Carbon labelling for Singapore products

Labels show carbon footprint of product or service; no set target for firms expected to adopt plan
Grace Chua Straits Times 24 May 10;

IN A year or two, consumers may be able to look at products on supermarket shelves and tell just how much carbon dioxide went into their making.

The Singapore Environment Council (SEC) and Agency for Science, Technology and Research institute SIMTech last week inked a deal to develop Singapore's first carbon labelling scheme.

The labels, to be formally launched at the end of this year, will inform consumers how much carbon dioxide is emitted over the lifetime of a product or service - from everyday operations such as manufacturing, transporting and even disposal.

There is no set target for the number of companies expected to come on board, but the Singapore Carbon Label will initially focus on the food manufacturing sector and recycled products like plastics.

SEC executive director Howard Shaw said the carbon labelling scheme aims to have locally made products meet international requirements, to make them more globally competitive.

For example, British and American supermarket giants Tesco and Wal-Mart already require suppliers to declare or label how much carbon went into their goods, while Japan began carbon labelling food and drink products in April last year.

Britain introduced its PAS 2050 standard for carbon labelling in 2008.

But Mr Shaw said other countries' calculations may have to be adapted for Singapore - hence the need for the Republic's own scheme.

For instance, manufacturing in Singapore is largely powered by electricity from natural gas, whereas production in Britain may be powered by coal.

Ultimately, the Singapore Carbon Label will be extended to other countries in the region, as there is no carbon labelling scheme for South-east Asia yet.

One local company trying to bring itself up to scratch is biodegradable-plastics company Winrigo.

Mr Teri Teo, its operations director, said his firm began working with SIMTech in 2008 on assessing the carbon in its products.

It sought out the research institute after finding no carbon labelling scheme for local products, said Mr Teo, who believes such labelling could become an industry requirement in the future.

Winrigo's carbon assessments were developed with a Spring Singapore technology development grant. The company spent about $20,000 to $30,000 coming up with the methodology and software to calculate emissions.

But not all companies will be willing to disclose their entire manufacturing process in order to properly calculate emissions, Mr Teo said.

To date, SIMTech has worked with five companies, such as food manufacturer Prima Group, on such assessments.

Knowing how much emissions their processes produce can help companies cut their carbon footprint.

For instance, Prima is revising its purchasing decisions to consider suppliers closer to its flour mills, and cutting energy use and reducing waste at its mills.

Mr Shaw said the carbon label was not expected to increase business costs greatly as the framework and methodology, once developed, can be applied elsewhere.

The actual cost of carbon assessments will vary based on industry and product.

Like the existing Singapore Green Label, which marks products that are energy-efficient, use recycled materials and adhere to other green criteria, the Singapore Carbon Label will give consumers more product choices.

But will they bite?

Well, if the Green Label is anything to go by, Mr Shaw is optimistic.

Although he admitted that the consumer take-up of the Green Label is perhaps a little slower than the commercial take-up, he pointed out that the number of products with the Green Label has been growing by 30 per cent a year for the last three years.

Currently, more than 250 products and companies bear the label.