Home

Listen to me, please. You're like me, a homo sapiens, a wise human. Life, a miracle in the universe, appeared around 4 billion years ago. And we humans only 200,000 years ago. Yet we have succeeded in disrupting the balance that is so essential to life. Listen carefully to this extraordinary story, which is yours, and decide what you want to do with it.

If you liked Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, this is 10X better. You can watch the movie Home at YouTube.

Home is a documentary on the various human activities that are impacting planet earth. Scientists tell us that we have 10 years to change the way we live, in order to avert the depletion of natural resources and the catastrophic evolution of the Earth's climate. The world that we know, is dying. Do we have to will to change now? Or do we only change on the brink of destruction?

PS. The movie runs about 90 minutes. Depending on your connection speed, it would be better to let it download for some time before settling down to watch it. Continue reading...

Clearing Up Misconceptions over RON

Beginning September 1, RON92 petrol will be pulled from the market, and substituted with RON95 petrol at RM1.75 per litre. Also, by September 1, fuel subsidies for RON97 will be removed, making RON95 the only petrol subsidized by the government. RON97 petrol will become a premium fuel sold at RM2 per litre.


The introduction of RON95 and the removal of subsidies for RON97 were announced by the government many months ago, at a time when crude oil was hovering around 40 USD. Since then, crude has staged a strong recovery to 70 USD. If this current price persists, which I think it should, the pump price of unsubsidized RON97 will naturally go beyond the RM2 per litre first suggested by the government.

Now these figures may not bode well for those with constrained budgets. 90% of drivers use RON97 today. If they opt for RON95 instead, will that change affect their cars adversely?

Last Thursday, I attended a Chevron workshop that talked about the RON95 transition. In the midst, they threw in an interesting presentation about RON and fuels in general. I feel compelled and obligated to explain what I learned about RON here as I know there are a lot of public misconceptions over RON. :)

Firstly, RON stands for Research Octane Number. It is a common type of octane rating (another type is Motor Octane Number) used to measure the petrol's qualities to resist igniting prematurely and spontaneously under extreme pressures and heat inside the combustion chamber, causing a phenomenon known as "engine knocking".

Under normal circumstances, the combustion is started by the engine's spark plug in an orderly and controlled fashion. However knocking occurs when the fuel spontaneously ignites in small pockets, under the heat and pressure of the combustion chamber, outside the controlled spark from the spark plug. This abnormal combustion increases the pressure in the chamber, resulting in a knocking sound and potentially causing engine damage.

• Normal combustion in a spark-ignition internal combustion engine is initiated by a spark.
• The flame front fans out from the spark plug and travels across the combustion chamber rapidly and smoothly until almost all the fuel is consumed.
• When combustion is abnormal, the last part of the unburned mixture ignites spontaneously and burns very rapidly, causing the pressure in the cyclinder to rise rapidly. This creates the characteristic knocking sound.
• Occasional light knocking doesn't hurt an engine.
• Heavy or prolonged knocking can result in objectionable noise, loss of power, overheating of engine parts, knock-induced surface ignition and worst, engine damage.
• Knock occurs because the petrol's octane number is below the antiknock requirement of the engine at that moment. Generally, the situation involves high-load conditions, like hard accerelation or climbing a grade.

The higher the RON numeration, the higher the percentage of iso-octane in the fuel mixture, the more resistant the petrol is in igniting spontaneously. Petrol with higher RON ratings is recommended for use in high performance vehicles where their engines run higher compression ratios, and therefore are more prone to engine knocking.

Myth #1 - I am currently a RON97 user. Switching to RON95 will damage my car engine.

The only difference between RON97 and RON95 is their octane ratings, indicated by the octane number in the product name. Using petrol of a lower RON may or may not hurt your car. You just need to find a suitable fit for your car and driving style. It’s best to refer to the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) recommendation in your car manual or check the back of the petrol filler lid of your car for the recommended octane rating. RON95 works good for most vehicles on the road today.

Myth #2 - Higher RON petrol gives my car that extra power and performance.

Again, another misconception. Higher RON petrol does not give more performance. In fact, putting in petrol with a higher RON rating than the manufacturer's recommended specifications won't provide any significant benefits. The important point is, not using one that is lower than manufacturer's recommendation, because when you use petrol with an octane level lower than required, knocking may result.

Shell's V-Power is a RON98 fuel. It enhances performance and responsiveness. But this is not due to the higher octane number. Rather it is the combustion enhancer addictive Shell added to make the fuel burns better. It doesn't improve fuel consumption either. In Singapore for example, Shell sells Formula 98 and V-Power. Both are RON98 petrol.

Lastly, the diagram below shows the fuel sales in different continents around the world. RON95 is the main grade sold in Europe. And RON91/RON92 are most popular in many countries.
Continue reading...

