BPS 5102 Group Assignment

THE GREEN MARK SCHEME IN SINGAPORE

POLICY, LEGISLATION & E FFECTIVENESS FOR CLIMATE CHANGE & GHG EMISSIONS

March 11, 2011

Project Team
Desmond Lee Eric Phang Siew Boon Julian Goh Robert J Baird Sweta Sorab Vanitha Sri D A0066585R HT095704L HT095684W HT0905706J A0079783J HT095713L

BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Singapores Approach to Climate Change ................................................................................................................... 4 Vulnerability to Climate Change.............................................................................................................................. 4 National Strategy and Targets ................................................................................................................................ 4 The Pragmatic Approach ........................................................................................................................................ 5 Environmental Challenges: GHGs and the Building/Construction Industry.................................................................. 5 The Green Mark Scheme & Supporting Legislations ................................................................................................... 7 GMS Incentives for New and Old Buildings ............................................................................................................. 7 Legislations Supporting the Green Mark Scheme ................................................................................................... 8 Critical Review & Recommendations .......................................................................................................................... 9 1. Clearer Roadmap to 2030............................................................................................................................... 10 2. More Direct Linkage With GHG Reduction .................................................................................................... 10 3. Clearer Alignment Across Policy Areas .......................................................................................................... 11 4. Innovative Financing Models ......................................................................................................................... 11 5. Continuous Performance Monitoring............................................................................................................. 11 6. Incorporating Demand Management Considerations .................................................................................... 12 7. Public Awareness and Demand for Green Buildings ....................................................................................... 12 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 References ................................................................................................................................................................ 14

BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

INTRODUCTION
As the adverse effects of climate change are better understood, countries have begun to respond with diverse strategies for mitigation and adaptation. Singapore, a highly urbanized, economically advanced and resourceconstrained tropical island nation, makes an interesting study in this regard.

Singapore has addressed the challenges of population growth, limited land area and the near-absence of natural and physical resources partly through urbanization. During the 2008-2009 global economic downturn, Singapores construction sector continued to grow, clearly demonstrating the sectors importance to the nations economy.1 As a significant user of energy and emitter of greenhouse gases (GHGs), it is essential that the construction and building industry plays an active part in sustainability efforts. The Singapore Government puts major emphasis on this sector when developing legislation and policy initiatives to address climate change.

This paper provides an overview of the challenges Singapore faces from climate change, particularly GHG emissions, and describes the countrys strategy to address them. It provides an in-depth review and critique of the nations key policy instrument towards encouraging green buildings, the Green Mark Scheme (GMS), and makes a number of recommendations to improve and accelerate the adoption of the GMS.

Ministry of Trade and Industry, 2009 Economic Survey of Singapore, pp. 40. 3 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

SINGAPORES APPROACH TO CLIMATE CHANGE

The Singapore Government aims to build and sustain a dynamic economy while ensuring a superior quality of life. To achieve this, the Government takes a holistic and long-term view. Its approach towards policymaking can be broadly described as deeply pragmatic and flexible, with a strong emphasis on cost-effectiveness.

VULNERABILITY TO CLIMATE CHANGE

As a tropical island state, Singapore is under threat from increased flooding, coastal land loss, water scarcity, extreme weather events and heat stress, among others. Academic studies show that the cost of protecting Singapores coast will rise in tandem with sea level rises projections range from US$0.3-5.7 million in 2050 to US$0.9-16.8 million by 21002. Thus, Singapores very survival depends on its ability to mitigate and adapt to climate change; simultaneously, to achieve a better quality of life, the pressures of economy and society must be balanced.

NATIONAL STRATEGY AND TARGETS

In 2006, the National Climate Change Strategy (NCCS) committed to improving energy efficiency, technological innovation, and promoting the use of clean, less carbon-intensive energy.

As climate change issues gained prominence, an Inter-Ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development (IMCSD) was formed, which in 2009 pledged to3: Undertake mitigation measures to reduce GHG emissions by 16% below 2020 business-as-usual levels4 Aim for 35% improvement in energy efficiency from 2005 levels by 2030 Make 80% of Singapores existing building stock green by 2030

Together, these declarations provide the targets set and the means by which Singapore plans to meet them.

