Energy Conservation (Amendment) Bill

Order for Second Reading read.

5.27 pm

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Baey Yam Keng) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Energy Conservation (Amendment) Bill, or EC Bill in short, seeks to introduce minimum energy efficiency standards (MEES) for all existing energy systems in industrial facilities.

Mr Speaker, the world is undergoing a major energy transition in the global effort to reach net zero, in order to avert the worst effects of climate change. At the first global stocktake at the 28th Conference of the Parties (COP28) last year, the international community collectively moved from setting broad-based net zero targets to taking definitive steps towards implementing decarbonisation solutions. Nearly 200 countries agreed on the need to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems. Singapore contributed actively at the global stocktake. We supported the COP28 Presidency to achieve key outcomes such as accelerating the energy transition in this critical decade, including calling on Parties to recognise that energy efficiency improvement is a critical pathway to decarbonisation. One of the key initiatives was the Global Renewables and Energy Efficiency Pledge, which called on countries to collectively triple renewable energy capacity and double the global annual average rate of energy efficiency improvements by 2030.

Singapore is doing our part in this energy transition, as outlined in our "4 switches" approach, which comprises solar energy, power imports, low-carbon alternatives and natural gas. We have been accelerating green energy transition by scaling up the deployment of renewable energy projects and achieved an installed solar capacity of 1.35 giga-watt peak (GWp), a fivefold increase from 2019. This puts us on track to meeting our solar deployment target of at least two GWp by 2030. Two months ago, we raised our low-carbon electricity imports target from four GW to around six GW by 2035. We are also investing in research and development activities in emerging low-carbon fuel technologies, such as hydrogen.

Even as Singapore deploys more solar power, imports low-carbon electricity and develops alternative energy sources, natural gas will continue to play an important role in our energy mix. The recent launch of the second liquified natural gas (LNG) terminal at Jurong Port will help Singapore meet the growing demand, diversify our sources and enhance our local infrastructure to support the importation of natural gas.

Besides these efforts, energy efficiency is also key to our drive towards sustainability while safeguarding our energy security and ensuring cost competitiveness. As a small and open economy, Singapore imports almost all of our energy supply. This makes it doubly important that Singapore raises our energy efficiency and makes every watt of energy count. Singapore's energy intensity is comparable to the 11th lowest among 38 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OCED) countries, according to the latest data from the International Energy Agency. With higher energy efficiency, our companies do not have to compromise on their economic productivity even if they do not increase their energy demand. We must press on to do more with less and to seize every opportunity to improve our energy efficiency.

Today, Singapore drives energy efficiency through a combination of policy instruments and incentives.

First, the cost of electricity is not subsidised. Pricing energy correctly incentivises businesses and consumers to use electricity efficiently and avoid wasteful consumption.

Second, the carbon tax makes businesses internalise the cost of carbon emissions in their consumption and investment decisions. The pricing of carbon spurs companies to reduce their emissions and energy consumption in a way that makes the most economic sense to them. Carbon tax revenue is then used to support efforts to transition to a decarbonised green economy.

Third, incentive schemes, such as the Resource Efficiency Grant for Emissions (REG(E)) and Energy Efficiency Grant (EEG) are available to help big and small companies undertake energy efficiency improvement projects and implement energy-efficient equipment. These help companies reap energy savings and improve their bottom line.

Fourth, we put in place regulatory frameworks that promote energy efficiency in various sectors. For example, in the building sector, the Building Control Act was recently enhanced to introduce the new Mandatory Energy Improvement regime, where owners of energy-intensive buildings will be required to conduct an energy audit and implement energy efficiency improvement measures to reduce their energy consumption. To help our households become more energy-efficient and reap energy cost savings, we implemented mandatory energy labels and minimum energy performance standards. Since introducing the labels and standards, the average energy efficiency of energy-intensive household equipment, such as air-conditioners and refrigerators, has improved by 59% and 42% respectively.

The Energy Conservation Act or ECA, is our regulatory tool to enhance industrial energy efficiency. The ECA was enacted in 2012 to introduce mandatory energy management practices for energy-intensive industrial facilities. These are facilities with energy usage threshold exceeding 54 terajoules in two out of the three preceding calendar years. Presently, there are 237 of such facilities, covering about 80% of Singapore's primary energy consumption. The ECA was then enhanced in 2017 to strengthen energy management practices and introduce minimum energy efficiency standards (MEES) for industry systems.

