Singapore faces hard choices over cost of going green

Clarissa Oon, Straits Times 9 Feb 08;

IN NEW Delhi, the city's entire fleet of 10,000 buses runs on compressed natural gas (CNG), which is less polluting than diesel or petrol.

The sight impressed MP Charles Chong, who was visiting the Indian capital to find out how other cities juggle economic growth with protecting the environment.

'I thought, if India can do it, why can't we?' said Mr Chong, who chairs the Government Parliamentary Committee for National Development and the Environment.

The problem here, he found, is the cost of setting up a network of CNG refuelling stations.

Ten refuelling stations would cost around $40 million.

Singapore has only one, on Jurong Island, supporting more than 300 buses and taxis that have switched to CNG. Three more are due to open this year.

Hence the dilemma: save money or save the environment?

As countries across the globe relook their economic policies against the backdrop of climate change and shrinking natural resources, Singapore is no exception.

Last month, it set up an inter-ministerial committee on sustainable development that will find ways to keep the economy growing in an environmentally-sound way.

The move could result in pro-environment changes cutting across sectors such as housing, transport and trade and industry.

Mr Chong and other pro-environment MPs and environmentalists argue that the costs of green technology and infrastructure will translate to long-term gains in clean energy and air.

Insight explores the 'sustainable development' debate and the hard choices ahead for Singapore.

Going green - and staying that way
Clarissa Oon, Straits Times 9 Feb 08;
A new inter-ministerial committee on sustainable development is set to rethink Singapore's wasteful, fossil-fuel-reliant culture across sectors such as housing, transport and industry. CLARISSA OON examines the task ahead.

IN DENMARK, drinking to the health of Mother Earth is, literally, a way of life.

Customers do not trash beer and soft-drink bottles but voluntarily return them to retailers to be cleaned and reused.

In return, Danes are refunded the deposit they must pay for each bottle, an amount ranging from 30 to 85 Singapore cents, depending on the bottle size.

If that is not mind-boggling in Singapore's use-and-throw consumer culture, what more the way energy-saving Danes blithely hop on public transport and even ride bicycles to get around in their cities.

Private cars are heavily taxed and taxis are expensive. Cabbies save fuel by not cruising around - they wait atdesignated taxi stands or await calls from passengers.

Environmentalists consider Denmark - along with other green-conscious Scandinavian countries - one of the success stories of sustainable development for the way it has increased its gross domestic product by 70 per cent over the last 25 years without increasing its energy consumption.

Now Singapore too wants a piece of 'sustainable development' - a concept economists and environmentalists have been debating for years.

In recent years, the debate has acquired greater urgency against the backdrop of an unprecedented onslaught on the world's shrinking natural resources by fuel-guzzling cars, polluting factories and mountains of waste.

On the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, last month, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong announced the setting up of a new inter-ministerial committee on sustainable development.

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan and Environment and Water Resources Minister Yaacob Ibrahim will co-chair the committee, which will also include Minister for Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Minister for Transport Raymond Lim, and Minister of State for Trade and Industry S. Iswaran.

Sustainable development essentially means keeping the economy humming in an environmentally sound way. The question is how, and that is the difficult part.

Members of Parliament and environmentalists interviewed say the committee will have to make hard, long-term choices to get the mix right.

In particular, it needs to cut waste, push more Singaporeans to recycle, and bring down energy consumption in Singapore's over-air-conditioned buildings and transport systems.

Not just business as usual

SUSTAINABLE development is not simply about playing catch-up with other countries but 'starting and sustaining the effort in a manner that makes sense for us', says MP Jessica Tan (East Coast GRC).

The committee's work will affect how towns and transport are planned and designed, using 'cleaner sources of energy and more environmentally friendly products', adds Ms Tan.

'It could also change our way of life in terms of consumption habits and recycling.'

However, some environment observers think the committee should go further and prescribe out-of-the-box solutions to reduce Singapore's dependence in the long run on imported fossil fuels, like oil.