Ng, Wei-Shiuen, Mendelsohn, Robert, 2005, The Impact of Sea Level Rise on Singapore, Journal of Environment and Development Economics, pp. 201-205. 3 Report of the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development, 2009. 4 Note, however, that no estimate of the expected GHG emissions in 2020 was provided. 4 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

THE PRAGMATIC APPROACH

Singapore takes the position that, being an alternative energy disadvantaged country (i.e., unable to tap sources such as solar, hydro, wind and nuclear) with low total carbon emissions, it is prepared to reduce its CO2 emissions if a globally binding agreement is in place. In other words, Singapore will not take drastic action to reduce its CO2 emissions unilaterally, but is willing to do its fair share as part of a global effort.

This pragmatic approach is clearly due to economic considerations. Singapore would not want to be economically disadvantaged by self-imposed stringent standards that would drive up business costs. On the other hand, conscious that climate change would ultimately affect all countries, it is in Singapores interest to seek agreement at the United Nations level.

ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES: GHGS AND THE BUILDING/CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY

Singapores energy comes from oil (including oil derivatives, 19%) and natural gas (79%)5, supplemented by waste incineration and, to a lesser extent, solar power. The government believes that geographical and technological constraints preclude the adoption of alternative energy sources for the present. To ascertain the magnitude of the environmental challenges facing Singapore, the National Environment Agency (NEA) published the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory using year 2000 data6.

These data showed that CO2 contributed 97.3% of Singapores total GHG emissions in 2000, with other GHGs making up the remaining 2.7%7. These proportions have remained relatively stable in the decade since. Hence controlling CO2 emissions is the biggest challenge by far.

In 2007, Singapore contributed less than 0.2% of global CO2 emissions. However, Singapores emissions increased by about 83% from 1990 to 2007, before stabilizing slightly. Per capita emissions peaked in 2004 and began a slow decline subsequently, possibly due to cleaner natural gas and other energy efficiency measures. Although CO2 intensity has dropped 39% from 1990 to 20078, in terms of absolute emissions the situation is still dire9.

World Green Building Council, 2010, Tackling Global Climate Change Meeting Local Priorities, pp. 34. National Environment Agency, 2010, Singapores Second National Communication, pp. 29.s 7 Greenhouse gases represented are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydro fluorocarbons (HFCs), per fluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). 8 0.17 kg/S$2000 in 2007. 5 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore
6

Figure 2: Singapores CO2 emissions from 1990 to 2007

10

Figure 3: Singapores carbon intensity from 1990 to 2007

11

Having established the pre-eminence of CO2 in Singapores GHG emissions, we now focus our attention on the contributions of the building and construction industry to the GHG problem, and the CO2 problem in particular.

In Singapore, the built environment contributes significantly to the total energy consumed and hence the CO2 emissions. The following statistics12 define the scope: Buildings and their occupants (consumers and households) contributed fully one-quarter of Singapores CO2 emissions in 200513 In 2005, buildings consumed 31% of end-use electricity; household consumption a further 18%14 Most of the electricity consumed during operation was from air-conditioners; it is expected that, with temperatures rising, air-conditioner usage will increase Approximately 4 million sqm of new buildings are constructed annually Apartments comprise 97% of the housing stock; the remaining 3% is detached or semi-detached houses; 80% of all housing is public-sector

Low Carbon SG, Singapores Carbon Dioxide Emissions Per Capita and Carbon Intensity, May 2009; statistical data from the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources, NCCS and the Singapore Department of Statistics. 10 Low Carbon SG, Singapores Carbon Dioxide Emissions Per Capita and Carbon Intensity, May 2009; statistical data from the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources, NCCS and the Singapore Department of Statistics. 11 Low Carbon SG, Singapores Carbon Dioxide Emissions Per Capita and Carbon Intensity, May 2009; statistical data from the Ministry of Environment and Water Resources, NCCS and the Singapore Department of Statistics. 12 Unless otherwise specified, all statistics in this section are from World Green Building Council, 2010, Tackling Global Climate Change Meeting Local Priorities, pp. 35. 13 National Environment Agency, 2008, National Climate Change Strategy, pp. 21. 14 Lee, Chuan Seng, Singapore Green Building Council, 2010, Building Green The Singapore Way. 6 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

THE GREEN MARK SCHEME & SUPPORTING LEGISLATIONS

Launched in 2005 by the Building & Construction Authority (BCA), this flagship programme aims to drive Singapores construction industry towards more environment-friendly buildings and reduced carbon emissions. Instead of adopting LEED15 or equivalent standards, the BCA decided from the outset to develop Singapores own framework, reasoning that LEED and the like did not adequately consider the needs of buildings in the tropical environment, especially given extra air conditioning requirements16.

