taking over Bali Buddha was to give locals environmental education.

Brenda and I invested about US$6,000 each initially. Since then, we have expanded a lot. Our aim is to raise awareness, with food and products.

I also believe the more you give the more you receive. It’s amazing how it really works. We donate almost 50 percent of our monthly profits to different foundations that are doing great things. Not just environmentally but also socially.

‘Balinese people are still not aware of the negative effects of using chemicals’

The Bali Times: Indonesian, including Balinese, dishes are mostly fried and can have high fat content, especially coconut-based fare. As a result, cholesterol levels and heart disease can be high in some areas, notably in southern Sumatra, where meat forms the basis of the popular rendang dish. What do you think of this food? Could it be made healthier?

Paolo Righetti: It could be healthier by changing the oil. Indonesians reuse oil until it is black. They use it for a month and it’s saturated, but it’s cheaper for them to do this.

They should not cook vegetables so much and reduce the amount of meat and fried food. But they love it.

It could be made healthier but it’s very difficult to change this habit.

The Bali Times: What are Indonesians’ perceptions of organic food? Is it available at the local market?

Paolo Righetti: Thirty years ago everything here was organic. They didn’t use any chemical products for fertilizing. Within the last 25 years there’s been a great explosion of government-supported programmes of chemicals in order to increase production. So for the last 25 years the country has been exposed to very high use and abuse of chemicals in agriculture.

Balinese people are still not aware of the negative effects of using chemicals. They’re starting to realise now that people are dying from cancer and have other problems they did not formally have.

Organic food is available to locals in places like Bali Buddha but it’s too expensive for them.

The Bali Times: How do Indonesian organic standards compare to those of other countries?

Paolo Righetti: There’s no national certification yet. But the great success is that in the last few years, people know more about organic food.

Locals have created the Bali Organic Association, BOA. It’s not standardised to the level of certification that they have in Australia or in other places. But it means moving a step further.

I can’t prove that my tomatoes are organic if someone asks me. But I do checks with the farmers. I go to the fields and customers can also go there. It will develop into something; it’s just a matter of time.

The Bali Times: What impact are pesticides, herbicides, fertilisers and hormones in non-organic food having on Indonesians’ health?

Paolo Righetti: People are having fertility problems, breathing problems, miscarriages, cancer… It’s not just that, but also the diet. In Indonesia, they don’t eat raw vegetables or much fruit. Now, Bali and the rest of Indonesia have been taken over by Monsanto’s GMOs (genetically modified organisms). They don’t have awareness and they are happy because crops are resistant to diseases.

But on a spiritual level, if you eat the DNA of a seed that has been modified, the seed’s bad DNA will also be your DNA. So somehow, by absorbing GMOs, we will be modified. We don’t see it now but we will in future generations. The key is education.

The Bali Times: Is organic farming more environmentally friendly?

Paolo Righetti: It’s more environmentally friendly because it uses composting, has natural pesticides and tries to avoid as much as possible the use of chemicals.

http://www.thebalitimes.com/2010/01/29/%E2%80%98balinese-people-are-still-not-aware-of-the-negative-effects-of-using-chemicals%E2%80%99/

Bali Buddha has been serving organic, MSG-free meals since 1994. Wi-fi free, Bali Buddha is an inspirational, alternative cafe where kids are welcome & the focus is on sharing conversation or simply enjoying your meal.
Visit their website here: http://www.balibuddha.com/

Related articles about organic foods:

• Organic And Beyond (andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com)
• Five Food Trends for the Next Decade (fooducate.com)
• The “Is Organic Food Healthier?” Debate Reignited (huffingtonpost.com)
• Is Organic All It’s Cracked Up to Be? (marksdailyapple.com)

Indonesia’s Yuyun, 44, was one of the winners of this year’s Goldman Environmental Prize, a prestigious award often referred to as the “Nobel Prize” for environmental activism.

She was recognized for her tireless efforts to pressure major hotels in Bali to reduce their solid waste output and to improve recycling efforts.

She received the award, which includes a $150,000 prize, during a ceremony on April 20 in the United States.

