Price is often the clincher, so Government should consider providing incentives
Esther Ng, The New Paper 26 Nov 08;
ALL things being equal, most Singaporeans would be willing to buy a more energy-efficient household appliancebecause, in the long run, we stand to save on our utility bills.
But cost can be a stumbling block, especially where big-ticket items such as refrigerators, washing machines and air-conditioners are concerned, as energy-efficient models tend to cost more.
For example, a four-tick inverter air-conditioner for two rooms costs around $2,500 compared to $1,800 for a one-tick unit. Those on a tight budget may go with the cheaper model even though it would cost them more in the long run — as much as $900 a year, according to retailers.
One thing for sure is that we have developed an appetite for air-conditioners in Singapore, going from one in five households with air conditioning in 1988 to about seven in 10 last year.
These energy guzzlers form some30 per cent of a household’s utility bill.
While the Government has introduced a mandatory energy-labelling scheme for refrigerators and air-conditioners — and by 2010, for clothes dryers, lightings and water heaters — “to help consumers make more informed choices”, perhaps more needs to be done, especially in the coming downturn.
We may consume less now because of higher electricity prices, but energy efficiency is a crucial long-term solution — and a win-win one — to achieving the goal of reducing energy consumption by 2012.
I am referring to the five-year campaign to get households to reduce their electricity consumption by at least 10 per cent.
So, if cost can be an issue when it comes to buying energy-efficient appliances, would an incentive serve to motivate Singaporeans?
I think so, and it should come from Government.
After all, there are official schemes such as the Grant for Energy Efficient Technologies ($22 million) and EnergyEfficiency ImprovementAssistance Scheme ($10 million) toincentivise businesses. There should be an equivalent for households.
In Taiwan, consumers get a rebate from the government if they buy energy-efficient electrical appliances.
Singapore could tailor this so households that need it more — from one-room to five-room HDB flats — are given the incentive, perhaps in the form of a voucher, and the Government could work out such a scheme with retailers.
A straw poll among friends suggested that a discount in the region of 10 to 20 per cent, depending on the costs of the appliances, would be enticing enough.
My friend Yasmine, who just got married, said: “I think vouchers could help, but it has to be of an amount that makes the difference between aless-efficient and more-efficient appliance quiteinsignificant.
“For example, if we had $200 in vouchers, we probably wouldn’t mind paying the extra $100 it would cost to get a four-tick fridge (compared to a less-efficient one). But if the voucher is only $50 or $100, and we’d still have to fork out $200 more, we wouldn’t bother.”
Yasmine and her husband tried as much as possible to get energy-efficient appliances within their budget, but in cases where an energy-efficient appliance cost significantly higher than a less energy-efficient one, they went with price.
“We’re broke newly-weds,” she said.
Price is often the clincher, and with some incentives, more people might be persuaded to buy green.
Singaporeans hate to waste a good deal, after all.