There is also a strategic advantage in developing a framework indigenously: Singapore is able to better calibrate its own balance in meeting both economic and environmental sustainability objectives. Adopting LEED would have rendered Singapore vulnerable to the imposition of externally determined standards that might counter the interests of business, whereas the GMS allows the government to be pragmatic.

The GMS is a points-based scheme to assess performance on energy and water efficiency, site/project development and management17, indoor environmental quality, environmental protection and innovation. The criteria cover both mitigation and adaptation measures; for example, energy efficiency includes improved air conditioner efficiency, renewable energy sources, and better O&M18, improved designs for natural ventilation and light, passive design, and reflective surfaces adaptive strategies to cope with inexorably rising temperatures. The GMS also rewards sustainable construction, encouraging recycled material use and more concrete-efficient designs.

GMS adoption is facilitated through a carrot and stick approach, a mix of incentives and regulations described in the following sections.

GMS INCENTIVES FOR NEW AND OLD BUILDINGS

Financial incentives and additional GFA 19 are used to encourage the development of new buildings under environment-friendly principles. Stringent land sales conditions have been set for new developments in selected strategic growth areas20.

15

Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design. To Green Marks credit BCA is more aggressive than LEED on energy efficiency; Green Mark places over 50% weight on energy efficiency, where LEED is at approximately 25%. 17 Building management and operation in the case of existing buildings. 18 Operations and maintenance. 19 Through the Green Mark Incentive Scheme for New Buildings (GMIS-NB) and the Green Mark Gross Floor Area Scheme (GM-GFA). 20 Marina Bay, Downtown Core, Jurong Gateway, Kallang Riverside and Paya Lebar Central. 7 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore
16

To promote environment-friendly practices for existing buildings, financial assistance is offered to offset the upfront costs involved in improving energy efficiency21. In total, S$100 million and S$20 million have been allocated for existing and new buildings respectively.

LEGISLATIONS SUPPORTING THE GREEN MARK SCHEME

The 2003 Building Control Act, amended to include the Building Control (Environmental Sustainability) Regulations of 2008, requires certain buildings to attain environmental sustainability standards equivalent to GMS ratings. The new regulations22 are applicable to: New buildings with GFA 2,000 sqm or more Additions or extensions to existing buildings that increase GFA by 2,000 sqm or more Major retrofitting of existing buildings with existing GFA of 2,000 sqm or more

Previously, the regulations focused on compliance with minimum energy efficiency standards. The new requirements are integrated into the building planning process. Qualified Persons (QPs)23 submitting the building plan must assess the building works under their charge, using the criteria and scoring methodology in the Environmental Sustainability Code24.

21

Through the Green Mark Incentive Scheme for Existing Buildings (GMIS-EB). The updated legislation went into effect in April 2008. 23 Or other appropriate practitioners. 24 http://www.bca.gov.sg/EnvSusLegislation/others/Env_Sus_Code2010.pdf . 8 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore
22

CRITICAL REVIEW & RECOMMENDATIONS

The GMS has undergone several revisions. The latest, Version 4.0, was released in December 2010. Recent changes include: Wider scope: The GMS has expanded to cover not just existing and new buildings, but parks25 and urban precincts26 as well. Higher standards: The minimum standards for GMS ratings have risen with each version. The GMS Certification (entry-level rating), generally requires energy efficiency improvements of 10-15%; proposals to increase this to 28% are under discussion27. Faster adoption: GMS adoption is being accelerated through revised regulations adopted in 2008 and the requirement to make GMS ratings compulsory for new public development.

The evolution of the GMS is in tandem with industry developments and the maturity of R&D efforts. For instance, one key improvement in Version 4.0 over Version 3.0 is the promotion of specific sustainable construction materials such as Recycled Concrete Aggregates (RCA) and Washed Copper Slag (WCS). This is clearly due to growing understanding and confidence in the usage of such materials in the construction industry in recent years. Thus, the GMS strike a practical balance in incorporating mature and proven solutions (which are cost-effective) against newer, less established ones (which may be more expensive).

