1. í Should Singapore do more
about climate change?
CLIMATE change, which threat-
ens to cause rising temperatures,
intense storms and rising sea lev-
els, is a global issue that Singa-
pore can’t escape.
So should the island state do
more about climate change? The
answer: It depends.
Clearly, it is vulnerable to ris-
ing oceans and drastic changes in
rainfall that result when excess
carbon dioxide and other green-
house gases warm the atmos-
phere. But it is also a small coun-
try with a relatively small abso-
lute carbon footprint – it produc-
es just 0.2 per cent of the world’s
greenhouse gases that cause warm-
ing.
Given that China produces a
whopping 29 per cent of global
greenhouse gas emissions and the
United States produces 16 per
cent, Singapore’s tiny contribu-
tion might cause some to think
that nothing the Republic does
will make even a dent in the glo-
bal picture of climate change.
Yet the Republic has pledged to
cut its emissions by 16 per cent
from the business-as-usual sce-
nario by 2020 if the world reaches
an agreement on climate change,
and from 7 per cent to 11 per cent
if there is no global agreement.
Without measures to slash
emissions, Singapore’s emissions
in 2020 are projected to reach
77.2 million tonnes. That is the
amount the entire world currently
emits in a single day.
Its emissions targets may seem
smaller than other nations’ – for
example, Germany has a domestic
programme that aims to cut green-
house gas emissions by 40 per
cent from 1990 levels by 2020.
But other countries have a
greater capacity to switch their en-
ergy sources from coal or fuel oil
to natural gas or renewable ener-
gy. Singapore’s choices are more
limited.
Singapore began switching its
fuel mix more than a decade ago.
In 2000, 19 per cent of its power
came from natural gas. By 2010, it
was 78.7 per cent.
But barring a technological mir-
acle, it has little space for sprawl-
ing rooftop solar panels or wind
turbines.
That does not mean it is fid-
dling while the world burns.
A national climate change strat-
egy report published last month
outlined a number of steps Singa-
pore has taken in recent years.
For one thing, it is promoting en-
ergy efficiency. An Energy Conser-
vation Act that takes effect next
year mandates that large consum-
ers of energy, such as industries,
appoint energy managers and sub-
mit improvement plans.
Industries contributed 54 per
cent of Singapore’s carbon emis-
sions in 2005, and are projected to
contribute 60.3 per cent in 2020
in a business-as-usual scenario.
Singapore’s emissions are ex-
pected to grow at 4.3 per cent a
year till 2020. Much of its econom-
ic growth until that period comes
from relatively high-emitting in-
dustries such as petroleum refin-
ing and chemicals. And power gen-
eration can no longer easily
switch from fuel oil to natural gas
as it had in years past.
In the long term, Singapore
will have to decide what it wants
its economy to be built on. Should
it reconsider its industry mix to
shift towards less energy-inten-
sive industries?
At the same time, it must do
this without outsourcing or shunt-
ing that same work to countries
that might be less energy effi-
cient, which might reduce Singa-
pore’s emissions but result in high-
er overall global emissions.
And it must balance emissions
control with other needs such as
energy security, which means us-
ing other forms of energy with
less severe impact on the environ-
ment.
Meanwhile, Singapore is taking
other steps to stem its carbon
emissions. Transport in 2005 pro-
duced 19 per cent of the country’s
emissions. But new rail lines and
more trains by 2016 may convert
some motorists to public trans-
port with lower emissions. And
new buildings are subject to the
Green Mark certification scheme,
which imposes minimum stand-
ards on energy and water efficien-
cy.
Yet for all its concrete policies,
Singapore should not neglect the
intangible aspects of climate
change action.
In international negotiations,
some small nations feel they have
more standing to bargain with
high-emitting countries if they
have already taken the clean lead.
For instance, the Maldives and Sa-
moa, both small island states at
risk from sea-level rises, have
pledged to go carbon-neutral –
having its emissions be equal to
the amount it takes in or offsets –
by cutting fossil fuel consumption
and installing more renewable
power. Singapore may opt to
adopt such a negotiating stance.
Developing countries and cities
look to Singapore as an example
of a sustainable city. But in fact, if
everyone in the world consumed
at the rate the average Singapo-
rean does, 3.5 earths would be
needed to generate the resources
for such a level of consumption,
according to a World Wide Fund
for Nature report last month.
Much of what is consumed is not
produced here, so that carbon
emissions are outsourced to other
countries.
So there is room to change peo-
ple’s mindsets so that every indi-
vidual feels that he can contribute
more to stemming climate change
– say, by consuming or wasting
less.
Just as psychological defence is
one of Singapore’s five pillars of
total defence, Singapore could fos-
ter its people’s psychological en-
gagement with this global chal-
lenge.
caiwj@sph.com.sg
BE UPDATED on the Big Quiz!
For news reports on school
talks and students’ responses,
go to www.straitstimes.com/
thebigquiz/
View clips from school talks
at www.razortv.com.sg
Student teams will compete
for the top cash prize of $5,000
and a trophy. The next best
teams will receive $3,000,
$1,000 and $500 respectively.
The competition is open to
students in the first year of
junior college or the equivalent,
such as Year 5 of a six-year
integrated programme.
After a preliminary round
involving 23 school teams, 18
will make it to the quarter-final
round next Wednesday.
Questions will be based on
reports in The Straits Times.
Next week’s primer topic is
on religious harmony. Readers
with questions on primer topics
can e-mail them to
stprojects@sph.com.sg
Updates on Big Quiz
FIVE years ago, researchers from
the Gallup World Poll asked peo-
ple from around the world whe-
ther they were aware of global cli-
mate change, and whether they
personally perceived it as a threat.