Today, the ECA covers every stage of an industrial facility's life, including design and initiation, operations and maintenance, as well as any subsequent expansion plans. Companies are required to review their energy performance from the onset, meet specific energy efficiency requirements for systems and equipment, report their energy performances and continually explore opportunities to enhance energy efficiency.

Since the introduction of ECA in 2012, the industry has achieved an average energy savings of about 2,800 terajoules per year, which is enough to power approximately 175,000 HDB 4-room flats, equivalent to about $230 million of cost savings per year.

Mr Speaker, the EC Bill will build on these efforts and help us push ahead to improve energy efficiency in the decades ahead. The EC Bill will require all existing industrial facilities to comply with stipulated MEES for energy-consuming industry systems.

In enhancing the ECA in 2017, section 26B was introduced to stipulate MEES for energy-consuming industry systems. These MEES sought to target energy efficiency improvements at the systems level, as opposed to the equipment level. This encourages companies to take a holistic approach in optimising and improving the energy efficiency across their system as a whole, which will result in greater energy savings.

To ensure that the standards prescribed are commercially sensible for businesses, the National Environment Agency (NEA) also considers the payback period of these energy-efficient technologies and provides industries with ample lead time before the MEES requirements kick in. The detailed MEES requirements for chilled water system were developed after close consultation with the industry in 2018.

NEA announced the MEES for chilled water systems in December 2019. Based on data reported by companies under the ECA, chilled water systems, which are commonly used by industrial facilities for process or space cooling, account for approximately 16% of electricity consumed in industrial facilities. This makes chilled water systems the highest electricity-consuming common system in the industry.

Based on 2016 energy use reported by companies regulated under the ECA, over 70% of these systems were found to be operating at sub-optimal energy efficiency levels. The MEES for chilled water systems was then set as the energy efficiency benchmark for industry and provides guidance for industrial facilities on how to optimise their systems to achieve higher energy efficiency and cost savings.

We implemented the first phase of MEES for chilled water systems by requiring new industrial facilities operational on or after 1 December 2020 to conform to MEES. Incorporating energy-efficient chilled water systems from the outset reduces the environmental impact of operating a less efficient system throughout its lifespan. In addition, this allows facility owners to reap substantial cost savings. One example is Soitec Microelectronics Singapore, a wafer and semiconductor manufacturing company that has installed an energy-efficient chilled water system in their new building in 2022. This has helped Soitec Microelectronics save about S$320,000 per year from lower energy use and reduced its carbon emissions by 400 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalence annually. The requirement also helps new facilities avoid more expensive retrofitting and operational disruption, if they upgrade to more energy-efficient models down the road.

We are now ready to implement the second phase of MEES for chilled water systems by applying the requirements to existing energy-intensive industrial facilities, accounting for about 80% of Singapore's primary energy consumption. These facilities will need to conform to MEES by 1 December 2025. All remaining industrial facilities, which are less energy-intensive and not currently regulated under the ECA, will have a longer runway to conform by 1 December 2029 under Phase 3. By then, the chilled water systems installed in existing industrial facilities prior to the announcement in 2019 would be at least 10 years old. It would make economic sense to switch to more energy-efficient types since it will reach the system's end of life in a few years' time. It would be timely for the facility owners to carry out retrofit works to enhance their chilled water system to comply with MEES.

I am heartened that many of the existing facilities have seized the opportunity to meet MEES ahead of the compliance timeline of the second phase. Stats Chippac Pte Ltd, a semiconductor manufacturing company, is one such example. Stats Chippac saw the benefits that could be gained from the MEES requirements and has tapped on the REG(E) to upgrade its chilled water system. The upgrade has improved the energy performance of the chilled water system by 25%, resulting in cost savings of around S$1.5 million per year from lower energy use. The payback period for its investment was just five years, after factoring in the grant received, which is well within the 15-year lifespan of chilled water systems. This meant that Stats Chippac stands to save over $15 million in total by upgrading to a MEES-compliant chilled water system.

To help the industry offset the capital cost of retrofitting their chilled water system, companies can tap on existing Government schemes, such as the REG(E) and the EEG, before the mandatory requirements kick in. Large manufacturing companies can apply for Economic Development Board's REG(E) to adopt energy-efficient equipment or technologies, including retrofitting their chilled water system. Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) can tap on the EEG funds to offset the cost of complying with MEES for their chilled water system. They will receive a higher tier of support of up to 70%, capped at $350,000 under the EEG Advanced Tier.