On the whole, the GMS has achieved some measure of success, with a mid-2010 scorecard as follows: Singapore had 486 GMS-rated buildings, from 17 in 200528 Approximately 16.2 million m2 of GFA was GMS-rated About 8% of Singapores built environment was GMS-rated

25

In the form of the Green Mark for Parks programme launched by the URA in conjunction with NParks. The Green Mark for Districts programme, launched in 2009, has so far rated two green precinct developments at Punggol and the National University of Singapores UTown. 27 Neng, Jeffery, 2010, Greening Singapores Built Environment, BCA. 28 The CAGR is over 95%, though from a very small baseline. This includes all Green Mark ratings from Certification to Platinum. 9 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore
26

Figure 4: Gross Floor Area in Singapore covered by the BCA Green Mark Scheme

29

Notwithstanding this, some suggestions for further improvements are discussed below:

1. CLEARER ROADMAP TO 2030

The Government is targeting 80% existing building stock GMS Certified by 2030. Despite tightening regulations in 2008, it is unclear how and whether this target is achievable. It would be useful for the Government to set out a clearer road map that better articulates its strategy and projections. This could include interim targets so that the industry and the general public can clearly understand the progress and interim milestones.

2. MORE DIRECT LINKAGE WITH GHG REDUCTION

The GMS clearly focuses on reducing the environmental impact of the building and construction sector. However, the linkage with GHG reduction is not explicit. Looking ahead, the ongoing Climate Change discussions by the Conference of Parties would likely lead to mandatory GHG-reduction targets by countries. Singapore can prepare for this scenario by aligning its various sustainability initiatives towards monitoring and reporting GHG reductions. The impact of the GMS in GHG mitigation should be quantified and made transparent. Adopting an outcome-based approach will also sharpen the focus and direction of future improvements to the GMS.

29

BCA, 2010.
10 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

3. CLEARER ALIGNMENT ACROSS POLICY AREAS

Besides the GMS, there are many other building- and land use-related policies that affect the environment; some of them might have unintended effects. One obvious example that requires careful review is en-bloc redevelopment. Current land use policies implicitly encourage redevelopment of existing buildings for higher intensity (and greater economic returns) before they have outlived their physical utility. While the buildings that replace them may be more GHG-efficient, the redevelopment process itself causes more GHG emissions than the original building would have caused over its natural lifetime. A more balanced framework to evaluate the total costs and benefits of enbloc redevelopment, considering environmental factors, would be beneficial.

4. INNOVATIVE FINANCING MODELS

One of the most commonly cited barriers to the adoption of green buildings is the higher upfront costs in installing green features. While these features are expected to reduce operational costs, developers have concerns about the extended payback period and the uncertainty of operational savings. The mismatch between upfront costs and mid- to long-term payback can be addressed through innovative financing. The Singapore Government could facilitate the establishment of third party entities (companies or funds), that can invest in green development projects. Operational savings from such investments would accrue to these entities as income streams (i.e., investment returns). While this business model can bridge the funding gap, an appropriate policy framework must be established to protect the interests of stakeholders.

5. CONTINUOUS PERFORMANCE MONITORING

Presently, buildings are assessed for GMS rating at the application stage and thereafter reassessed every three years to maintain their accreditation. This can be problematic: If new buildings that received incentives based on their GMS rating were to fail the reassessment, how are the incentives previously granted, recovered? In particular, it would be impractical to withdraw the bonus GFA, which is incorporated into the physical structure of the buildings. The environmental performance of GMS-rated buildings could fall short of standards in the interim between assessments.

To address this, GMS-rated buildings can be assessed on a continuous basis. Specifically, to ensure real and measurable reduction of GHG emissions, the energy efficiency of GMS-rated buildings should be continuously monitored and benchmarked. Technology readily available in the market can be used.
11 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

GMS 4.0 has taken a significant step in this direction by mandating the monitoring of non-residential buildings using water-cooled chiller plants. There is scope to expand such real-time monitoring.

6. INCORPORATING DEMAND MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS

The effectiveness of green buildings in environmental sustainability ultimately depends on the behaviour of their occupants30. A GMS Platinum building may consume a large amount of resources if its occupants do not adopt sustainable practices.

