Measures to be studied include waste disposal levies and refund schemes
Grace Chua, Straits Times 4 May 10;
PEOPLE here do not recycle waste as much as they should and the National Environment Agency (NEA) is asking for expert advice on ways to raise the recycling rate.
The NEA said in a tender document made public last week that it wants a consultant to look into whether measures such as levies for waste disposal, refund schemes or mandating certain premises to separate recyclables like food waste and glass, can work to get people to change their habits.
The cost-benefit study would help keep the Semakau landfill, now one-eighth full, from filling up fast, as well as shrink the mountain of rubbish generated here each year.
Consultants studying the issue should, the NEA says, recommend a combination of these and other methods that provide the most bang for the buck, or the 'highest increase of the overall recycling rate per unit cost'.
If any of the proposals are implemented, they will be the first measures forcing a 're-use and reduce' culture here by fiat.
Despite the presence of recycling bins in HDB estates and condominiums, households' efforts to fill them have proved abysmal.
Just 57 per cent of the nation's 6 million tonnes of waste was recycled last year. Now, official targets are set at 60 per cent by 2012, and 70 per cent by 2030.
Going by the tender documents, it appears that NEA is testing measures already implemented elsewhere - with the caveat that the measures 'shall be relevant and applicable to Singapore's context'.
Japan, for example, has strict laws on separating recyclables which go beyond separating glass, plastic and paper: It even pushes for the separation of polyethylene terephthalate (PET, a type of plastic used in bottles) from other plastic containers, and paper products from cardboard boxes.
In Switzerland, residents pay a fee for each bag of rubbish they throw out.
Here, those living in flats pay between $4.31 and $7.35 a month for waste collection, and landed- home owners pay $17.12 to $24.08.
The NEA also wants the consultant to look at how companies can do more to recycle mixed food waste.
Just 13 per cent of the 606 million kg of food waste was recycled last year, even though it could be put to industrial use, such as the manufacture of organic fertiliser.
On the household front, the concern is the disposal of plastic and glass.
Mr Edwin Khew, chief executive of environmental waste management firm IUT Global, pointed out that the cost of making plastic will go up as oil prices rise.
Yet only 9 per cent of plastic is recycled, and plastic containers are usually dumped into rubbish bins to be incinerated.
When they are burnt, toxic chemicals called dioxins are released, which must be scrubbed from flue gas.
'The less you incinerate, the less ash you produce, and the less you spend on these procedures,' Mr Khew said.
To incentivise people to recycle plastic bottles, the NEA wants the consultant to study a deposit-refund scheme.
A small-scale scheme is in place at three FairPrice supermarkets where customers can deposit their bottles and cans in 'reverse vending machines' in exchange for coupons, which can be collected to earn small items like bottled drinks.
Both Mr Khew and National University of Singapore South-east Asian Studies scholar Natasha Hamilton-Hart welcome the idea of mandating the separation of recyclables.
'Several other developed countries and local governments are - without exaggeration - decades ahead,' Dr Hamilton-Hart said.
'Singapore has the administrative and political resources to run a mandatory programme.'
Dr Lim Wee Kiak, MP for Sembawang GRC, is concerned about how some of the proposals, such as higher levies, might affect households used to throwing rubbish down refuse chutes. He suggested increasing recycling facilities for households instead.
The tender will close on May 18, with the study to be completed some time next year.
Lessons in recycling from Germany
Straits Times Forum 7 May 10;
I APPRECIATE the National Environment Agency's effort to conduct a feasibility study on improving recycling efforts in Singapore ('NEA seeks expert help to raise recycling rate'; Monday).
Recycling efforts in Singapore are indeed evident, as seen from the placement of recycling bins around the island, Bring Your Own Bag Day every Wednesday at supermarkets, and more recently, the use of biodegradable food packaging for takeaway orders in foodcourts.
However, more can be done to increase the recycling rate at both individual and national levels.
Spending six months last year in Germany was an eye-opener for me, as I observed the various recycling efforts by the public. Efficient waste-disposal systems and deposit-refund schemes in supermarkets allow residents to integrate recycling efforts into their daily lives.
Deposit-refund machines are located in supermarkets for customers to return used plastic bottles. Customers are given a refund of about 50 Singapore cents per bottle, which can be used to offset subsequent grocery purchases. Alternatively, they can donate the amount to charity. Plastic carriers can be bought for a small fee, with the object of persuading customers to bring their own grocery bags instead.
Rubbish chutes in almost every house and building have multiple compartments for disposal of paper, plastic and glass. Rubbish collected from these compartments is eventually sent for recycling. Such rubbish chutes ensure that residents keep up their recycling efforts even at home and at work.
These practices are not confined to Germany, as I have seen them elsewhere in Europe. The existence of a strong recycling management system there has ultimately enabled residents to be more proactive in their recycling efforts.
Such practices, if extended to Singapore, may allow greater accessibility of recycling efforts to the general population. It is certainly possible for Singaporeans to regard recycling not as an imposition, but a convenient and meaningful facet of their daily lives.
Azlyn Khalid (Miss)
