Replies to Forum Letters
Today - Operational junction boxes to be properly installed, covered
EMA replied to Mr Lim Poh Seng’s letter regarding the exposed junction boxes outside a condominium along Bishan Road. EMA shared that all operational junction boxes are required to be properly installed and covered, to ensure they do not pose safety risks. The junction boxes have since been removed by the condominium’s managing agent.
Today - EMA: We provide information in a meaningful, timely manner
EMA replied to David Boey’s letter “From transparency to opacity” (28 Nov). EMA shared that a wide range of information on our website and the contents and format are reviewed regularly to ensure that they are relevant and informative. We will continue to review how information can be uploaded in a meaningful and timely manner.
We also explained that non-fuel component of the electricity tariff is pegged to the cost of the most efficient generating technology now in the market. As these costs vary at different time intervals, changes in non-fuel generating costs should be considered over a longer time period.
Today - Liberalisation has its benefits: EMA
Today published EMA’s reply to the letter “Anomalies in retail electricity market since liberalisation” (27 Sept), which asked about the benefits of liberalisation in the electricity market. EMA replied that natural gas-based production and more competition led to savings and greater choice. We also explained that if we had use steam plants, the electricity tariff today would be at least 15 per cent higher.
EMA also shared that it will continue to promote market competition to bring about greater benefits to consumers. This would include facilitating the entry of new players in the generation and retail markets, as well as the planting of new generation capacity when the liquefied natural gas terminal is ready in 2013. In addition, we are also studying the feasibility of introducing an electricity futures market here which will provide retailers and consumers with more options.
Changes in electricity tariff primarily driven by fuel cost movements
EMA replied to Mr David Boey’s letter on 25 Jul 2011 and explained that EMA pegs the non-fuel generating cost to the cost of the most efficient generating technology currently in the market. This has helped to mitigate the impact of the increase in global oil prices on consumers, by encouraging generation companies to invest in more efficient technology, which in turn, allows consumers to benefit from such efficiency gains. EMA highlighted that the bulk of the increase in electricity tariff this year was due to rising oil prices.
Factors do help cushion tariffs against oil price hikes
EMA replied to Mr David Boey's letter on 10 Mar 2011 and agreed that the rising Singapore dollar helps to cushion the impact of increasing oil prices. EMA also explained that competition in the Singapore electricity market had resulted in more efficient power generation and that this has resulted in a lower tariff. In addition, EMA shared that the non-fuel costs of power generation are reviewed and updated once every two years in accordance to international benchmarks. These factors have helped to cushion against the effects of rising oil prices on electricity tariffs.
EMA will evaluate benefits of IES project
EMA replied to Mr David Boey’s letter on 19 Nov 2010 and clarified that the cost-benefit balance of smart meters is changing over time. This is due to both the meters’ rapidly declining costs and its integral role in the IES. EMA also added that the pilot project will allow us to evaluate the benefits before deciding to roll out the smart meters on a large scale.