Water Conservation Tax hard to Swallow
-
If i don't remember wrongly there were about 3000 households who were in arrears in their utilities bills in early 2000s. Had PUB not been overcharging us in water and electricity, these households might not be in debts. http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Online+Story/STIStory_403096.html ST Forum > Online Story Water conservation tax hard to swallow I REFER to last Saturday's letter ('Need for water conservation tax') by Mr Chan Yoon Kum, assistant chief executive of national water agency PUB, in response to my letter ('Shouldn't we pay less for consuming water?') on July 8. Mr Chan did not address the crux of my question, which was this: After many decades of conscientiously and successfully pursuing water conservation measures, is it necessary to continue using a hefty pricing mechanism to penalise consumers for some incremental reduction? What is the ideal limit of water consumption in our hot and humid climate without compromising basic hygiene that would convince the PUB to remove the water conservation tax and waterborne fees? According to a study in 2003, 'The water issue between Singapore and Malaysia: No solution in sight?', by Dr Lee Poh Onn, a Fellow of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore produced 1.3 million cubic m of water per day. The PUB revealed that by last year, the daily capacity had increased to more than 1.4 million cubic m, of which domestic households consumed half and the rest was sold for commercial revenues. The report quoted that our raw water processing cost was 25.3 cents per cubic m. Dr Lee summarised the production cost of imported water at 26 cents, Newater at 39 cents and desalination water at 78 cents (exchange rate of S$1 to RM$2.08 in 2003). By 2011, the PUB will be producing 1.33 million cubic m of water (0.68 million cubic m from catchments, 0.4 million cubic m from desalination and 0.25 million cubic m of Newater). Based on the 2003 study, the average cost would be 41.5 cents per cubic m. With a 20 per cent increase, the cost is about 50 cents per cubic m. There is hardly any justification for responsible consumers to pay $2.21 per cubic m of water quoting Mr Chan's example. The water tariff in Johor Baru is 36 cents (90 Malaysian sen), while that in Hong Kong is HK$4.15 (80 Singapore cents) per cubic m. Is it logical or reasonable for Singaporeans to pay over four times the recovery cost of drinking water - a basic human need? While it is laudable that Singapore proudly and unselfishly helps solve the water dilemma by sharing its drinking water technology with the world, the country's citizens should also share the benefits of Singapore's water success. It took us a long time to get to where we are now; where we are self-sufficient with less imported water if needed on a sustainable basis. Tax revenues and sanitary fees should cover the maintenance cost of the sanitation system. Hence, the water conservation tax and waterborne fees have lost their intended purposes. They can only become an extra burden on citizens. Paul Chan
-
Based on the 2003 study, the average cost would be 41.5 cents per cubic m. With a 20 per cent increase, the cost is about 50 cents per cubic m.
There is hardly any justification for responsible consumers to pay $2.21 per cubic m of water quoting Mr Chan’s example. The water tariff in Johor Baru is 36 cents (90 Malaysian sen), while that in Hong Kong is HK$4.15 (80 Singapore cents) per cubic m.
Is it logical or reasonable for Singaporeans to pay over four times the recovery cost of drinking water – a basic human need?
No wonder cost of living in Singapore high and thus stressful life.
It is all due to the bastard policies of PAP.
-
Under the water agreements that are valid till Year 2061 and 2062 - Malaysian state of Johor is to provide Singapore with 350 million gallons of raw river water per day at a price of $0.007 per thousand gallons.
In turn, PUB is to resell a minimum of 17 million gallons per day of treated water to Johor at $0.13 per 1000 gallons.
If the PUB is selling treated water to Johor at 13 cents per thousand gallons - (when the cost of treating the water is 63 cents per thousand gallons), why is the PUB pricing the treated water higher to Singaporean consumers ?
There is no reason for the PUB to justify higher prices even if it is to cover the cost for the new treatment plants to recycle waste water into ‘NEWater,’ - as the NEWater is sold to the industrial users at $1.00 per cubic meter - with the cost of the treatment plant being amortized over a longer period of 20 years or more.
