Propositions and Recommendations on Climate Change Strategy in Singapore

Policy paper addressing:

PROPOSITIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONSON CLIMATE CHANGE STRATEGY IN SINGAPORE

Environmental Challenge Organisation (Singapore)

1ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGE ORGANISATION (SINGAPORE) © 2010

Introduction: ECO’s position on climate change

Shrinking polar caps. Floods in the Philippines. Droughts in India.

All three occurred in different regions but connected by one common cause-climate change. This is a serious global issue and like other events which have threatened our way of life such as viral pandemics and terrorism, we have to come together to mitigate the situation with what we can control.

Climate change is real, urgent and severe. In the past few years, developments in climate science and increasing observable occurrences of extreme weather events have brought climate change to the forefront of the global agenda. The 4th Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has conclusively demonstrated climate change is unequivocally human-induced. Despite this, measures being implemented so far have been woefully inadequate.

Climate change is perhaps the gravest issue our generation has yet to tackle. Global greenhouse gas emission levels have increased by 70% between 1970 and 2004. Following this trend, it is expected that the global average temperature will rise by 1.8 to 4.0°C by 2100. It has been further speculated that an increase in temperature by 2°C can have catastrophic effects on our climate and ecosystem.

Effects will be experienced, at worse, in our future and definitely by future generations. Climate change is therefore an issue that must be tackled by our generation now.

The impacts of climate change range from sea level rise, melting ice caps and glaciers, biodiversity loss along with increased incidences of drought and flooding. This in turn is already leading to more agricultural shortfalls, endangered water security and the spread of vector-borne diseases.

Yet, climate change is no longer solely an environmental problem. Rather, it is a challenge that spans the economic and geopolitical horizons. Changes in earth’s atmosphere which increasingly destabilizes the global climate will have a significant bearing on the future of food scarcity, water stress, the prevalence and intensity of diseases and the loss of homelands, natural wonders and livelihoods around the world. In this regard, climate change will have a profound impact on human rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights such as the right to life, security, food, and health. At the same time, efforts to mitigate the causes and effects of climate change are raising complex questions on the economic rights of nations to prosper and improve the lives of their people.

There is not only an environmental imperative to act but also a moral, social and even economic one as the world targets to support around 9 billion people in 2050.

Thus, ECO Singapore believes that the Singapore Government should demonstrate greater initiative and commitment towards the climate change movement, placing consistently increasing emphasis on environmental concerns in view of stable economic development.

2

Perceived limitations and shortcomings in existing policies and initiatives

In evaluating Singapore’s existing policies and initiatives tackling climate change, we will be looking at these 4 aspects in detail, namely education, carbon emissions, clean energy research and development, as well as energy efficiency.

Education

Climate change education in Singapore targets either the public through media publicity and mass events, or students in schools through the incorporation into formal syllabus and various school activities. However, we feel that these are woefully inadequate due to their various limitations.

Public education is usually very passive in nature as it involves holding events, and creating publicity but not sufficiently engaging the public. It is true that public education has somewhat reinforced the message that going eco-friendly is cost-effective, a primary concern of households, with NEA tying up with several companies to sell eco-friendly products and offer discounts to show that going green is sustainable in the long term.

However, such community events such as Clean and Green Week do not really engage individuals higher up the income ladder. These individuals are the ones whose lifestyles are usually more taxing on the environment, in terms of having more cars and larger houses which increase the carbon emissions and waste per household, and they are usually the one who have the capacity to make the change. Even media campaigns are somewhat superficial, such as NEA’s recent commercial “Let’s Make Our World The Most Beautiful Home”, which simply took viewers through key milestones in Singapore’s transformation into a clean and green city.

In addition, there is the issue of how Singaporeans have equated environmental consciousness to cleanliness, causing most to be apathetic towards environmental issues. This is further reinforced by the media through the use of the phrase “clean and green city” and reflection of changes in the environment – a very government-centric approach – neglecting any focus on what individuals can do for the environment.

The incorporation of climate change issues into formal curriculum is rather limited at present, isolated to lower level education due to curriculum time constraints and based on a solution-centric approach. This not only makes it ineffective in consistently reinforcing the pertinence of climate change in the world today, it is unable to impress upon students the rationale behind such solutions and make climate change a relevant issue to the local context.

Nurturing a culture of eco-friendliness has also been restricted to few schools such as Commonwealth Secondary and Marsiling Secondary, making it highly improbable that such education will translate into real change in their lifestyles. In addition, school-initiated activities are limited due to lack of incentive for schools to implement on their own, and are lacking at higher levels due to curriculum time constraints. Community-level initiatives targeted at students such as the South West Community Development Council's Junior


Environment Ambassador programme are not useful in fostering eco-friendliness in youth as its outreach is limited to only those who are interested in serving as peer advisers.