Overall, the MEES for chilled water systems is estimated to help reduce energy consumption in industrial facilities by at least 245 GWh annually, equivalent to taking more than 21,000 cars off the road. The proposed amendments will also allow us to extend the MEES framework to existing ECA facilities for other energy-consuming systems which are currently under review. NEA will continue to adopt the consultative approach that was used to develop MEES for chilled water systems. We look forward to continuing the partnership with the industry to jointly unlock more opportunities to improve energy efficiency and reap energy and cost savings.

The Bill will also introduce two other housekeeping amendments to the existing ECA requirements.

One, development works under the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) Plan Lodgment scheme will be required to meet our Energy Efficiency Opportunities Assessment (EEOA) requirements. This is to ensure that such development works are held to the same requirements as the other new industrial facilities. Requiring Plan Lodgment cases to undergo EEOA at the planning stage helps to ensure that they are energy-efficient from the onset. This allows them to enjoy more energy cost savings in the long run and avoid costly retrofitting works in the future. To effect this, the requirement for development works to meet the EEOA in section 26A of the ECA will be expanded to include URA Plan Lodgment scheme cases.

Two, this Bill will lay the groundwork to require certified energy managers to endorse the Energy Management System and EEOA reports to improve the overall quality of the reports.

Mr Speaker, to conclude, the EC Bill will ensure that our energy efficiency remains the cornerstone for the sustainable future of our industry. Enhancing industrial energy efficiency is a win-win solution for both businesses and Singapore. Using less energy to do more will go a long way to reduce business costs, power up Singapore's energy security and help us meet our climate ambitions. With that, Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.

5.45 pm

Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, this Bill will expand the scope of energy conservation measures. It will extend minimum energy efficiency standards to more existing industrial systems and require more works under the URA Plan Lodgment scheme to undergo an energy efficiency opportunities assessment. I have three points of clarification to raise.

My first clarification is on the categories of individuals with duties under the ECA. Under ECA, every company is required to appoint energy managers. The new section 23A will also require a relevant person with operational control over any energy consuming systems to be registered. Duties and offences are prescribed for these individuals and relevant corporations. It is less clear what duties company directors and officers bear.

It is possible that company directors or officers may be liable if a registered corporation commits an offence with the consent or convenience of the director or officer. But this is not spelled out clearly in ECA. This leads to ambiguity over the responsibilities of directors and officers.

In other areas, such as workplace safety, the duties of directors and chief executives are clearly provided for. There is even a code of practice on chief executives and board of directors workplace safety and health (WSH) duties. On matters of sustainability and energy, the duties of company leaders are less clear. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary elaborate on the duties of company directors and officers when it comes to energy conservation measures under ECA?

My second point is on the long-stop date for report submission. Presently, a registrable corporation with a water-cooled tube water system installed is required to submit a first report by 1 December 2025, to show that its operating tube water system performance meets the MEES threshold and that its measurement and verification system is accurate.

According to NEA, existing industrial facilities that are not yet regulated under ECA will be required to conform to MEES and submit a first report by 1 December 2029. This is five years away. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share whether there are plans to stagger the timeline of report submissions by the various facilities over this five-year period? Prior to the first report submission before the long-stop date, what measures will be taken by NEA to encourage the other industrial facilities to meet and surpass the MEES?

My third and final point is on how the EEOA and MEES reports submitted to NEA are used to encourage improvements in energy performance. It is commendable that we are expanding the scope of reporting to more facilities. However, report submission is not the end in itself. The ultimate purpose of these reports is to spur improvements in energy performance.

NEA has shared that for MEES reports, NEA will review the annual average operating system performance and other key performance data of the tube water systems annually. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary explain what NEA will do with the findings of its review? Will these findings be communicated to companies or published on an aggregated industry-wide level so that companies can benchmark their performances?

More generally, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary share what follow-up steps are taken by the Ministry upon reviewing the EEOA and MEES reports submitted, to help companies achieve more efficiency in their energy use? Notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.

Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.

5.49 pm

Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill has significant implications for our nation's sustainability efforts. I support the intent of this Bill to enhance energy efficiency. However, I have several clarifications regarding its potential impact on our residents and local businesses.

First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the expanded registration requirements, ongoing monitoring and potential penalties raises concerns about their impact on small businesses. How will the Government support small businesses with limited resources to meet these new energy efficiency monitoring requirements? Will the Ministry consider implementing simplified reporting mechanisms tailored to their capacity? With penalties for non-compliance reaching $5,000, we must consider whether smaller players could be disproportionately affected compared to larger corporations.