“I am going to use the money to finally get myself and my family a house, and also for my girls’ college tuition,” said the mother of two teenage girls. “And half of it will go to some environmental organizations — one of which is Ashoka, which helped me a lot through my early years as an activist.”

Yuyun is the founder and director of the Bali Fokus Foundation, an NGO that has worked on community-based environmental management, pollution control and sustainable development programs since 2000.

“I consider this award to be just the beginning of the struggle because waste issues have never been exposed to the media, even though the issue is very much an everyday part our lives,” she said.

“The government is usually tempted to solve the problem with mega-projects, high technology and lots of money, but we can actually do it on our own without any help or any international debt. We just need to be realistic.”

Raising awareness of waste management, however, is particularly difficult among poor people, Yuyun said, because villagers do not believe that change can be achieved using cheap and simple methods.

Her successful campaign focuses on local people managing their own waste first before taking it to the dump.

This year’s Goldman Environmental Prize recipients also included Maria Gunnoe, a US woman who has faced death threats for her outspoken activism against the coal industry in West Virginia, and Marc Ona Essangui, a civil society leader from the West African country of Gabon who has risked imprisonment for his campaign to stop mining in a protected national park.

* Deborah Cassrels    * From: The Australian    * January 02, 2010 12:00AM

“THE magic is going,” says Dan, a French expatriate living in Bali, lamenting the pervasive development boom in the Indonesian island province long considered idyllic by foreigners.

Since the 2002 and 2005 terrorist bombings, tourists, particularly Australians, have returned in droves. But, the word is, an environmental time bomb is ticking.

Seduced by the tropical beauty, stunning beach sunsets, surf sand and Balinese Hindu culture, tourists pack Kuta’s bars and nightclubs and nearby Seminyak’s upmarket hotels, villas and restaurants. Yet some are noticing cracks in the system as archaic utilities and infrastructure buckle under rampant development denuding the island’s rainforests and coastline. Even the Balinese are in danger of disorientation from their attractive culture of customs, dance, music and art.

Gridlocked traffic, pollution, rotating power blackouts, water shortages and sewerage and garbage embarrassments are threatening ecological sustainability and tainting the much loved island’s image as a haven from the urban rat race. “If Bali continues in this way, it will collapse in 10 years,” predicts Oswar Mungkasa, the executive of the country’s National Development Planning Agency responsible for solid waste and drainage.

“For me, Bali is not as attractive as it was. Local government doesn’t realise, because investors keep coming, it is sitting on a time bomb,” he says.

Mungkasa fears there’ll need to be “a cholera outbreak [there was one in 1994] or some sort of wake-up call” before attitudes change.

Lack of awareness and absences of regulatory enforcement are recipes for infrastructure disaster, Mungkasa says. “Bali is a fantastic island. You can find anything there, from the culture, the sun, the sea, even sex. The environment is getting worse, but the tourists are still coming.”

If they drop off, he says, lack of sanitation and other problems won’t register with the locals.

“The [Balinese] mindset is not educated or aware. They see sanitation as a cost, not an investment. They dump their rubbish in the drainage system. They cannot understand why they should change their habits.”

Although development restrictions apply on valuable beachfront property in Kuta, Legian and Seminyak, hotel construction continues unabated in defiance. Mungkasa denies there will be a moratorium: “It’s just an idea; you cannot stop investment.”

In the scramble for the tourist dollar, opportunistic investors are carving into what remains of untouched western and southern coastlines. Southwards from Canggu to Jimbaran and the Bukit, and recently westwards to Tabanan Province, developers are snapping up available prime property, prompting the sentiment that the 5600sq km island’s charm is eroding along with the land. Regulations that stipulate buildings must be at least 100m from the high tide mark and no more than 15m high are constantly flouted, sources say.

As the jewel in Indonesia’s tourism crown, Bali generates 30 per cent of national tourist revenue or an estimated $US3 billion ($3.4bn) or more a year.

Authorities are not looking to cap the island’s lifeblood, contributing as it does more than 80 per cent of revenue to island government coffers.