Partnerships with other stakeholders to further in-school education of climate change are also relatively ineffective. For example, the National Weather Study Project (NWSP), a collaborative effort allowing students in participating schools to undertake weather and environmental study projects, is heavily reliant on companies’ willingness to support as it necessitates much funding. Also, the NWSP is not aimed at the wider, more apathetic student population and hence does not deal with the root cause of ignorance and apathy.

The Singapore Environment Council’s Schools’ Green Audit programme is a clear reflection of the flawed general perception that having much greenery is eco-friendly, as seen by the indicators used in evaluation such as the number of trees and plants in the school and the amount of paper it uses each year. It is important to note here that a good living environment does not necessarily equate to high environmental consciousness, hence the SEC Schools’ Green Audit Programme is an inaccurate gauge.

Also, the Government’s refusal to acknowledge its un-environmentally friendly practices causes an inherent contradiction in the messages it sends out to Singaporeans – promoting environmentally-friendly lifestyles yet informing the public that Singapore’s contributions to global warming are rather insignificant. This is clearly not the case, as Singapore’s per capita emissions are the 18th in the world, contributing significantly to the global tally. Thus, education is rendered ineffective as individuals are unable to reconcile the mixed messages and become apathetic and ignorant about the truth of climate change.

Carbon emissions

Based on CO2 intensity levels, a steady decrease from 1990-2005 seems to assure that carbon reduction targets in 2012, 2020 and 2035 will be successfully met. However, this steady decrease has not been achieved by the actual decrease in carbon emissions, but rather by allowing GDP to rise at a faster rate in comparison. Even as efficiency plays a major role in the approach taken to emission reduction, an increase in emissions seems to defeat the purpose of having set targets at all.

Furthermore, without legally binding agreements with the respective industries, the efficiency seems to be profit-driven, causing the targets set to be not something to aim towards, but something that would be conveniently reached with rises in efficiency.

Another point to note is that the inherent cost-savings of emitting less CO2 serves as an incentive. The lack of a decrease or even maintenance of CO2 emission levels prove that this factor is no longer useful or acknowledged as an incentive to reduce emissions. Legally binding limits set upon industries by the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources control the volume of CO and SO2 present in the air for all industries, but none have been implemented for CO2, as the former are seen more toxic than the latter.

4

Clean energy research and development

Clean energy is arguably one of Singapore’s more successful pitches in combating climate change as it receives more support from the government in terms of funding. It is welcome because of its perceived economic benefits: the clean energy industry is expected to contribute S$1.7 billion to Singapore’s GDP and 7000 jobs by 2015. Singapore wants to ride the alternative energy market boom by becoming a global hub with an emphasis on solar energy, biofuels, wind energy, tidal energy, energy efficiency and carbon services, which involves services such as storing CO2 underground or giving advice on offsetting CO2 emissions.

The Economic Development Board (EDB)’s comprehensive blueprint to grow the industry highlights 5 key pillars: R&D, developing manpower, grooming Singapore-based enterprises, branding the industry internationally and growing a vibrant industry ecosystem of engineers, architects and developers.

The measures to groom local companies to become world-class players and encourage start-ups in this industry are currently sufficient in funding, as new sponsorships are being doled out to worthy projects each season. The issue now is to raise the standards such that these technologies are passed on to existing buildings that can be upgraded and expand the area of improvement, such as solar panels on HDB flats. Having a wealth of cutting-edge technology that cannot be effectively made use of only contributes to a waste of resources.

Singapore is also currently a major semiconductor and electronics hub, and this has parallels with the manufacture of solar wafers, cells and modules. Our position with all-round capabilities from the precision engineering and chemicals industries, gives us a headstart in the solar panel manufacturing industry. However, the race to build a solid solar energy industry is against other major players such as China and South Korea.

In addition, the issue of economic benefits as the main motivation behind the development and funding of the clean energy industry makes it clear that the Government’s focus is still fixated on economic development, rather than true environmental concern and recognition for the cause of climate change.

Energy efficiency

As the most direct way of tackling climate change, there have been many initiatives implemented by the Singapore Government regarding energy efficiency, being its primary focus in tackling climate change. Thus far, they have been perceived to be rather successful in reducing energy intensity levels, contributing to carbon emission reduction targets.

Also, using energy efficiency as a primary strategy in tackling climate change takes into account Singapore’s land constraints, as switching to alternative energies are significantly more challenging e.g. wind and solar energy, and the effectiveness of incentives, as minimising energy consumption reduces both economic and environmental costs for both individuals and firms and makes financial sense. Incentives can motivate firms towards energy efficiency e.g. economic benefits, corporate image and use these to their advantage for a win-win situation.