During the opening of the NEWater plant in Year 2007, PM LHL had then said that: "ramp up capacity has yielded significant operational efficiencies and economies of scale, and 'coupled with decrease in membrane costs in recent years, we have been able to lower the price of NEWater from the original price of $1.30 to $1.15 per cubic meter. From 1 April 2007, PUB will reduce the price of NEWater from $1.15 to $1.00 per cubic meter "
Surely, after the passing of two years, technological advances would have been continuously made, and capacities further increased with downstream projects coming on-line - all of which will lead to further increase in efficiencies and economies of scale that lead to further cost reductions ?
This price increase attempt is typical of the PAP Government to create an attractive environment for businesses - by lowering the costs of operations, which is achieved by spreading the costs on the larger population.
This smell of a sly attempt to increase revenues into the Government Treasury after losing US$100 Billion from the indiscretions made by GIC and Temasek Holdings in their wild overseas financial adventures during the period from 2006 through 2008.
-
My question is how much water does a family have to use for the water conversation tax to make a significant impact on living expenses.
My home has 4 adults, 2 working and 2 working from home with the water bill + conservation tax comes up to around 20 dollars.
Say we do reduced the water conservation tax, would it really help the poor families who already had low water usage to save money ? Or would families who could already well afford the tax be encouraged to waste more of it ?
My standpoint is from a conservation point of view, so i don't really support the idea of removing or even reducing the water conservation tax.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Under the water agreements that are valid till Year 2061 and 2062 - Malaysian state of Johor is to provide Singapore with 350 million gallons of raw river water per day at a price of $0.007 per thousand gallons.
In turn, PUB is to resell a minimum of 17 million gallons per day of treated water to Johor at $0.13 per 1000 gallons.
If the PUB is selling treated water to Johor at 13 cents per thousand gallons - (when the cost of treating the water is 63 cents per thousand gallons), why is the PUB pricing the treated water higher to Singaporean consumers ?
There is no reason for the PUB to justify higher prices even if it is to cover the cost for the new treatment plants to recycle waste water into ‘NEWater,’ - as the NEWater is sold to the industrial users at $1.00 per cubic meter - with the cost of the treatment plant being amortized over a longer period of 20 years or more.
During the opening of the NEWater plant in Year 2007, PM LHL had then said that: "ramp up capacity has yielded significant operational efficiencies and economies of scale, and 'coupled with decrease in membrane costs in recent years, we have been able to lower the price of NEWater from the original price of $1.30 to $1.15 per cubic meter. From 1 April 2007, PUB will reduce the price of NEWater from $1.15 to $1.00 per cubic meter "
Surely, after the passing of two years, technological advances would have been continuously made, and capacities further increased with downstream projects coming on-line - all of which will lead to further increase in efficiencies and economies of scale that lead to further cost reductions ?
This price increase attempt is typical of the PAP Government to create an attractive environment for businesses - by lowering the costs of operations, which is achieved by spreading the costs on the larger population.
This smell of a sly attempt to increase revenues into the Government Treasury after losing US$100 Billion from the indiscretions made by GIC and Temasek Holdings in their wild overseas financial adventures during the period from 2006 through 2008.
dun compare please, our situation and their situation is completely different. if you ask me to drink direct malaysia water from their tap, i have to think twice. -
angel:
get back to bed!
-
Originally posted by tERMINATOR20000000:
angel:
get back to bed!
i wanted to, but my laptop keep showing irrelevant stuff that i feel so much wanted to intervene,those below 20% so called poors or rich in knowledge but lazy to work should be living in 3 or 2 rooms flats, i believe the govt had subsidize alot on conservatives and utilities charges, govt will help them, but those who live in 5 rooms or condo or private apartment like me, please paid your bills and keep quiet. Unless you are a poor guy struggling to live in a condo or 5 rooms flat, then that is your problem, not govt problem. I am not saying i look down on those poor peoples, i respect them, but they have to respect themselves.
I believe that most who really complain alots are those in the middle class clusters, these peoples are people who are the high spender and outright their credits. In the end, they also want face and pride, buy condo, apartment, drive BM, merc lah...shop and eats at high class place..and then come and complain about water bills and all these conservative charges. Bull to them.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
i wanted to, but my laptop keep showing irrelevant stuff that i feel so much wanted to intervene,those below 20% so called poors or rich in knowledge but lazy to work should be living in 3 or 2 rooms flats, i believe the govt had subsidize alot on conservatives and utilities charges, govt will help them, but those who live in 5 rooms or condo or private apartment like me, please paid your bills and keep quiet. Unless you are a poor guy struggling to live in a condo or 5 rooms flat, then that is your problem, not govt problem. I am not saying i look down on those poor peoples, i respect them, but they have to respect themselves.