For a small enterprise already struggling with rent and low profit margins, a $5,000 fine for minor lapse in energy reporting could wipe out their profits for a month. Meanwhile, a multinational corporation would barely notice such a penalty. This disparity feels unjust.

Additionally, how would the Ministry ensure that the registration process for these new registrable relevant persons is smooth and efficient? We need to avoid unnecessary administrative burdens on businesses. Offering grace periods and flexibility, especially for those with a proven history of compliance, would show a commitment to supporting those already making an effort.

Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, the requirement for existing systems to meet MEES presents a potential challenge. Retrofitting older facilities can be costly. Given that many local businesses may be using older systems, what specific financial assistance or incentives will be provided to help them upgrade and meet these new standards? How will the Government balance the immediate financial burden of retrofitting against the long-term benefits of energy savings, particularly for SMEs? Could this lead to unintended consequences, such as increased costs being passed down to consumers, especially in sectors like retail and food and beverage? This could further inflate living costs. Are there lessons and resources from past energy efficiency initiatives that can help develop a targeted support strategy for older facilities?

Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill's emphasis on energy managers and their role in ensuring compliance leads to more responsibility for these individuals. How will the Ministry ensure that training for energy managers is accessible to smaller firms, not just large enterprises? What measures are in place to prevent the concentration of expertise within larger corporations, which would marginalise smaller businesses? If energy management expertise becomes concentrated solely within large corporations, smaller businesses may fall behind in meeting the new requirements. This could lead to penalties and the loss of their competitive edge.

Moreover, the need to hire or train energy managers may inadvertently increase manpower costs for SMEs that are trying to tightly manage their overheads. For larger businesses, will this requirement make Singapore a less cost-effective location? Coupled with the expenses to comply with MEES requirements, could this drive towards sustainability hinder our economic attractiveness?

I propose a proactive approach to address this resource disparity. The Government should partner with community groups, local educational institutions and industry associations to develop and deliver accessible training programmes, specifically for smaller firms. Subsidised training, online resources and targeted mentorship are just a few examples of how we can empower our SMEs to meet these new challenges.

Furthermore, how will the Ministry ensure that the Director-General's powers to assess and monitor energy efficiency are exercised transparently and fairly? Clear guidelines and accountability are essential for building trust and ensuring compliance. The Ministry must clearly define the Director-General's powers, establish transparent assessment criteria and provide mechanisms for businesses to appeal decisions.

Fourth, Mr Speaker, Sir, raising awareness is paramount to help residents and businesses understand how these changes will affect them. A lack of awareness could lead to confusion and compliance challenges. Beyond merely disseminating information, we need to educate stakeholders about the reasons behind these changes. Highlighting the long-term environmental and financial advantages of energy conservation will promote greater support and motivate a true move towards sustainable practices.

What steps will be taken to ensure that all stakeholders, particularly smaller businesses, are well-informed about the new registration and reporting requirements? How can the Government cultivate a culture of energy conservation that goes beyond mere regulatory compliance, making a true community-led effort? Ongoing dialogue is essential for identifying challenges, addressing concerns and adapting our approach, as needed.

Regular public forums and feedback sessions with affected residents and businesses are critical to ensuring that these regulations remain relevant and effective. Moreover, how will we know if these regulations achieve their intended goals? The Ministry must establish clear metrics for measuring the impact of these changes on energy consumption, cost savings and environmental outcomes.

These results must be shared transparently with local communities, rather than being buried in Government reports. Regular public updates that engage local communities are essential for maintaining accountability and public trust.

In closing, Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to reiterate my support for the EC Bill and its goals. Nevertheless, it is important that we protect our local businesses, especially our SMEs, as we move towards a more sustainable future. To help achieve this, I recommend a few key actions.

First, we should simplify the reporting processes so that small businesses can easily meet the new energy efficiency requirements without facing overwhelming challenges.

Second, the Government needs to consider providing financial assistance to help these businesses upgrade their older systems to meet new standards without breaking the bank. We must also ensure that training programmes for energy management are accessible to smaller firms. This way, expertise does not just sit with larger companies and everyone has a chance to succeed.

In addition, the rules around the Director-General's oversight needs to be clear and fair, allowing businesses to appeal decisions, when necessary. It is also essential to maintain an ongoing conversation with residents and businesses. Regular public forums will help us identify any issue and make adjustments, as needed.