Father Forgets

Too often we are quick to criticize others. It is always easier to find fault in others than to admit we ourselves have blundered.

I once hissed and spat venom towards a close friend, to defend and to protect myself. It was impulsive. But it was wrong. I then apologized and we were back on good terms (luckily). Was the initial outburst necessary? No.


"Father forgets" was written by W. Livingston Larned. It is such a wonderful piece that it should act as a constant reminder for all of us to think twice, if not thrice before criticizing or scolding someone, especially our children:

Listen, son: I am saying this as you lie asleep, one little paw crumpled under your cheek and the blond curls stickily wet on your damp forehead. I have stolen into your room alone. Just a few minutes ago, as I sat reading my paper in the library, a stifling wave of remorse swept over me. Guiltily I came to your bedside.

There are the things I was thinking, son: I had been cross to you. I scolded you as you were dressing for school because you gave your face merely a dab with a towel. I took you to task for not cleaning your shoes. I called out angrily when you threw some of your things on the floor.

At breakfast I found fault, too. You spilled things. You gulped down your food. You put your elbows on the table. You spread butter too thick on your bread. And as you started off to play and I made for my train, you turned and waved a hand and called, “Goodbye, Daddy!” and I frowned, and said in reply, “Hold your shoulders back!”

Then it began all over again in the late afternoon. As I came up the road I spied you, down on your knees, playing marbles. There were holes in your stockings. I humiliated you before your boyfriends by marching you ahead of me to the house. Stockings were expensive - and if you had to buy them you would be more careful! Imagine that, son, from a father!

Do you remember, later, when I was reading in the library, how you came in timidly, with a sort of hurt look in your eyes? When I glanced up over my paper, impatient at the interruption, you hesitated at the door. “What is it you want?” I snapped.

You said nothing, but ran across in one tempestuous plunge, and threw your arms around my neck and kissed me, and your small arms tightended with an affection that God had set blooming in your heart and which even neglect could not wither. And then you were gone, pattering up the stairs.

Well, son, it was shortly afterwards that my paper slipped from my hands and a terrible sickening fear came over me. What has habit been doing to me? The habit of finding fault, of reprimanding-this was my reward to you for being a boy. It was not that I did not love you; it was that I expected too much of youth. I was measuring you by the yardstick of my own years.

And there was so much that was good and fine and true in your character. The little heart of you was as big as the dawn itself over the wide hills. This was shown by your spontaneous impulse to rush in and kiss me good night. Nothing else matters tonight, son. I have come to your bedside in the darkness, and I have knelt there, ashamed!

It is feeble atonement; I know you would not understand these things if I told them to you during your waking hours. But tomorrow I will be a real daddy! I will chum with you, and suffer when you suffer, and laugh when you laugh. I will bite my tongue when impatient words come. I will keep saying as if it were a ritual: “He is nothing but a boy - a little boy!”

I am afraid I have visualized you as a man. Yet as I see you now, son, crumpled and weary in your cot, I see that you are still a baby. Yesterday you were in your mother’s arms, your head on her shoulder. I have asked too much, too much.

Continue reading...

Swine Flu raised to Level 6

One week ago on June 11, Dr. Margaret Chan, Director-General of the World Health Organization raised the level of swine flu alert level from phase 5 to phase 6. Strangely enough, it didn't hog media headlines as it did when the alert level was raised to level 4 in April. The news simply failed to garner as much media attention, with hardly any response from the various capital markets.

I think mass media did it right by playing the news down. As governments are busy devising precautionary measures to fight against swine flu, additional issues arising from a panic-stricken crowd is the last thing we want to see. If you carefully read the WHO descriptions of the different phases, we should be at phase 6 much earlier, like one month ago. WHO might have postponed the decision after requests and pressures from countries' officials.

Phase 5 is characterized by human-to-human spread of the virus into at least two countries in one WHO region. While most countries will not be affected at this stage, the declaration of Phase 5 is a strong signal that a pandemic is imminent and that the time to finalize the organization, communication, and implementation of the planned mitigation measures is short.

Phase 6, the pandemic phase, is characterized by community level outbreaks in at least one other country in a different WHO region in addition to the criteria defined in Phase 5. Designation of this phase will indicate that a global pandemic is under way.

Do we not have flu outbreak in many countries in different continents one month ago?

Frankly, there is no reason to be afraid. Swine flu mortality rate is very low at present. Be prepared. Wear a mask if you need to. Be vigilant. Take the precautionary steps to protect yourself. And don't panic! You don't have to cancel your holiday trip to Perth, or Alaska. You can proceed with your business trip to Dubai and come back in one piece.