I believe that most who really complain alots are those in the middle class clusters, these peoples are people who are the high spender and outright their credits. In the end, they also want face and pride, buy condo, apartment, drive BM, merc lah...shop and eats at high class place..and then come and complain about water bills and all these conservative charges. Bull to them.
REally, u can go to hell and stay there permanently. Stop getting at the poor, middle class, who do u tink you are, damn shitty mamasan, papasan. Don't talk crap, you respect them, your writing here prove otherwise. -
Originally posted by Fantagf:
REally, u can go to hell and stay there permanently. Stop getting at the poor, middle class, who do u tink you are, damn shitty mamasan, papasan. Don't talk crap, you respect them, your writing here prove otherwise.
aiya, me also poor, later i go take my empty drum to collect rain water for washing clothes, wash my dogs, cars and floor. Save water hor. -
Originally posted by angel7030:
aiya, me also poor, later i go take my empty drum to collect rain water for washing clothes, wash my dogs, cars and floor. Save water hor.
shut your f gap. there is always such thing as retribution. Don't come talk crap now that you are also poor. What have the poor and middle income people in Singapore done to let you so against them? Just because they are not elites, they are not mamasan, papasan like yourself that is why you despise them , you against them.It is better for you to get lost for you contribute shit only to this forum.
The suitable forum for you is PAP website where you can give your best shot to bootlicking, adoring your lau hero, leehsienloong and all members of PAP.
You sek see or see!
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
shut your f gap. there is always such thing as retribution. Don't come talk crap now that you are also poor. What have the poor and middle income people in Singapore done to let you so against them? Just because they are not elites, they are not mamasan, papasan like yourself that is why you despise them , you against them.It is better for you to get lost for you contribute shit only to this forum.
The suitable forum for you is PAP website where you can give your best shot to bootlicking, adoring your lau hero, leehsienloong and all members of PAP.
You sek see or see!
my lau hero, not LHL lah, you anyhow long here and there, he LKY, without him, i may be selling papayas.Aunty, cool down lah, later get heart attack ar?? then i contribute $2
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
my lau hero, not LHL lah, you anyhow long here and there, he LKY, without him, i may be selling papayas.Aunty, cool down lah, later get heart attack ar?? then i contribute $2
Old granny mamasan, u are better off serving humsup men than coming here. Go bootlick LKY until u die ok. We don't need you here.You are so full of filth, yee yucks!!!!!
-
la la la la lalala
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
la la la la lalala
Go la, your humsup client waiting for you, old granny, old man mamasan, papasan! You are piece of filth! yee yucks -
Originally posted by angel7030:
dun compare please, our situation and their situation is completely different. if you ask me to drink direct malaysia water from their tap, i have to think twice.
What is so different between "our situation and their situation" ?Clean treated water is clean treated water - we are all Humans, and we need clean treated water.
The difference is why charge them at 13 cents per thousand gallons, when the cost for treatment is 64 cents per thousand gallons, and when Singaporeans are charged the full rate PLUS margins to recover infrastructural costs ?
What do you know about the water supply from the Malaysian tap that justify PUB to sell treated water at lower prices to the Malaysian ?
-
Originally posted by Stevenson101:
My question is how much water does a family have to use for the water conversation tax to make a significant impact on living expenses.
My home has 4 adults, 2 working and 2 working from home with the water bill + conservation tax comes up to around 20 dollars.
Say we do reduced the water conservation tax, would it really help the poor families who already had low water usage to save money ? Or would families who could already well afford the tax be encouraged to waste more of it ?
My standpoint is from a conservation point of view, so i don't really support the idea of removing or even reducing the water conservation tax.
