NEWATER AND DESALINATED WATER

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan asked the Minister for the Environment (a) what are the targeted quantities and proportion of NEWater and desalinated water that will be produced for direct and/or indirect use by households and industries, by (i) 2011 when our first water agreement with Malaysia expires, and (ii) 2061 when our second water agreement with Malaysia expires; and (b) whether plans to produce NEWater and desalinated water as well as expand our water catchment areas will be speeded up so that we can be self sufficient in our water demands if the need arises.

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong asked the Minister for the Environment (a) whether Singapore is aiming towards 100% self-sufficiency in our water resources and, if so, (i) when will it be achieved and (ii) what will be the estimated cost of this water; (b) what is the reason for NEWater to be pumped back into the reservoirs where it will be subject to evaporation and loss, followed by another round of water treatment, thus raising cost; and (c) if he can confirm that Singaporeans are sold treated water at S$5.32 per 1000 gallon making it a whopping 445% markup from cost.

The Minister for the Environment (Mr Lim Swee Say): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer both Question Nos. 4 and 5 together because they are inter-related?

Mr Speaker: Yes.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Thank you, Sir. Mr Steve Chia asked whether Singapore is aiming towards 100% self-sufficiency in our water resources and, if so, when will this be achieved. Sir, currently, we have two sources of water supply, namely, water from our local catchments as well as untreated water from Johor under the 1961 and 1962 Water Agreements. As the two agreements will expire only in 2011 and 2061 respectively, the issue of self-sufficiency does not arise until 2061.

The question before us is therefore not so much one of how soon we can be self-sufficient in water supply. Rather, it is about whether we can become, firstly, more self-sufficient by 2011 when the 1961 agreement expires; and secondly, totally self-sufficient by 2061 when the 1962 agreement expires. And the answers to both these questions are: Yes, we can.

Dr Amy Khor asked whether the plans to increase the local supply can be speeded up just in case there is a need for us to be totally self-sufficient. Sir, PUB has already taken steps to strengthen our local water supply system. These include expanding the local catchments, launching NEWater for direct non-potable use in the industry and commercial buildings, and indirect potable use in our domestic sector. At the same time, PUB is also introducing desalted water under a water purchase agreement with the private sector by the year 2005.

Together, these three initiatives will more than make up for the supply of water from Johor under the 1961 agreement. After 2011, we will increase the amount of desalted water in our supply system now that the cost of desalted water has reached an affordable level. We will also produce more NEWater as it is not only cleaner than PUB water, but also cheaper than desalted water.

As stated by our Prime Minister at the launch of NEWater on 21st February, there is therefore no need to renew the 1961 Water Agreement when it expires in 2011. We can also be totally self-sufficient by 2061 when the 1962 Agreement expires, if there is no new water agreement with Malaysia on mutually beneficial terms.

Dr Amy Khor asked what are the targeted quantities and proportion of NEWater and desalinated water that will be produced by 2011 and 2061.

Under the Singapore Green Plan 2012, our projection is that NEWater and desalted water will account for 25% of total demand over the next 10 years. And this works out to about 100 mgd out of a projected total demand of 400 mgd by the year 2012.

By 2061, the quantities and proportions of NEWater and desalted water in our water supply system will depend on the overall supply and demand situations, as well as the relative costs of these two sources and that of other potential sources made possible by future advances in water purification technology. As of now, we expect the quantity of NEWater to be higher than desalted water because it is much less energy intensive and cheaper to produce.

Mr Steve Chia asked for the reason for NEWater to be pumped back into the reservoirs, thus raising cost. Mr Steve Chia is right to point out that indirect potable use of NEWater will cost more than if it is consumed directly. Even though NEWater is cleaner than PUB water and meets all international standards for potable use, we have decided to go along with the recommendation of the international expert panel to consume NEWater indirectly by mixing it with reservoir water. This is to follow the established practices in the United States for more than 25 years. We see no need for Singapore to set a new precedent.

However, this does not mean that we are not taking full advantage of the lower cost of NEWater. In view of the ultra-pure characteristics of NEWater, more than 80% of NEWater will be used in the industry and commercial buildings directly for non-potable use. Sir, in this way, we can still enjoy the cost advantage of NEWater for the industry and commercial buildings. And yet, at the same time, we can free up more PUB water for domestic use.