PS. I prefer the name swine flu than H1N1 because flying pigs are cute :)

Continue reading...

Malaysia tops Power Distance Index

I was reading Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers: The Story of Success with great interest when I stumbled upon a term called Power Distance Index. In his book, Gladwell correlated plane crashes with the pilots and first officers' power distance rating of their culture. I was so intrigued with what he said that I did a bit of extra research on the internet to find out more about PDI.


Power distance is one of the five dimensions of culture coined by Dutch writer, Gerard Hendrik Hofstede. He studied the interactions between national cultures and organizational cultures, and his study has demonstrated that there are national and regional cultural groupings that affect the behaviour of societies and organizations, and that are very persistent across time.

Power distance, in particular, is concerned with attitudes towards hierarchy, specifically with how much a particular culture values and respects authority (click here to see Hofstede's global PDI map and table). It measures the extent to which the less powerful members of organizations and institutions accept and expect that power is distributed unequally. To measure it, Hofstede asked questions like "How frequently, in your experience, does the following problem occur: employees being afraid to express disagreement with their managers?" "How much are older people respected and feared?" "Are power holders entitled to special privileges?" etc.

To put it simply, people from low power distance countries are more comfortable with demanding the right to contribute and criticizing the decision making of those higher in power. In an organization with multiple hierarchies, subordinates may treat someone few ranks above them as an equal, regardless of formal positions. Contrary, in high power distance countries, subordinates acknowledge the power of others simply based on where they are situated in certain formal, hierarchical positions. They would be intimidated by those in power, and treat their superiors like, well, superiors.

The United States is a lower power distance country. It is, after all, one of the most democratic countries in the world. US ranks at the bottom of the PDI and this can be easily observed by the way the Americans perceive power differences. Companies like Intel encourage their employees to communicate openly, by implementing open door policy. Issues could be escalated to the top management to get their attentions. Unlike their high power distance counterparts who most of the time use subtle language and mitigated speech in order not to offend their bosses/clients, the Americans usually speak bluntly. This explains why sometimes they are regarded as “rude” and “uncivilized” by others from high power distance countries.

While using subtle language/mitigated speech or speaking tactfully might not appear harmful and are welcomed in certain societies, doing this in the cockpit will certainly yield deadly consequences. A bad decision by the CEO might result in reduced operating income, or worst, bankruptcy. However, a bad decision by the pilot might cause a plane to crash. And what is more valuable than human lives?

The linguists Ute Fischer and Judith Orasanu once gave the following hypothetical scenario to a group of captains and first officers and asked them how they would respond:

You notice on the weather radar an area of heavy precipitation 25 miles ahead. [The pilot] is maintaining his present course at Mach .73, even though embedded thunderstorms have been reported in your area and you encounter moderate turbulence. You want to ensure that your aircraft will not penetrate this area.
Question: what do you say to the pilot?

In Fischer's and Orasanu's minds, there were at least six ways to try to persuade the pilots to change course and avoid the bad weather, each with different level of mitigation.

1. Command: "Turn thirty degrees right." That's the most direct and explicit way of making a point imaginable. It's zero mitigation.
2. Crew Obligation Statement: "I think we need to deviate right about now." Notice the use of "we" and the fact that the request if now much less specific. That's a little softer.
3. Crew suggestion: "Let's go around the weather." Implicit in that statement is "we're in this together."
4. Query: "Which direction would you like to deviate?" That's even softer than a crew suggestion, because the speaker is conceding that he's not in charge.
5. Preference: "I think it would be wise to turn left or right."
6. Hint:" That return at 25 miles look mean." This is the most mitigated statement of all.

Fisher and Orasanu found that captains overwhelmingly said they would issue a command in that situation: "Turn thirty degrees right." They were talking to a subordinate and they had no fear of being blunt. The first officers, on the other hand, were talking to their superior, and so they overwhelmingly chose the most mitigated alternative. They hinted.

In the 1982 Air Florida crash outside Washington DC, the first officer tried three times to tell the captain that the plane had a dangerous amount of ice on its wings. But listen to how he said it. It was all hints.

"Look how the ice is just hanging on his, ah, back, back there, see that?"

"See all those icicles on the back there and everything?"

"Boy, this is a, this is a losing battle here on trying to de-ice those things, it [gives] you a false feeling of security, that's all that does."

The plane ended up plunging into the Potomac River.

Now, the interesting part. If you have already clicked on the link to Hofstede's global PDI map, you should see that Malaysia ranks highest in the Power Distance Index. How could Malaysia, a peaceful democratic country ranks higher than so many other autocratic countries? Is the high population of Muslims (more than 60%) a factor in this? Or has the draconian Internal Security Act(ISA) made its countrymen afraid to speak out and confront the authority?

I wonder.

Continue reading...