If we assume that one household consist of four to five persons - the following amount of water usage can be estimated based on a per person per day basis:Consumption: 2 litres
Cooking: 3 litres
Laundry: 5 litres
General washing: 5 litres
Personal Hygiene: 25 litres
Toilet flushing: 30 litres
Total: 70 litres per person per day
Household of 4 will use 280 litres per day
Household of 5 will use 350 litres per day
Note that these are not absolute figures and are estimates based on assumptions of personal habits.
The total water used per month will be 8,400 litres or 8.4 cubic meter for a household of 4 persons; and 10,500 litres or 10.5 cubic meter for a household 5 persons.
What guideline should we use to determine what is to be the reasonable amount of water consumed per household ?
Obviously the lifestyle of different income groups will affect the amount of water used, and the higher the costs of the water charged - it will affect the amount of water used by the lower income group more than it does to the higher income group.
The next social costs to be considered is that if the lower income group should reduce the amount of water used to the extent that it affects hygiene standards - will it then increase the Healthcare costs to look after this group ?
-
Originally posted by pearlie27:
If i don’t remember wrongly there were about 3000 households who were in arrears in their utilities bills in early 2000s. Had PUB not been overcharging us in water and electricity, these households might not be in debts.
http://www.straitstimes.com/ST+Forum/Online+Sto…
ST Forum > Online Story
Water conservation tax hard to swallowI REFER to last Saturday’s letter (‘Need for water conservation tax’
by Mr Chan Yoon Kum, assistant chief executive of national water agency PUB, in response to my letter (‘Shouldn’t we pay less for consuming water?’ on July 8.Mr Chan did not address the crux of my question, which was this: After many decades of conscientiously and successfully pursuing water conservation measures, is it necessary to continue using a hefty pricing mechanism to penalise consumers for some incremental reduction?
What is the ideal limit of water consumption in our hot and humid climate without compromising basic hygiene that would convince the PUB to remove the water conservation tax and waterborne fees?
According to a study in 2003, ‘The water issue between Singapore and Malaysia: No solution in sight?’, by Dr Lee Poh Onn, a Fellow of the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore produced 1.3 million cubic m of water per day. The PUB revealed that by last year, the daily capacity had increased to more than 1.4 million cubic m, of which domestic households consumed half and the rest was sold for commercial revenues.
The report quoted that our raw water processing cost was 25.3 cents per cubic m. Dr Lee summarised the production cost of imported water at 26 cents, Newater at 39 cents and desalination water at 78 cents (exchange rate of S$1 to RM$2.08 in 2003).
By 2011, the PUB will be producing 1.33 million cubic m of water (0.68 million cubic m from catchments, 0.4 million cubic m from desalination and 0.25 million cubic m of Newater).
Based on the 2003 study, the average cost would be 41.5 cents per cubic m. With a 20 per cent increase, the cost is about 50 cents per cubic m.
There is hardly any justification for responsible consumers to pay $2.21 per cubic m of water quoting Mr Chan’s example. The water tariff in Johor Baru is 36 cents (90 Malaysian sen), while that in Hong Kong is HK$4.15 (80 Singapore cents) per cubic m.
Is it logical or reasonable for Singaporeans to pay over four times the recovery cost of drinking water – a basic human need?
While it is laudable that Singapore proudly and unselfishly helps solve the water dilemma by sharing its drinking water technology with the world, the country’s citizens should also share the benefits of Singapore’s water success.
It took us a long time to get to where we are now; where we are self-sufficient with less imported water if needed on a sustainable basis.
Tax revenues and sanitary fees should cover the maintenance cost of the sanitation system. Hence, the water conservation tax and waterborne fees have lost their intended purposes. They can only become an extra burden on citizens.
Paul Chan
Hi TS
It all makes sense if you consider Singapore to be a 3rd world nation where there is a shortage of water like Afrika. Thats why water is so expensive here
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
What is so different between "our situation and their situation" ?Clean treated water is clean treated water - we are all Humans, and we need clean treated water.
The difference is why charge them at 13 cents per thousand gallons, when the cost for treatment is 64 cents per thousand gallons, and when Singaporeans are charged the full rate PLUS margins to recover infrastructural costs ?