Finally, we should have clear ways to measure the impact of these new rules on energy use and savings, sharing those results openly with the community. Let us remember that energy efficiency should feel like a partnership, not a burden. We want our local businesses to feel empowered in their journey towards sustainability, not overwhelmed by new regulations. Together, we can create a strong community where everyone benefits from our commitment to a greener future. I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng.

5.57 pm

Mr Baey Yam Keng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng for their comments and support for the Bill. Let me address the issues that they have raised.

First, on capacity-building efforts for the industry. Mr Yip Hong Weng asked if small companies have access to capability-building programmes and services that could help them in the energy efficiency improvement efforts. I am pleased to share that there are several programmes available today that small companies can access.

One example is the Singapore Certified Energy Manager programme, which is co-administered by NEA and the Institution of Engineers Singapore. Since its introduction in 2008, this programme has equipped over 1,500 energy professionals with the technical skills and competencies to manage energy services within their organisation.

Another example is the Energy Efficiency Technology Centre (EETC), which is a collaboration between NEA and the Singapore Institute of Technology. Since its introduction in 2020, it has upskilled engineering students and existing practitioners in industrial energy efficiency. By providing low-cost energy assessment services, EETC also supports energy efficiency improvements at SMEs.

To date, over 40 SMEs and close to 500 professionals and students have benefited from EETC's services and programmes. For example, EETC has helped Fuisland Offset Printing (S) Pte Ltd, a printing company, to identify opportunities to reduce idle power usage and to address the inefficiencies of their printers. This saved Fuisland 24,000 kilowatt hour (kWh) annually. Fuisland is currently implementing other recommendations across the enterprise to enhance their overall energy efficiency.

Another example is Watson EP Industries Pte Ltd, a small manufacturing company which worked with EETC to assess their machinery performance and energy consumption more accurately and to identify energy efficiency improvement opportunities, such as upgrading their inefficient air conditioning units. This helps Watson save about 63,000 kWh annually, which translates to about $20,000 cost savings per year.

This brings me to my second point, on how the Government is supporting and engaging companies to enhance their energy efficiency. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about the funding support that is available to smaller companies, which may have limited resources. As mentioned in my opening speech, the Government has introduced funding support schemes to help big and small companies undertake energy efficiency improvement projects.

The EEG helps companies by co-funding investment in energy-efficient equipment. The EEG provides two tiers of support – a base tier to support up to $30,000 for pre-approved energy efficient equipment; and an advanced tier to support companies for larger investments that drive greater energy efficiency. SMEs receive a higher tier of support of up to 70%, capped at $350,000 under the EEG Advanced Tier.

Mr Yip asked if MEES requirements would result in higher costs for small companies. In most cases, it would not. In fact, companies stand to reap significant cost savings from energy efficiency improvements, especially with the Government's funding support. With the EEG, small companies can achieve a shorter payback period on their investments through the reduced capital costs and enjoy considerable cost savings from lower energy use during the lifespan of the equipment.

To illustrate, an SME that taps on the EEG to retrofit a chilled water system with a cooling load of 1,000 refrigeration tons would be able to reduce the investment's payback period by about 20% to two years. Thereafter, the SME will stand to enjoy savings of around $1 million every year from this more energy-efficient system.

Mr Louis Ng and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about efforts to engage the industry on the requirements under the ECA. Indeed, NEA has engaged the industry on energy efficiency improvements through multiple channels.

This includes working with trade associations and chambers to reach out to companies, particularly SMEs, to raise awareness of how they can make energy efficiency improvements and access funding support through schemes, such as the EEG. NEA also organises regular industry engagement sessions and puts out circulars to update the industry on the latest developments and upcoming regulatory requirements, ahead of their compliance timelines.

NEA adopts a targeted approach through one-on-one engagements with companies to help them understand their performance and identify areas for improvements. NEA shares the analysis of how the company's energy efficiency journey compares against the industrial average and encourages companies to adopt industry best practices. Together, these efforts support companies to take concrete steps to raise their energy efficiency and reduce business costs in the long run.

Third, on energy reports. Mr Louis Ng is right that the energy reports submitted by companies can help to spur energy efficiency improvement at various levels.

First, at the company-level. The process of preparing the reports enables companies to get facility-level insights, such as its energy performance and potential for energy efficiency improvement. NEA also provides support by reviewing each company's energy consumption and their energy efficiency improvement plans, ensuring that these plans are forward-looking, span the next one to five years and include at least one planned energy efficiency measure.