Changing occupant behaviour requires a multi-faceted approach. One strategy is demand management through information technology. Traditionally, occupants have little knowledge of their consumption behaviour. Consumption of resources (e.g., electricity and water) is reported monthly, doing little to influence behaviour. The emergence of Smart Grid-related technologies such as smart meters that allow the occupant to monitor the usage of resources in real time, will aid in changing behaviour. The GMS could include award points for the adoption of demand management tools to influence occupant behaviour.

7. PUBLIC AWARENESS AND DEMAND FOR GREEN BUILDINGS

As awareness of sustainability issues grows among the general public, introducing mandatory eco-labelling of buildings is a timely step. The approach is already widespread for electricity-hungry household appliances like airconditioners and washing machines. The mandatory display of fuel efficiency of vehicles has, to some extent, influenced purchasing patterns among potential vehicle buyers.

Though the GMS were launched in 2005, public awareness is low. Since buildings form an important part of daily life, whether as homes or workspaces, it is logical to raise public awareness and support for green buildings. Over time, this would encourage buyers, tenants and other users to choose green buildings, providing an impetus for developers to incorporate green features as standard.

30

The expression occupants is used to denote users and tenants of the building, i.e., any persons who occupy the building whether permanently or temporarily.
12 BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

CONCLUSION
Climate change is one of the most complex long-term challenges we face today. For all nations, mitigation efforts impact policies on environment, economy and energy security. They are politically difficult. This is because the measures are costly but the benefits are not only uncertain but would accrue over the long term and then too for the global commons. Professor S Jayakumar Senior Minister & Coordinating Minister for Climate Change

Prof. S Jayakumar aptly sums up the challenges faced by policymakers worldwide in dealing with climate change. The trade-off between the upfront costs needed to address climate change and the long-term benefits is a complex one, further complicated by the international nature of climate change issues.

It is accepted that green buildings play a major role in improving energy efficiency and consequently reducing GHG emissions. The question is how strongly countries are prepared to push for green buildings, considering the upfront costs whether these are borne by the public or private sector.

The GMS is Singapores key policy instrument to encourage green buildings. Since its launch in 2005, it has undergone four iterations; its scope has expanded, its requirements are more stringent. What began as a voluntary, incentive-based scheme now has a more regulation-based approach. The shift clearly reflects a recalibration by Singapores policymakers, perhaps driven by a greater awareness of the direct impact of climate change on Singapore.

Detractors may argue that progress is too slow and that more should be done. Some might expect Singapore to take bolder steps or even assume a leadership position in addressing climate change. However, such expectations may be unrealistic, given the pragmatism of the Singapore Government. Ultimately, each country will find its own balance in addressing climate change, based on consideration and calculation of its national interests.

13

BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore

REFERENCES
1. Ministry of Trade and Industry, 2009, 2009 Economic Survey of Singapore 2. Ng, Wei-Shiuen & Mendelsohn, Robert, 2005, The Impact of Sea Level Rise on Singapore, Journal of Environment and Development Economics 3. Inter-Ministerial Committee on Sustainable Development, 2010, Report 4. World Green Building Council, 2010, Tacking Global Climate Change Meeting Local Priorities [Presentation] 5. National Environment Agency, 2010, Singapores Second National Communication 6. National Environment Agency, 2008, National Climate Change Strategy 7. Lee, Chuan Seng, 2010, Building Green The Singapore Way, Singapore Green Building Council [Presentation] 8. Building & Construction Authority, 2010, Singapore Environmental Sustainability Code 9. Neng, Jeffery, 2010, Greening Singapores Built Environment, Building & Construction Authority [Presentation] 10. Ho Bee Lan, 2009, A critical review of BCA Green Mark Scheme (Version 3) with particular reference to sustainable material usage, National University of Singapore 11. Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources, 2009, A Lively and Liveable Singapore Strategies For Sustainable Growth 12. Singapore Green Building Council, 2010, Will it pay to build green? Singapore as a green building hub 13. Building Construction Authority, 2010, Revised BCA Green Mark Criteria For New Buildings (Version 4.0) 14. www.bca.gov.sg 15. www.ura.gov.sg 16. www.hdb.gov.sg

14

BPS 5102 Group Assignment: The Green Mark Scheme in Singapore