What do you know about the water supply from the Malaysian tap that justify PUB to sell treated water at lower prices to the Malaysian ?
how clean are they treated?? thru a bit of filter or more filters and process like us?? you better go and look at Malaysia and indonesia situation, some dun even filter at all, they got mountain and rain water, we got sea water only leh, what you expect?? -
Originally posted by angel7030:
how clean are they treated?? thru a bit of filter or more filters and process like us?? you better go and look at Malaysia and indonesia situation, some dun even filter at all, they got mountain and rain water, we got sea water only leh, what you expect??Your cynical views about the water conditions in Malaysia and Indonesia shows the typical ugly Singaporean habit of believing that all things Singapore is more superior than anyone can possibly have - and make comparisons with a condescending view.
If the Malaysians and Indonesians have such bad water quality, there will be constant headlines that shout of high incidences of water-borne diseases - have you read any such occurrences that appear repeatedly through the years ?
Only stupid people like you will listen and believe LKY's guarantee that it is safe to drink directly from the tap when in Singapore.
Do you seriously believe that he will pay for your medical bills if you get sick when drinking directly from the tap ?
If you are living in the HDB, do you know that the treated clean water from the PUB is pumped into the roof top storage tanks before being distributed to the individual units in the HDB block ?
No-one knows what is inside the water tank, and if you will take the trouble to pass the water through any kind of filter - (even a fabric bag at the tap) - you will notice a layer of brown muck forming within a week.
Even for private home dwellers, can anyone be assured that the main or subsidiary water pipe lines have got no foreign matters entering the supply pipes ?
Do you think that the rivers that flow from the mountains and rain water will bring enough water to every villages, towns and cities in Malaysia and Indonesia ?
As matters stand, the Klang Valley in Selangor is already facing water shortages during the dry periods every year.
Very soon they will also have to follow our way in processing NEWater - even as they plan to invest in an underground diversion of the Perak River to supply water to the state of Selangor.
Singapore continue to depend on Malaysia for 50 percent of our water needs until the present Water Agreements run out in 2061 and 2062.
At present, even as the island is surrounded by sea, only about 10 percent of our water supply is from the sea - due to the high costs involved to convert sea water into potable water; while it is planned for NEWater to supply 30 percent of future needs.
It is safer for you to stay in your Bar, and drink what you are familiar with.
-
Originally posted by Atobe:
Your cynical views about the water conditions in Malaysia and Indonesia shows the typical ugly Singaporean habit of believing that all things Singapore is more superior than anyone can possibly have - and make comparisons with a condescending view.
If the Malaysians and Indonesians have such bad water quality, there will be constant headlines that shout of high incidences of water-borne diseases - have you read any such occurrences that appear repeatedly through the years ?
Only stupid people like you will listen and believe LKY's guarantee that it is safe to drink directly from the tap when in Singapore.
Do you seriously believe that he will pay for your medical bills if you get sick when drinking directly from the tap ?
If you are living in the HDB, do you know that the treated clean water from the PUB is pumped into the roof top storage tanks before being distributed to the individual units in the HDB block ?
No-one knows what is inside the water tank, and if you will take the trouble to pass the water through any kind of filter - (even a fabric bag at the tap) - you will notice a layer of brown muck forming within a week.
Even for private home dwellers, can anyone be assured that the main or subsidiary water pipe lines have got no foreign matters entering the supply pipes ?
Do you think that the rivers that flow from the mountains and rain water will bring enough water to every villages, towns and cities in Malaysia and Indonesia ?
As matters stand, the Klang Valley in Selangor is already facing water shortages during the dry periods every year.
Very soon they will also have to follow our way in processing NEWater - even as they plan to invest in an underground diversion of the Perak River to supply water to the state of Selangor.
Singapore continue to depend on Malaysia for 50 percent of our water needs until the present Water Agreements run out in 2061 and 2062.
At present, even as the island is surrounded by sea, only about 10 percent of our water supply is from the sea - due to the high costs involved to convert sea water into potable water; while it is planned for NEWater to supply 30 percent of future needs.
It is safer for you to stay in your Bar, and drink what you are familiar with.
woei uncle,
if you go malaysia and indonesia hotels, they will write there that tap water is not drinkable, please boil before drinking. But if you stay in Singapore hotels, you can drink it.
Even my bf in NS drink tap water, whereas went in went for joint training with indo or malaysia, they have to boil the water or use disinfection pills to kill germs.
