Dangers of Singapore as petrochemical hub

Striking a balance between the economy and the environment
Letter from Felix Ang Kok Hou, Straits Times Forum 31 Dec 07

I READ with concern your article, 'S'pore enjoys steady flow of billion dollar investments' (ST, Dec 27), on the billion dollar investments made by petroleum companies in Singapore.

A quick search on Google and Wikipedia revealed some startling statistics. Singapore has oil refining capacity of about 1.3 million barrels per day. Malaysia has about 0.5m bpd and Indonesia 1.05m bpd. The US, with the world's largest refining capacity, has 16.7m bpd while Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer, has 2.08m bpd.

If we look at the per capita numbers, Singapore would be at 0.295 bpd, Malaysia 0.018 bpd, Indonesia 0.0046 bpd, the US 0.055 bpd and Saudi Arabia 0.084 bpd. What this means is that each Singapore resident is bearing more risks of oil refining than probably the rest of the world.

Taking into account our population density and the proximity of the oil refineries to our main land, we face ongoing risks to our health from daily air pollution emissions to major catastrophes like serious oil spills and terrorist attacks.

And we are going to expand our oil refining and petrochemical production capacities with these new investments. One of the facilities will be producing benzene. Prolonged exposure to benzene is associated with the development of certain types of leukaemia.

The US has not built any major oil refineries in its own country since 1976 due to pressures from environmental groups. But we are encouraging construction of these facilities with open arms. To put it crudely, are we accepting those who are not welcome in their own countries?

Oil prices are hitting new record highs and big petroleum companies are getting more powerful. I believe there are many measures in place now to prevent and mitigate environmental pollution and health risks. But with our increasing reliance on them as investors and employers, are we going to reach a point in many years' time where our national interests may be compromised by their corporate interests? By then, can our environmental laws still be responsive and impartially enforced?

As we continue to support global efforts to combat climate change, should we not be taking more substantive action in our own backyards? Our commitment to the international community would appear hollow if our priorities are always economic and capitalistic in nature. Surely environmental protection is more than simply getting the town councils to plant more trees in our neighbourhoods.