In this page, we look at 4 different letters submitted to The Straits Times' Forum. All the letters are tied to the subject of the ecological enivronment.
Letter #1
A letter was initially to the Forum indicating that companies or organisations that buy carbon credit does not lower an organisation’s carbon emission.
It was claimed that because buying carbon credit cost the organisation to do something, therefore it will do less of it.
In this paragraph, we look at another letter submitted to the Forum by another individual in response to the aforementioned:
It might seem that the carbon credit system is creating a quota. Then businesses and organisations are encouraged to meet said quota. That is inaccurate.
The system is designed so that companies have freedom to make choices that account for conditions policy makers are unaware of.
By paying to produce carbon, the companies are directly liable for the social and environmental costs of their work.
This is unlike the view the other writer claimed that the environment and social responsibilities are pushed to someone else when an organisation buys carbon credits.
The perspective that carbon credits are used to fund flawed environmental projects is a valid concern. But such issues should be brought forward to lawmakersb instead of companies.
Letter #2
According to a study by Schneider Electric, one third of the businesses in Singapore identified themselves as closely aligned to the Singapore Green Plan 2030. Main problems cited by the rest of the companies according to the study are; a lack of funding, made worse after the Covid pandemic.
There are also challenges in changing the culture of a company.
Singapore’s electricity prices have been rising. This should lead to increased interest to invest in sustainable solutions to prevent businesses being affected by volatile global energy prices.While the initial cost for implementing this is high, companies benefit from a reliable energy source with lower operating cost.
If businesses form a sustainability committee for their own company. That will encourage the business to adopt sustainable practices. Such a committee includes environment experts independent of the company who provide unbiased business sustainability advice.
To alleviate any financial burden on the company,grants can be obtained under the Enterprise Sustainability Programme. The committee could oversee the application for such grants. The committee can also lead initiatives in the company to inculcate a more sustainable company culture.
Letter #3
Regarding the burning of offerings during the 7th lunar month. One person wondered if there was a method to create a kind of technology that can remove pollutants discharged into the atmosphere in a cost effective manner.
Such a technology is beneficial for residents living in flats and pedestrians in HDB estates where the burners are often located in these places.
Letter #4
In the middle of June 2021, it was reported that marine life was being dug up by visitors to Changi beach. The writer of this paritcular letter wondered if Singapore did not educate the public about the dictum ‘to leave nothing but footprints and take nothing but memories’ when visiting natural sites.
His opinion is that Singapore’s wildlife protection legislation can be written in such a way such that it takes reference from Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity conservation act 1999.
The Act in Australia states protection for native animals, fishing limits and the regulation of non native flora and fauna. The law also punishes individuals who illegally disturb wildlife with fines and jail time.
He states that Education is key to resolving such problems. The schools in Singapore should promote environmental protection and awareness. Parents should act as role models and not act in any way that disrupts wild life.