Protecting next generations, cutting climate impact top reasons for supporting net zero: Poll
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
More than nine in 10 survey respondents indicated they took an interest in issues related to climate change.
PHOTO: ST FILE
Follow topic:
SINGAPORE – With the effects of climate change
These existential reasons for cutting carbon emissions ranked above those centred on the benefits of going green for Singapore’s economy – such as boosting economic growth, creating jobs and safeguarding the competitiveness of industries.
The results of the questionnaire by the National Climate Change Secretariat (NCCS) were released online on Jan 17, weeks before Singapore – alongside other countries – is to submit its 2035 climate targets to the UN.
Between October and November 2024, NCCS carried out a public consultation exercise on Singapore’s current decarbonisation plans to reach net zero by 2050.
The survey received 580 responses, with 96 per cent of respondents indicating they took an interest in issues related to climate change.
The majority of respondents were aged between 20 and 49.
They were asked about their views on a suite of decarbonisation solutions, personal behavioural changes they were willing to make to go green, and the transition to a low-carbon economy, among other things.
While they were largely supportive of decarbonisation solutions that the authorities have put in place or are exploring, the respondents were more critical of carbon credits
Commenting on the findings, Ms Melissa Low, a climate policy observer and research fellow at the NUS Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions, said the results of the survey could be a reflection of the mostly young demographic that participated in it, as they will bear the brunt of climate change impacts.
“Thus, it is not surprising that... the responses reflect the need for intergenerational equity, and for future generations to inherit a planet that is liveable,” she said.
Singapore had one of its warmest years on record in 2024, which only underscored the need to reduce the worst effects of a warming planet on themselves, Ms Low added.
On why economic reasons ranked slightly lower than the existential ones, she said: “I think for young Singaporeans, the immediate economic effects of decarbonisation may not be clear to them... They probably already experience or are aware of the green growth opportunities of sustainability and decarbonisation.”
In contrast, the results of a 2024 South-east Asia climate survey released in September showed that more people in the region were concerned about bread-and-butter issues such as food security, which they attributed to price hikes rather than climate change – despite the growing toll from extreme weather events.
More than 80 per cent of the respondents were supportive of a suite of emission-cutting measures, such as shifting to cleaner-energy vehicles, increasing industrial energy efficiency and ramping up solar energy use.
A lower 60 per cent backed carbon credits and carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies, mainly out of wariness about greenwashing, in which consumers are misled about sustainability, or environmentally unsound practices are masked.
They added that CCS should not be detrimental or cause environmental damage to the host countries’ storage sites, where carbon dioxide (CO2) is buried in a deep rock formation or beneath the seabed.
There are concerns that CO2 could leak from storage sites or habitats destroyed with the building of carbon storage facilities and pipelines.
Singapore lacks suitable geological storage sites for captured CO2, and has been looking into cross-border partnerships. An industry consortium here plans to develop a CCS project that can permanently store 2.5 million tonnes of CO2 a year by 2030.
Carbon credits are generated from projects aimed at reducing or removing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. Singapore is collaborating with more than 20 countries on carbon markets.
Carbon tax-liable companies in Singapore can eventually buy carbon credits from projects in partner countries to offset up to 5 per cent of their taxable emissions.
Some respondents said regulations should be imposed to ensure that the carbon credits used by Singapore are of high integrity and do not cause harm to the environment or people who rely on the land where carbon projects are carried out.
They added that companies should not be allowed to use carbon credits as a way to pay their way out of decarbonisation.
Some suggested that the carbon tax amount could increase and the emission threshold for taxable companies lowered. Now, only firms in Singapore that produce more than 25,000 tonnes of CO2 a year, such as those in the petrochemical and semiconductor sectors, have to pay the tax.
Currently, the tax is $25 per tonne of CO2, and it is set to be raised to $50 to $80 per tonne by 2030. But large emitters are granted “carbon tax relief” in the form of allowances to cope with the higher tax rate. Before 2024, the rate was $5 per tonne.
The respondents called for more transparency regarding how allowances are allocated, and stressed that the impact of the carbon tax should not be lessened with such allowances.