Sydney expat Alasdair Stuart, a spokesman for inTouch Realty in Seminyak, the island’s first real estate agency, sees no let-up in property sales, with values rocketing 100 per cent in the past 18 months in Canggu. He asks: “What economic crisis? There isn’t one here. There is rampant and random urban sprawl.”

Very little is left for sale in lucrative Kuta, Legian and Seminyak, which were fishing villages 40 or fewer years ago. “Until about a year ago, Batu Belig [south of Seminyak] was the last bastion where you could buy land. It’s all finished.”

Isolated areas such as Canggu, Tabanan and the Bukit are going the same way, even though much of the property is not even beachfront, with multimillion-dollar homes and hotels. Many of the investors are from Singapore, Jakarta and Hong Kong, Stuart says.

South of Canggu, three beachfront villas are for sale at between $US3.3 million and $US3.7m, while a record $US5.7m deal is being sealed on about 1.5ha of clifftop land in the Bukit, viewed as a tsunami-proof zone. “The Bukit has been explosive. Land has risen 500 per cent in the past five to six years. I think Bali is one of the most bulletproof places on the planet because property prices are fuelled by tourists all year round,” Stuart says.

Foreign tourist arrivals, at 1.83 million for the 10 months, jumped 13.5 per cent from January to October, compared with 2008. They were expected to top two million by this week, with additional flights meeting demand. Australians, taking advantage of their stronger dollar, are topping the list, at 350,000 for the 10 months, a rise of 38 per cent, although Japanese tourists, ranking second, fell 9.13 per cent. The benefits for investors have been mixed. A trend to mid-range accommodation and villas has slashed luxury hotel occupancy rates to 65 per cent.

The island’s infrastructure is fraying under the pressure. Electricity comes coal-powered from Java but there are no energy-efficiency incentives offered. Tempers are flaring over rolling blackouts lasting up to six hours since October. With no respite offered until mid-January, some islanders will spend Christmas and New Year in the dark. The wealthy residents, Stuart says, won’t be affected because they buy two or three generators. “They are added to the list of things they need.”

Under strain once from Asia’s financial crisis in 1997 and now from increased tourism, the national electricity board, PLN, pleads insufficient funds for maintenance of its connecting north-west distribution plant.

Plans for more power plants remain at an impasse but a solar energy initiative looks encouraging. Indonesia, already producing solar panels more cheaply than those produced by China, is supplying overseas markets. It’s hoped the domestic market in the tourist areas will be supplied this year.

Dysfunctional planning is frustrating. For example, new sewerage and drainage installation along the 4km tourist strip of Jalan Legian, a showcase street of fashionable shops and restaurants, has taken almost a year. Open trenches replaced footpaths, endangering pedestrians and drivers as business plunged. Despite the work, connecting pipes are not yet functioning. “We have to upgrade electricity, water, sewerage and telecommunications. But there is no proper planning. Kuta and surrounding areas has blown out in population and size. Infrastructure is not keeping up with development,” says Bali Tourism Board head, Ida Bagus Ngurah Wijaya.

An environmental impact assessment study undertaken for the Bali Urban Infrastructure Project in 1998-2003 recommended the ideal population for the island was 2.4 million. It is now 3.4 million, plus the tourists.

When leading Indonesian environmentalist Yuyun Ismawati tested the water at Bali’s ocean beach fronting exclusive hotels at Seminyak and Oberoi two years ago, the result was flabbergasting: “The lab told me it was sewage. It was actually sea water,” she recounts. “I would not swim in the ocean in Bali.”

Tourists complaining of sewage odour are concerned about swimming in the ocean, agrees the head of the Denpasar Sewerage Development Project task force, Wayan Budiarsa. Infections are feared. Says Ismawati: “People don’t have proper septic tanks or sewerage collection so they discharge waste water to the rivers, which flows to the ocean. Only 10 per cent of household sewage is treated [by a new Denpasar project].”