The four-pronged approach adopted by the government in tackling energy efficiency issues – promoting adoption, building capability, raising awareness, supporting research and development – is commendable, as it caters to the various stakeholders involved, and seeks to tackle both structural and cultural issues i.e. both “hard” and “soft” strategies are utilised in both the short-term and long-term.

However, even though there are efforts that aim to educate the general public more about energy efficiency and encourage them towards embracing it, there is still more that can be done. In addition, the rationale of promoting energy efficiency to the general public usually emphasises on how they can save money and cut costs.

In addition, Singapore’s emphasis on energy efficiency is perceived as a “soft” option in tackling climate change, as compared to hard strategies such as adapting alternative energies or strict regulations cutting carbon emissions, which may actually yield more concrete and effective outcomes.

6

Proposed recommendations and modifications

We believe that with more commitment on the Government’s part, making the following changes in the various aspects can greatly enhance the effectiveness of current initiatives and further improve Singapore’s standing as an environmentally friendly city with a high quality of living.

Education

Public education is limited as it can only go as far as to change the pragmatic mindsets of Singaporeans, and its impacts vary for individuals at different levels of the income ladder. Thus, we wish to place more emphasis on the importance of effective climate change education from young that can better inculcate and ingrain environmental consciousness.

Environmental education related activities should be expanded to more schools, and climate change education should be included in Civics lessons up to JC to ensure consistency and continuity in reinforcing the pertinence of the climate change issue. The content of such climate change education should go beyond its solution-centric focus to look at the relevance of climate change to the local context, allowing students to better grasp the urgency of the issue. More field trips can be promoted e.g. trips to Semakau Landfill, NEWater, Senoko Power Plant as a method to minimize the abstract and somewhat distant nature of climate change. In doing so, it ensures both greater outreach of climate change education and the simultaneous creation of an environmentally friendly culture, unlike the fragmented one we see today.

Regarding primary school level education, due to greater flexibility of curriculum time, more visible implementation should be done. As students at the primary education level are picking up the foundations of learning and life skills, practicing environmentally friendly measures such as recycling will enable such good habits and values to be inculcated in children from a young age.

In addition, to cope with the general attitude of cynicism and apathy among youth, making alternatives to un-environmentally friendly practices available and convenient in schools can be useful in changing general mindsets that going green is difficult and troublesome. Also, correcting the misconception that being green is being clean can be done by the modification of survey questions such that they truly probe into the environmental consciousness of the school, immersing into the school culture and monitoring students’ daily practices. More stringent criteria should be required as well for schools to pass the green audit and make sure the standards are maintained throughout the year instead of being isolated just for the duration of the green audit.

Carbon emissions

With regards to carbon emissions and reduction targets, our recommendations are focusing on both cutting emissions and the misleading nature of carbon intensity.

Firstly, Singapore’s approach to promoting environmentally conscious behavior is primarily profit-driven, with new opportunities and cost-savings. Thus, another alternative may be to


limit the emissions at a level that complies with the international standards, even if such standards are not formally adhered to. Even if these limits are set at the current levels, they will be more beneficial than the steady increase seen now. Also, trade emissions can be implemented as they set a legal limit to the emissions and this policy does not place a burden on the government to go against their policy of not provide incentives or subsidies. Firms in the industry can trade their pollution permits and the limits will still be upheld.

We also feel that a more accurate gauge in carbon emissions is needed. The rapid carbon intensity decreases seem to reflect the high rate of GDP growth and the research and development incorporated rather than the curbing of emissions. The lack of efficiency is not the problem at hand, and any rise still contributes to global emissions. Thus the targets should be set based on actual reductions in emissions to show the actual change and serve as proof for the efforts taken.

Clean energy research and development

More focus on improving efficiency and making use of clean technology and research for mass production can be achieved, such that the benefits of clean energy have a greater outreach. The use of clean energy on a national level is most promising in solar energy, which can be implemented through legislation to install solar panels on all buildings – both existing and new, depending on their availability, and offsets for installation and cost. For example, solar panels are only used commercially by owners of private houses. Thus, incentives can be made for setting up solar energy generator systems, both in corporations and in housing. Excess electrons generator can be sold back to the grid at a fixed cost.

Energy efficiency

Energy efficiency is generally pushed forward as a means to cutting costs and electricity expenditure, to encourage Singaporeans to embrace energy efficient technology. However, on retrospect, is that the right kind of mindset we seek to establish in Singaporeans – committing towards environmental improvement, with the motivation still deeply rooted in selfish economic concerns?

It must be acknowledged that economic concerns are the easiest way, and most effective incentive towards motivating certain behaviour, however, the government should begin to shift away from such pragmatic, selfish kind of thinking and go beyond its limited perspective to embrace the environment as a necessary obligation. Efforts for the environment, including those for energy efficiency, should not be done entirely like an afterthought or an enhancement to environmental conservation, but should be coordinated as a concerted strategy towards improving the environment with equal priority to economic concerns. Only in promoting such a rationale then can mindsets of people change and environmental initiatives work.

