• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

1. Mr Speaker, I thank Members for speaking in support of the Bill. They have also raised many thoughtful comments, which I will now address. District Pneumatic Waste Conveyance Systems Overview of Costs Associated with DPWCS 2. Mr Murali Pillai asked how connection charges and tariffs will be determined, and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked if residents would have to foot these costs. Let me give an overview of the costs and how they will be recovered. 3. First, the connection charge will cover the capital costs. In Kampong Bugis, NEA will collect this from the Master Developer. The connection charge will be small compared to other costs like land costs and construction costs. In fact, it will be a very small proportion. It will be made known to bidders when the site is launched for sale, so that this would be factored in their bids. Second, a monthly tariff will be collected from owners of premises within the district, such as the Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST). This will cover operational and maintenance expenses for the DPWCS. The MCST will then collect payments towards this tariff from subsidiary proprietors under the MCST as part of their monthly maintenance fees. 4. To keep overall costs competitive, NEA will appoint the DPWCS licensee for Kampong Bugis through an open tender. The tariffs will take into account factors such as gross floor area (GFA) and amount of refuse generated for different types of premises. For example, the tariffs for residential premises will be different from that for commercial premises. Managing potential cost increases from DPWCS 5. Ms Irene Quay, Mr Zainal Sapari and Ms Sylvia Lim spoke about potential cost increases arising from the DPWCS. 6. We will make every effort to ensure that the costs of waste collection remain affordable. But we also have to balance short term costs with long term sustainability. Waste generation in Singapore grew from 5.6 million tonnes in 2007 to 7.7 million tonnes in 2017, a 40% increase over the last decade. This trend is likely to continue as Singapore’s population and economy grow. If we do not adopt technology but continue to manage waste the way we do today, we will need a proportionate increase in manpower which we cannot meet without turning to more foreign labour, given our manpower constraints. 7. We know that Singapore’s workforce is shrinking and ageing. Manpower costs across all sectors will continue to rise. The challenge is even more acute in the environmental services industry, which many Singaporeans, as I had noted earlier, perceive as dirty and unappealing, and shun away from. We might not be able to find workers, even if we were willing to pay for them. Members would agree with me that increasing our reliance on foreign workers to collect waste is not a sustainable solution. So we need to start putting in place systems now, such as the PWCS to automate waste collection, which will allow our workers in the environmental services industry to take on higher value-added jobs. 8. From our recent consultations with industry players, the operating costs for PWCS comprise only a very small proportion of the total maintenance expenses for a condominium. Hence, the PWCS will not significantly affect the residents’ maintenance fees. Condominiums with PWCS will also benefit from reduced pests and odour, and manpower savings from not needing to manually transport waste within the premises. 9. At the district level, premises will also enjoy more cost savings due to economies of scale through shared bin centres, air and ventilation equipment, and pipe networks. In greenfield sites, these benefits would be even greater, as the planning and construction of the network will be done from the start without retrofitting. This is seen in other cities, including several in South Korea, where DPWCS are implemented on greenfield sites. 10. For these reasons, we expect the cost borne by each dwelling unit (DU) for the DPWCS at Kampong Bugis to be lower than that at Yuhua, which is a brownfield site that required extensive and more costly retrofitting works, as mentioned by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah. Over the longer term, as PWCS is used more extensively in Singapore, and with technological advancements, we can expect the costs of DPWCS to decrease. 11. As mentioned in my opening speech, NEA estimates that a 1000 dwelling units condominium would save GFA equivalent to a five-room HDB flat by eliminating its bin centre. In Kampong Bugis, this translates to the Master Developer saving 20% of the GFA used for bin centres, which could then be diverted to saleable units or facilities for residents. Residents will also benefit from a cleaner and quieter environment due to reduced truck traffic. 12. Mr Murali asked whether the Government would consider subsidising existing private developments to implement PWCS within their estates. Currently, the costs of conveying waste from individual chutes to bin centres in private developments are borne by residents through their monthly maintenance fees. So the Government does not subsidise this, and we have no plans to do so. Measures in place to address residents’ concerns and other operational problems 13. Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Zainal Sapari spoke about operational concerns related to DPWCS in Singapore and other cities, such as suction noise and smell from choked pipes. 14. I would like to assure Members that we take these concerns seriously. PWCS itself is a tried and tested technology and has been used in countries such as South Korea and Sweden for many years. To date, some 140 condominiums and commercial developments in Singapore have also used PWCS with only minor operational issues. Where disamenities occur, we will study and address them. For example, chokages have been addressed by improving the design of refuse chute hoppers, and odour, by ensuring the regular replacement of odour filters. 15. Let me share with Members the experience of a district in Gwacheon City, which is in Seoul. Residents were initially concerned when they saw the shared bin centre in the middle of the district. They were concerned that the bin centre would affect the aesthetics of the area, and whether there would be odour problems. These concerns were cleverly addressed by integrating the bin centre into a landscape garden, which residents welcomed. 16. This illustrates the importance of resident-centric design. The PWCS retrofitting project at Yuhua faced design limitations as it was in an existing estate with limited space. As a result, the bin centre had to be located in the middle of the estate, surrounded by blocks of flats. HDB has introduced acoustic mitigating measures and odour treatment solutions to address the noise and smell issues at the bin centre. Public education efforts were also intensified to remind residents of items that cannot be disposed of in the PWCS. This would prevent chokages that give rise to odours. 17. More importantly, the learning points from Yuhua have been incorporated in the Government’s upcoming projects. These include the PWCS at the new HDB estate at Tampines North, where the bin centre will be located at the edge of the district, away from residents. Other effective design features include placing refuse hoppers outside of flats and sizing refuse hoppers to limit the size of items that can be thrown into the chute, thereby preventing chokage. New developments, such as those in Kampong Bugis, would incorporate such planning and design features that will facilitate the smooth operation of the PWCS. 18. Another cause of disamenities is improper maintenance of the PWCS. To address this, NEA is jointly developing a Singapore Standard for PWCS with HDB, Enterprise Singapore (ESG) and other stakeholders. The Standard covers proper maintenance of PWCS, such as recommendations to replace air filters every six months, so that they remain effective in removing unpleasant odours. PWCS vendors must also provide operation and maintenance manuals to managing agents and MCSTs and provide basic training to the staff of the managing agents. 19. As Ms Irene Quay, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Dr Chia Shi Lu highlighted, users of DPWCS have a role to play in preventing chokage and its associated issues. They must use the DPWCS correctly, and avoid throwing bulky or long items such as pillows or brooms into the chutes. NEA will support such efforts to educate residents on the correct way to use the PWCS, as we are already doing at private developments which have adopted PWCS. For instance, signage could be placed at throw-points to educate residents on proper usage. NEA has also amended the Code of Practice on Environmental Health to introduce a refuse chute hopper design that limits the size of items that can be thrown into the chute. 20. Mr Zainal Sapari, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Irene Quay highlighted the need for prompt detection of faults in the PWCS and the importance of contingency plans in the event of breakdowns. It is our priority that our residents have reliable waste collection services and NEA will ensure this through licensing conditions on the DPWCS licensee. In the event of a prolonged disruption in the main DPWCS network, the licensee must ensure continued service, such as through manual waste collection. These contingency plans are similar to those in other countries such as South Korea. PWCS are also equipped with sensors and monitors to alert operators of any system faults so that they can carry out prompt remediation. 21. Even as we prepare for contingencies, it is pertinent to note that most chokages are cleared within two to three hours, in existing developments that use PWCS in Singapore.

Load more

  9

Copy Link