Though 89 per cent of the Sin-
gaporeans asked said they knew
something or a lot about climate
change, just 59 per cent of those
viewed it as a threat. (South Korea
came in at 93 and 80 per cent. In
Ethiopia, 80 per cent said they
were aware of climate change,
and 73 per cent of those saw it as
a personal threat.)
Last year, a survey by Singa-
pore’s own National Climate
Change Secretariat showed 73.8
per cent of 1,010 respondents
were concerned about climate
change, and 63.4 per cent thought
Singapore would be severely af-
fected.
So there is rising awareness of
how the Republic will be buffeted
by climate change. Even if the
economy remains robust, there is
no way for Singapore to spend its
way out of climate change’s worst
impacts.
If global greenhouse-gas emis-
sions go unchecked, both rainfall
and dry periods could become
more intense, for example – and
flood and water management will
be more and more important for
the island-state.
Boosted by melting ice sheets,
sea levels are also projected to rise
between 18cm and 59 cm this cen-
tury, estimates the United Na-
tions’ climate panel. Some scien-
tists say the rise could be as much
as 1m to 2m.
So the Singapore government
has mandated that new reclaimed
land must be at least 2.25m above
the highest recorded tide level.
And much of the coastline already
has some form of tidal protection.
But the nation will feel the
knock-on effects of climate
change beyond its borders, too.
For example, extreme weather
means that food production will
fluctuate, making global food pric-
es – including those here – more
volatile. Business supply chains
could also be disrupted – for in-
stance, floods in Thailand last
year hit the electronics and auto-
mobile supply chains hard.
And as oceans warm up, some
of the reefs that serve as homes
and nurseries to fish are dying off,
so the food-fish supply may dwin-
dle, leading to further food-securi-
ty worries.
On the flip side, some mea-
sures to stem climate change can
also be good for the country.
For instance, boosting energy
efficiency would help Singapore –
which has few energy or fuel re-
sources of its own at the best of
times – increase its energy securi-
ty, by making energy supplies go
further.
And cross-border efforts to
halt deforestation in Indonesia
can also put a lid on forest fires
there as well as the consequent
haze that clouds the skies each
year.
GRACE CHUA
By GRACE CHUA
Developing countries and cities look to
Singapore as an example of a sustainable
city. But in fact, if everyone in the world
consumed at the rate the average
Singaporean does, 3.5 earths would be
needed to generate the resources for such a
level of consumption, according to a World
Wide Fund for Nature report last month.
Global problem, bleak outlook
In 2000, 19 per cent of Singapore’s power came from natural gas. By 2010, it was 78.7 per cent, a result of a switch in the country’s fuel mix that started more than a decade ago. ST PHOTO: ALPHONSUS CHERN
Construction work south of Keppel Road, near Singapore’s Central Business
District. If global climate change goes unchecked, both rainfall and dry periods
could become more intense, and sea levels are projected to rise. ST FILE PHOTO
This primer is the 10th
instalment of a 12-part
series in the Opinion
pages, in the lead-up
to The Straits
Times-Ministry of
Education National
Current Affairs Quiz.
í If climate change is such a
pressing global problem, why is
it so hard to deal with?
AT THE first Rio Earth
Summit, held in Brazil in 1992,
leaders from all over the world
produced the United Nations
Framework Convention on
Climate Change, the landmark
agreement to stabilise the
production of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere to
prevent runaway, man-made
climate change.
The treaty sowed the seeds
of the Kyoto Protocol, which
outlines limits and targets for
greenhouse gas emissions.
Greenhouse gases like carbon
dioxide, methane and nitrous
oxide trap the sun’s heat in
the atmosphere, causing it to
warm up. They result both
naturally and from human
activities, but man-made
sources such as burning fossil
fuels are putting too much of
these into the atmosphere.
But since then, progress on
climate change has been
incremental.
In part, that’s because the
nations of the world still
disagree on a critical issue:
Who does what and who pays?
Under the Kyoto Protocol,
wealthy countries were to help
less-developed ones with
technology and funding to pay
for emission reductions.
At the latest climate change
meeting in Durban last year,
participants agreed to set up a
Green Climate Fund to
channel US$100 billion (S$125
billion) towards poorer
countries, but plans for a
sustainable income stream
have not yet been formed.
Developing countries such
as China and India argue that
their per capita emissions are
much lower than those of
developed countries’ and
therefore they should get to
catch up economically before
they start cutting back.
But that argument will not
hold for much longer: an
International Energy Agency
analysis last year found that
China’s per capita emissions
will outstrip the European
Union’s in the next four years.
Developing nations also say
that even as they try to help
themselves, it is developed
nations like those in Europe
which should bear
responsibility for the climate
change crisis today, because
the latter grew their
economies by emitting
greenhouse gases.
But the world’s balance of
economic power has shifted in
the years since 1992.
Today, China’s total
emissions far outstrip those of
any European economy.
Europe’s economies, mired in
debt, are less able to finance
efforts by developing
countries.
What is more, not all
countries have signed on to
the Kyoto Protocol.
Last year, Canada – an
energy producer that is now
exploiting its wealth of fossil
fuels in the form of tar sands
– withdrew from it.
That underscores yet
another challenge.
Even as many countries
suffer the ill effects of climate
change, such as drought and
loss of agricultural
productivity, some countries
will benefit directly from
climate change, if their
growing season lengthens with
warmer weather.
Others, such as Canada,
will benefit from simply
ignoring it.
GRACE CHUA
PRIMER
Doing more about climate change
Rising awareness
of the effects
A28 OOPPIINNIIOONN F R I D A Y , J U L Y 2 7 , 2 0 1 2