Apart from the problem of soaring fuel prices, the burning of oil, coal and natural gas releases harmful greenhouse gas emissions. These have been blamed for an overheating planet, rising sea levels and climate change.

Clean and renewable energy, such as solar or wind energy, is now several times more expensive than conventional power, but environmentalists argue that the costs are decreasing as global demand rises and technology improves.

Sustainable development does not mean thinking in the 'same old business-as-usual model', says Nature Society president and former Nominated MP Geh Min.

'I wouldn't like a scenario where the committee says, okay, the economy comes first, so we can't make any drastic changes, we still look at Formula One, tourism, industries, petrochemicals, more of the same.'

For sustainable development to fly, policymakers and ordinary Singaporeans have to develop an environmental consciousness, 'the way cost-effectiveness or social responsibility is built into our thinking', says Dr Geh.

Too small to matter?

ASIDE from the sheer cost of green technologies, another argument in favour of doing nothing is that Singapore is simply too small a country to have any impact on climate change, despite being vulnerable to its effects.

Last November, the Ministry of Trade and Industry released a National Energy Policy Report that made improving energy efficiency and reducing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions a priority.

The report said climate change could result in increased flooding and the spread of diseases in Singapore, as well as a loss of coastal land and water resources.

However, it added pointedly that as a small country, Singapore's 'domestic energy demand is small, and we account for only about 0.15 per cent of the world's carbon dioxide emissions'.

'If the Singapore economy were to shut down completely for one whole year, the CO2 savings would be offset by incremental emissions elsewhere in less than two weeks, based on the current rate of global emissions growth.'

In response, environment observers say Singapore should still do its part as a responsible player in the global economy.

Going green makes good business sense when more consumers go green, they argue.

In addition, Singapore can offer solutions to other cities.

Turning Singapore into a model environmental city gives it a competitive edge at a time when a growing number of economies are looking for ways to minimise the fallout on the environment, said Nominated MP and waste recycling company boss Edwin Khew Teck Fook.

'Right now we are helping (the northern Chinese port city of) Tianjin to develop an 'eco-city'.

'But, looking at ourselves, are we a perfect model to be able to teach others?' he asked.

Spotty track record

WHILE it has done well in water recycling and introducing many 'green lungs' in the form of parks and trees, Singapore is still far from the eco-city it can be.

For one, its buildings and vehicles are spewing emissions at a rate that is among the highest in the world, according to a World Bank Environment Department report last October.

The report ranked 70 countries, according to percentage increase, for their emissions from 1994 to 2004. Singapore was 10th.

Its carbon dioxide emissions jumped 60 per cent over the period, just 8 percentage points lower than high-profile polluter China and higher than India (53 per cent) and Indonesia (48 per cent).

Over the same period, Singapore's population also surged from 3.4 million to 4.2 million.

Littering offences have gone up about three times since 2006.

Just over half of all waste is recycled, according to National Environmental Agency figures.

This lags far behind Scandinavian countries where the recycling rate is 70 to 80 per cent or higher, says MP Charles Chong (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC), who chairs the Government Parliamentary Committee for National Development and Environment.

While recognising the need to clean up its own backyard, Singapore is also stepping up cooperation with the region.

On April 12, 2006, it ratified the Kyoto Protocol, an international treaty binding members to cut their emissions by specified rates within a specified time frame.

Last November, it pushed successfully for an Asean declaration in which member countries work together on climate change.

MP Penny Low (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) believes that finding the right sustainable development solutions requires careful cross-cultural studies.

'We should scan the world for innovation and take it further here,' she says.

Yet there is no one perfect country when it comes to sustainable development, says Dr Geh.

'Japan, for example, is very clean, but look at the Japanese whaling and over-fishing practices, and the way they have depleted forests in South-east Asia.

'They're not so conservation-minded outside their national borders,' she quips.

In a way, she says, the old environmentalists' adage of 'think global but act local' no longer holds.

'You also have to act to influence global action. I think the PM realises this, that's why he's making environmental pronouncements at Davos.

'But we have to set our own house in order first.'