There should also be more efforts made in terms of active education for the younger generation. Energy efficiency should be assimilated into part of the formal syllabus rather than as campaigns and competitions, as mentioned earlier under our recommendations for climate change education, which may be effective in raising awareness but not in instilling

8

the compelling, habitual nature or tendency towards embracing energy efficiency. Laying foundations in the young is crucial to ensure a continuation and consistency of this trend.


Looking beyond the local context to ASEAN

In the year 2000, carbon emissions in the South East Asian region were 5187.20 MT. In addition, emissions have been rising steadily with the 2000 levels having increased by 27% of the 1990 levels. As of the year 2000, South-East Asia emits 12% of the global share of carbon emissions. This is indeed quite a feat, considering that Annex I nations had just 4 times that share in total.

Of these emissions, 75% can be attributed to the land use and forestry sector. From 1990 to 2005, the region converted 41 million hectares of rainforest into areas for agriculture and other land-use practices. In 2005, the area of primary forest had decreased by 27% compared to 1990. This has caused a significant reduction in forest carbon and the degradation and clearing of the forests for the burning of biomass has also resulted in the production of 5.8 GT of carbon dioxide annually during the 1990s.

To combat climate change, ASEAN has implemented practices and measures in various aspects, particularly in the forestry sector. An example of successful adaptation is the 5 Million Hectare Reforestation Program (5MHRP) adopted by the Viet Nam National Assembly in 1998. As of 2003, the 5MHRP had achieved the restoration of about 2m hectares. A fellow ASEAN country, Indonesia, has more than 20 Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) projects in Kalimantan, Papua and Sumatra, in addition to its National Movement for the Rehabilitation of Forests and Lands launched in 2003. This National Movement aimed to reforest 5 million hectares of forestland by 2009, with the re-planting of 100 million trees by May 2008 brought about by planting movements conducted by the community, local governments, and the private sector.

Current official stand of ASEAN

At present, ASEAN has indeed expressed support in contributing towards a successful outcome at COP16, with various programs and policies regarding mitigation and adaptation in place, as well as extensive research planned for both areas in the South-East Asian region. However, it has no legally binding agreements with regards to carbon emission reductions.

Why ASEAN should do more

The effects of climate change have become increasingly visible over the years. Occurrences of extreme weather have increased, with the number of typhoons in 2004 increasing to 21, above the median of 17.5 for the years 1990 through 2003.

In addition, droughts in Viet Nam, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and the Phillipines have caused forest fires, crop failures and water shortages. From 2002 to 2007 alone, South East Asia produced 140 million tones of grain per year. South-East Asia is also one of the world’s largest producers of palm oil. These climatic changes could cause a dangerous decline in agricultural output, which the region depends heavily on, causing problems for economic development and trade within and between ASEAN and other countries.

If no action is taken to tackle climate change, Indonesia, Philippines, Thailand and Viet Nam could suffer a loss equivalent to more than 6% of GDP annually by 2100.

10

Proposed recommendations and modifications

Firstly, the effects on the environment and climate change should be of primary or high priority during policy making and development planning. Private firms should also be required, incentivized or highly encouraged to choose more environmentally sustainable alternatives when considering expansion or further development.

To achieve this, sufficient information on environmentally sustainable practices as well as their benefits for both private firms and the environment should be made available and accessible. This would clearly educate and incentivize citizens as well on why and how they can choose environmentally sustainable options.

ASEAN cooperation should also be strengthened in this area so as to improve the rate of technology, finance transfer and information on climate change in the region. The undertaking of more extensive research to provide accurate information on climate change, as well as mitigation and adaptation efforts could also prove useful in policy making for all countries in ASEAN. With this, a collective goal can be established in tackling climate change and build even closer, deeper ties between countries through cooperation and collaboration.

In addition, according to “The Economics of Climate Change in Southeast Asia: A Regional Review” by the Asian Development Bank, climate change is the biggest form of market failure that the world has ever witnessed. Thus the intervention of public policy is essential to regain a socially efficient outcome. To do this, governments will need to devise cost-effective implementation strategies that would allow for both the environment and the private firms to benefit. These strategies should encourage the initial implementation of adaptation and mitigation measures through the creation of strong incentives.

Also, governments should raise greater public awareness on climate change and its effects to aid in garnering support for the successful implementation of environmentally sustainable policies. This is important as government intervention alone cannot successfully address climate change and the active participation of the households, firms, individuals, non-government organizations and the civil society are necessary to tackle climate change.


Documents

Propositions and Recommendations on Climate Change Strategy in Singapore