Bottlenecks and pollution generated by one million motorbikes and huge gas-guzzling vehicles, such as people movers and Hummers, jostling on narrow roads, are a further environmental nightmare. “No one seems conscious of the fact Bali is a small island with limitations. Only 4 per cent of people use public transport,” bemoans Adnyana Manuaba, a government adviser on sustainable development and physiologist from Udayana University in Denpasar. “The government is happy to receive a lot of taxes from motor cars,” Manuaba says. He advocates a monorail or mass rapid transit to serve tourism, agriculture and small industry, not more roads. A previous rail plan never came to fruition.

Predicting a tourism backlash, Manuaba condemns continuing hotel development and blames a lack of holistic planning and weak law enforcement on infrastructure stagnation.

“The people have an `instant noodle’ mindset. They want short-term gains, money,” he says.

The established hospitality industry is getting nervous too. Stuart Smith, a Melburnian expatriate who has lived in Bali for 12 years, has three boutique hotels and complies with local laws. Smith says growth from large developers, even just in the past six months, is having a catastrophic impact on Bali’s foreshores.

“Coastal land is being desecrated. It’s like a shock wave and it’s grown out of control,” he says. He is a critic of one beachfront resort development, Sea Sentosa, being developed at what until now has been a surfing haven, home to a couple of small restaurants. This 2.8ha resort in Canggu will comprise apartments and villas and typical facilities — a bar, nightclub, swimming lagoon, beachfront restaurants and retail outlets.

The development is built across an estuary just metres from the beach. It claims to be eco- friendly.

In online chatrooms, there is already concern about alleged noise levels, coastal erosion and water degradation. “[It] goes into a little surfing village with a 3m-wide road,” Smith says. “It will include the infrastructure that goes with it, not the infrastructure that should go into it, that’s the problem.”

The Sea Sentosa company says it will “prove that development and environment are not mutually exclusive. We are developing responsibly and aesthetically as well as working on long-term environment and community initiatives such as beach and river clean-up programs”.

When Inquirer visited the site, there were new roads. Medical waste is commonly dumped on the beach — vials of blood, old vaccine, medicine bottles and syringes lay there — metres from where local children were swimming in the estuary, women were washing, people were eating and surfers were enjoying the waves.

Ismawati, the environmentalist, did a study in 2004 supported by the Indonesian Ministry of Health and the World Health Organisation. He found untreated, hazardous hospital waste was dumped in rivers and the landfill. “Some ends up in the ocean, some is recycled. We have good regulations but no one is enforcing them due to operational costs,” he says.

Some big hotels reputedly dump untreated sewage into the ocean but are being discouraged. Mungkasa, the official planner, says it is no longer permitted, but concedes law enforcement is impossible. “This year treatment is being done. But there is no penalty if sewage is untreated.”

Something is being done. The Denpasar Sewerage Development Project, a 130km system to service mainly tourist areas and funded with a Y=5.4 billion ($650,000) loan, is due for completion in 2014. But Budiarsa says it “may take 10 or 20 years because it needs so much money”.

Waste and drainage, controlled by local government, are huge problems, Mungkasa says. “They [Balinese authorities] don’t have enough funding, not because they don’t have money but because they don’t realise water and sanitation are important. They know if they don’t do anything the central government will, especially because it’s a tourist area.”

Jakarta allocates about 7 trillion rupiah ($800m) a year to Bali’s infrastructure. Many argue revenue from the state-owned airport, such as tourism taxes and visa proceeds, should also flow to Bali, not back to Jakarta.

Ismawati, who won the Goldman environmental prize for the islands and island nations category this year and featured in Time magazine, reiterates the need for a development cap and financial assistance. While she was whitewater rafting at Telagawaja River in east Bali in June, operators told her she was lucky to strike a good day: the water level is often too low for the sport. “Sometimes operators stop serving tourists due to low water levels because of conflicting agricultural, domestic and tourism usages.” Yet this source is earmarked this year for the domestic water supply in Karangasem in east Bali — home to about 250,000 of Bali’s poor, who have no nearby water access — according to the Bali Public Works project manager for drinking water, I. B. Lanang.

Critically, 73 of Bali’s 165 rivers are dry, while four major volcanic lakes contain sediment. Water from the city-owned company, PDAM, which is unable to provide more than 60 per cent of the water needed by the population, is being supplemented by free groundwater. Tourism, using 40 per cent of the island’s water, is contributing to the exploitation of groundwater wells, many illegal.