Second, at the industry-level. As I mentioned earlier, aggregated data from the reports is used to form the industry average on energy efficiency performance, which is then shared with companies to help them benchmark their own energy efficiency performance. NEA is also better able to assess the challenges faced by the industry in improving energy efficiency and assess whether current measures are translating into concrete energy efficiency improvement efforts.

Third, at the national level. NEA also has an interest in tracking the overall effectiveness of our energy efficiency measures, as Mr Yip alluded to. Insights from the energy use reports, together with the EEOA and MEES reports, inform the next bound of policymaking on further energy efficiency gains in industrial facilities. For instance, as I shared in my opening speech, the reports highlighted that the majority of the chilled water systems in industrial facilities were inefficient, which led to the introduction of MEES for chilled water systems. Moving forward, we are also gathering input on the feasibility of applying MEES to other common industrial energy-consuming systems.

Next, I will address questions on key responsibilities and processes under the ECA. Mr Louis Ng asked about the duties of company directors under the ECA. While company directors do not have specific responsibilities under the ECA, the Energy Conservation (Energy Management Practices) Regulations do prescribe specific responsibilities for the Chief Executive of the company.

Under the Regulations, the Chief Executive is the person principally responsible for the management and conduct of the business of the corporation. The Chief Executive is required to endorse the corporation's annual submissions to NEA, such as the annual energy use report, energy efficiency improvement plans and energy efficiency opportunities assessment report. In addition, the Chief Executive is required to provide a signed statement assuring the completeness and accuracy of information submitted for the status of registration of his corporation.

Mr Louis Ng also asked about the timeline for industrial facilities that are not regulated under the ECA to conform to MEES. As mentioned in my opening speech, this would fall under the third phase of MEES for chilled water systems, where we have catered for a longer lead time for this group of less energy intensive facilities to prepare for compliance by 1 December 2029. As such, there are no plans to stagger the timeline of report submission over the next five years.

Mr Yip Hon Weng sought clarifications on the energy efficiency reporting requirements for small companies that fall under the revised definition of "new venture" under the ECA. The submission of EEOA reports for new ventures is streamlined under the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) CORENET X platform, which is also used for the submission of their building plans. NEA is working with BCA to ensure that companies which have new ventures will be able to complete their EEOA obligations without any delay to the construction of these new ventures. NEA is engaging the companies at the early planning stages of their new ventures to help them understand the process and requirements of the EEOA.

Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked about the registration process of new "registrable relevant persons", which represent the companies required to comply with MEES. Registration is done on the Emissions Data Monitoring and Analysis portal that companies who have facilities regulated under the ECA are already familiar with. They would have used it for past registrations and submissions of their energy use reports. NEA will support new companies to familiarise them with the various administrative processes, if needed.

Finally, let me touch on how the ECA will be administered, including providing flexibility for companies that might have genuine difficulties in meeting certain requirements.

The ECA empowers the Director-General to enforce the MEES, including directing companies to carry out necessary measures to ensure that the prescribed system can meet the prescribed standards. The NEA Director-General exercises these powers fairly and transparently across the facilities regulated under the ECA. NEA has also developed Standard Operating Procedures to ensure that the ECA is implemented consistently and fairly across companies.

There are also flexibility provisions for companies that face genuine constraints in meeting the requirements of the ECA, which Mr Yip Hon Weng spoke about. Under section 31B, NEA has the power to exercise flexibility to help companies that are unable to meet the ECA requirements due to extenuating circumstances. Such companies may write in to NEA, which will then work with them to understand their challenges, assess the request on a case-by-case basis and, where appropriate, grant time extensions or conditional waivers.

I hope that these clarifications help Members better appreciate these prescriptions and regulations under ECA, which were intended to build essential capabilities within companies for better energy management, while having room to exercise discretion where needed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the EC Bill was first introduced in this House in 2012 to help our industrial facilities become more energy efficient. This is an important lever for Singapore to reduce our industrial greenhouse gas emissions. Over recent years, we have made significant strides towards a more sustainable future and enhanced our climate targets. Our ambitious net zero goal by 2050 requires a major energy transition. Enhancing our industrial energy efficiency today, is a necessary step to prepare Singapore for a sustainable tomorrow.

So, I call on all Members of the House to give your support to this Bill. With this, Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

6.11 pm

Mr Speaker: Mr Yip and Mr Ng, any further clarifications? No? Okay.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Baey Yam Keng].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.