Look to Singapore For a Climate Change Strategy

I’m often frustrated by the need to point out Singapore as a country that gets a lot of things right. It isn’t really a free country and the people there are not really happy.

Nonetheless, they get a lot of things right. For example, their climate change strategy seems spot on. Singapore, the size of a postage stamp and with only 5.4 million, will not change the Earth’s climate–even if they quit using energy completely. But they are determined to contribute.

They have a Climate Change Secretariat and its head wrote a letter to The Straits Times detailing their efforts.

“Singapore submitted a pledge to reduce our Emissions Intensity by 36 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030 and stabilise our emissions around 2030.

 This is ambitious, given our early actions to develop sustainably before climate change became a global concern and our limited scope for alternative energy.

Since the 1970s, we have managed car usage to reduce traffic congestion and emissions. Over 95 per cent of Singapore’s electricity is generated from natural gas, the cleanest fossil fuel. With other measures, Singapore has one of the lowest carbon intensities (carbon dioxide emitted per dollar of gross domestic product) in the world.

Singapore has limited alternatives to using fossil fuel for power generation. Even if all usable rooftops in Singapore were covered with solar panels, it could currently generate about 10 per cent of our total electricity needs. Nonetheless, we will continue to deploy solar energy where feasible, to meet our target of 350 megawatt-peak (MWp) by 2020.

Improving energy efficiency is a key strategy. The Energy Conservation Act imposes energy management practices for large industrial energy users. By 2030, we aim for public transport to make up 75 per cent of peak-hour journeys and for 80 per cent of buildings to achieve Green Mark standards.

We are also taking measures to address climate change impacts such as rising sea levels and extreme weather events. These include raising minimum land reclamation levels, preserving our biodiversity, encouraging diversification of our food import sources, and working with local farms to increase productivity and resilience.”

The solution to global warming isn’t global, as I’ve been known to remark. The top 5 emitters will be responsible for 41% of emissions in 2040, while the second five emitters will only put out 11% of emissions, according to the EIA. Singapore’s emissions are a fraction of a percentage point of the global total now and will be a fraction of a percentage point in 2100 no matter what they do.

Those in smaller countries really should look at Singapore as an example of doing their part, but not over-doing. Their emphasis on building up resilience and focusing on energy efficiency should be the playbook for other countries around the world.

Now about that freedom stuff…

Singapore

 

 

11 responses to “Look to Singapore For a Climate Change Strategy

  1. Tom,
    Almost all of what is being done in Singapore is merely responsible government dressed up to make climate obsessed people happy.
    Improving infrastructure is a basic role of effective government.
    Using clean energy- when it makes sense- is always preferable to dirty energy.
    Keeping land use, food logistics, storm defense, and ocean defense up to date is, again, good government. ,The money wasted to date on climate fear mongering could provide these good things worldwide.

  2. They need to build an artificial island and put a nuclear power plant on it. Natural gas will eventually run out.

  3. Stabilizing emissions at 60% of 2005 levels will still cause lots of global warming. Why would you encourage a path like that?

    • Hiya MikeN,

      Because for postage stamp countries that’s enough. It shows they’re on board, but it doesn’t hurt them and the total of emissions from Singapore means nothing.

      • On board with what, Tom?
        And the money wasted on low performance loser tech like wind and solar is a waste of precious resources.
        Mike N,
        Is it “global warming” or is it “cliamte change”?
        Inquiring minds want to know.

      • So you are only encouraging this for small countries where it makes even less difference?

      • Hiya hunter–on board with the tulip craze, if that’s all it is, so they don’t get ostracized by larger countries and can play well together in multi-national institutions. On board with early mitigation efforts in case they prove necessary.

        MikeN, from what I read, Singapore is upgrading its infrastructure with a margin for potential impacts of climate change, something I’ve been advocating for quite some time.

        It may not be much, but it’s a helluva lot better than Germany retiring its nuclear power fleet and switching to brown coal as a substitute.

        The point is, large or small, Singapore is taking a rational and measured approach.

      • I think Bill Gates and Pielke Jr have the rational and measured approach. If what is needed is an 80% cut(now 90%), then you need to achieve that and not waste time and money with smaller cuts.

  4. MikeN,
    Gates is not rational nor is he measured. Climate obsession has addled reasoning faculties. He has abandoned his well rewarded faith in market based economies and democracy in favor of the dark mania of the cliamte consensus.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s