This show that our water is better in quality and that command a price. I drink tap water too, really, but with a filter in my tap, why need to boil?
And also i collect rain water in drums at my house outside garden and pouch for our gardening, washing clothes and house cleaning.
By 2061, do you think we still use 10% of sea water??? I think we will have the capacity to use 100% of sea water liao.
-
Originally posted by PedoBear:
Hi TS
It all makes sense if you consider Singapore to be a 3rd world nation where there is a shortage of water like Afrika. Thats why water is so expensive here
Please take a look at HongKong. Don't always bring in Malaysia, Indonesia and Africa countries and compare to Singapore...Why HongKong water is cheaper? Don't tell me HongKong water not clean.
-
Originally posted by zenden9:
Please take a look at HongKong. Don't always bring in Malaysia, Indonesia and Africa countries and compare to Singapore...Why HongKong water is cheaper? Don't tell me HongKong water not clean.
Ya lor, should compare apple to apple. Hong KOng on same par with Singapore. Moreover, govt of Hong Kong not getting overpaid the highest salary in the world to provide cheap water.hahahaha
-
Originally posted by Fantagf:
Ya lor, should compare apple to apple. Hong KOng on same par with Singapore. Moreover, govt of Hong Kong not getting overpaid the highest salary in the world to provide cheap water.hahahaha
ha ha ha siao liao...hongkong same par with singapore...ha ha ha..siao liao..talk cork.com.sg -
Originally posted by angel7030:
woei uncle,
if you go malaysia and indonesia hotels, they will write there that tap water is not drinkable, please boil before drinking. But if you stay in Singapore hotels, you can drink it.
Hello auntie,
Have you stayed in a hotel in Indonesia and taken the trouble to find out where they get their water supply, or did you just listen to conversation from the people visiting your bar and talk when they are drunk ?
Do you know that many hotels in Indonesia take their water supply from the ground and not all are connected to any kind of water supply pipe grid ?
Even my bf in NS drink tap water, whereas went in went for joint training with indo or malaysia, they have to boil the water or use disinfection pills to kill germs.
Do you think that your "bf" and all the NSF training in Indo and Malaysia have the time to boil the water ?
Do you know that your "bf" - and all undergoing NS - are trained to fill and drink from the waterbottles that are filled with the raw water straight from any of our resevoirs - which is before treatment, and a chlorine tablet is also placed into the bottle ?
This show that our water is better in quality and that command a price. I drink tap water too, really, but with a filter in my tap, why need to boil?
Only you will accept that Singaporeans are charged higher price, when our PUB is allowed to sell to the Johor State Government 13 cents per thousand gallons - which is below the treatment cost of 60 cents per thousand gallons.
Do you seriously believe that there is no consequence from constantly drinking straight from the tap ?
You can be forgiven if you fail to note the odd behaviour in forcing yourself to "die-die" must check into this Speaker's Corner, and make a daily ritual to pollute all the threads with your inconsequential remarks every morning after you close the Bar - irregardless of your worn out state.
And also i collect rain water in drums at my house outside garden and pouch for our gardening, washing clothes and house cleaning.
By 2061, do you think we still use 10% of sea water??? I think we will have the capacity to use 100% of sea water liao.
Only you will believe that 100% of sea water can be used - do you even know how much 100% of sea water is ?
No wonder the ice cap is melting.
-
Originally posted by angel7030:
woei uncle,
if you go malaysia and indonesia hotels, they will write there that tap water is not drinkable, please boil before drinking. But if you stay in Singapore hotels, you can drink it.
Even my bf in NS drink tap water, whereas went in went for joint training with indo or malaysia, they have to boil the water or use disinfection pills to kill germs.
This show that our water is better in quality and that command a price. I drink tap water too, really, but with a filter in my tap, why need to boil?
And also i collect rain water in drums at my house outside garden and pouch for our gardening, washing clothes and house cleaning.
By 2061, do you think we still use 10% of sea water??? I think we will have the capacity to use 100% of sea water liao.
Talk crap,bullshit, you longinchjohn. I have been to hotels in Malaysia and Indonesia nothing you said happen okie. You think people here 3 yr old to be deceived by u.
U are better off being a papasan, mamasan !!