Saltwater intrusion is evident. Deforestation and illegal logging is also reducing water resources in lakes in Bedugul, central Bali, the island’s most important water catchment area.

Vast quantities of plastic bags, bottles and other debris littering streets, beaches, rivers and the ocean, are also tarnishing Bali’s image, along with the ecosystem.. The island generates about 2000 tonnes of waste a day, mainly from southern tourist areas. “Only about 40 per cent is collected and sent to an open dumping ground serving Badung Province. This is the greatest source of greenhouse gas emissions, after forest fires,” Ismawati says.

Investors, urged to improve landfills for which they would receive carbon credits, have not responded, she adds. Unwilling to pay for garbage collection, “most people dump rubbish, including factory chemicals and fertilisers, in the drainage or river. They also burn it. Though we tell them about the dioxins from burning, they still do it.”

An integrated coastal management survey a few years ago found 64 per cent of tourists said they would not return because of the rubbish. Each tourist generates about 4kg of waste a day compared to about 1kg per local. Now Ismawati’s BaliFokus Foundation is spearheading a campaign to reduce the 750 tonnes of plastic bags distributed and discarded yearly. Though waste to energy conversion has been touted, Ismawati says it is not viable. “It wouldn’t work for Indonesia because most waste is wet. If you burn something wet it will release dioxins, especially if it contains PVC and plastics.”

ALONG the beachfront at sleepy Batu Belig, near Seminyak, another huge villa development, due to open this year, is under way. A W hotel, part of the Starwood Group, is being built on 7ha of beachfront land.

Staff at the small adjacent beach warung shrugged when asked if they were concerned about the development, even though it may force their eatery’s closure. Under a local planning law, building must include 30 per cent of green zones. “In theory the rules apply, but in reality it doesn’t happen,” says environmentalist Mungkasa, not referring to Batu Belig specifically. “Land boundaries and laws can be changed as long as the local government agrees.” With the minimum wage set at R829,316 ($US82.90) a month, survival is the primary concern.

Another dilemma is the provincial government itself, which acquired autonomy only in 2000, and is often confounded by its role devolved from Jakarta.

“Since autonomy they can’t cope. We can advocate but implementation is another thing,” Mungkasa says.

The trend to luxury villa development is stretching the island to capacity, Smith says. “Hundreds of illegal villas, without permits or licences, are being built and there are increasing numbers of expats coming to live here, building houses. Is it great for Bali in the short term? Probably, but in the long term, it’s going to implode. The past six years have gone crazy.”

Mushrooming ecological resorts are also contributing to the destruction of rainforests and rice fields. “No development is [truly] eco-friendly. Rainforests are also being cut down to plant more rice,” he says. Residents complaining that Bali has never been hotter point to diminishing green areas.

Early last month the Governor of Bali, Mangku Pastika, who had promised to regulate development, launched a green campaign promising water supplies for unserviced areas, tree planting, rubbish cleanups, organic fertiliser subsidies and some free local health services.

“But there is nothing about a development moratorium, or a transport, energy, waste or water balance,” BaliFokus’s Ismawati says. “Most of the leaders — national and provincial — have failed to make long-term projections. We can continue like this for 10 years, maximum. It is critical now; we are dying.”

The 15km route to the airport from Smith’s central Seminyak hotel has become so congested “we allow 45 minutes to get there. It used to be nine”.

“When I first arrived in Bali, Kuta was just a beach with a couple of losmans [homestays] at the front,” Smith says . “Now that little strip is the most expensive land in Bali. A lot of people have become rich from it, including the Balinese [who have sold land] but they’ve never been educated in financial planning.”

While Smith concedes development is unavoidable, he says it must be policed. “There needs to be a lifeguard because it’s way out of hand. In a controlled environment it can work well. We need professional, outside help. Bali is still a beautiful island but to sustain it for the next generation, we have to do something.”

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/developers-drawn-to-tourist-magnet/story-e6frg6z6-1225815243942