Mr Steve Chia asked what will be the estimated cost of water by the time we achieve self sufficiency. Sir, the cost of PUB water today is $1.17 per cubic metre plus 30% of Water Conservation Tax, giving a total price of $1.52 per cubic metre. The projection by PUB in 1997 was that we would have to increase the cost of water to $2 per cubic metre eventually, in view of the high cost of desalted water at that time. But, fortunately, with advances in water purification technology, desalted water today costs much less than what we projected five years ago. But more importantly, the introduction of NEWater has further lowered the high cost of additional supply of water in future. We therefore do not foresee the need to increase the price of water to $2 per cubic metre for some time yet.

Lastly, Mr Chia asked if Singaporeans are sold treated water at S$5.32 per 1,000 gallons making it a whopping 445% markup from cost. Sir, treated water is sold to Singaporeans at $1.17 per cubic metre, or about $5.32 per thousand gallons, as stated by Mr Steve Chia. However, I am not sure how Mr Steve Chia arrived at the figure of "445% markup from cost".

Sir, besides the costs of collecting raw water and processing it into treated water, PUB has to build and maintain an extensive reticulation system reaching out to every home, every factory and every building. PUB also has to invest in new collection facilities, additional production capacity and expanded delivery infrastructure to cater for future increases in demand. Let me assure this House that the aim of PUB is not only to produce enough drinking water to meet the needs of Singaporeans and Singapore, but also to keep the price of water at an affordable level to the best of its ability in a sustainable manner.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Sir, as we will be relying more and more on NEWater, can the Minister assure the House that there will be no long-term health effects on consumers? Can he assure us that PUB is fully satisfied?

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, I would like to thank Ms Irene Ng for raising the question. Sir, I am aware that in today's Today newspaper, there is an article on NEWater. Reading through the article, it leaves the impression that the long-term health effect of NEWater is yet to be established. Sir, I want to point out that this is not the case.

Sir, let me explain the situation in layman's terms. All over the world today, countries do introduce new sources of water supply. In every country, Singapore included, before any new source of water supply is introduced, there is an established requirement to conduct physical test, chemical test and microbiological test. The findings of these tests are complete, comprehensive and sufficient basis to establish the suitability for potable use of the new source of water supply. In the case of NEWater, over a period of two years, we had conducted thousands of tests - physical tests, chemical tests, microbiological tests - and it is clearly established beyond any doubt that NEWater is safe.

However, the article in Today seems to convey the point that, since there are two animal tests still underway, therefore we have not established the long-term health effect of NEWater. This is a wrong presentation of the situation. Such animal tests are conducted all over the world, not for the purpose of introducing new sources of water supply, but for the introduction of new drugs. Sir, any company or industry that wants to introduce new drugs will have to conduct animal tests, but not for the introduction of new sources of water supply.

Sir, you may then ask: if this is the case, why did PUB and NUS go ahead to conduct these two animal tests? Sir, let me put it this way. The article is right to say that we are being kiasu. We want to be so sure and safe that, even though all the tests needed have concluded clearly that NEWater is safe to drink, we want to make sure that, on an on-going basis, we will continue to monitor NEWater, just to be very safe. In case something unknown happens, at least we are in there to monitor the development and, if need be, take the necessary measures.

Let me assure this House that the safe potable use of NEWater is never in doubt. I was not at the interview. So I do not know whether Prof. Lee and Prof. Ong were either misquoted, or quoted out of context. But I leave it to the experts to respond to the article in the newspaper Today.

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, can the Minister explain the rationale by the international panel of experts on the recommendation to pump NEWater back to the reservoir? If it is not a good rationale, would we actually consider merging it after it is being treated so that you actually do not go through a second treatment and you can save cost?

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, Mr Steve Chia basically asked if NEWater is safe and why did the international expert panel recommend the indirect potable use and not direct potable use. Sir, the potable use of reclaimed water is not new. It has happened in some places in USA, for example, since 1972. So it is almost 30 years by now. In USA today, the consumption of reclaimed water has to satisfy two requirements. Firstly, the reclaimed water must be of potable standard, meaning it must be able to meet all international standards for potable use. It means the reclaimed water must be good enough for potable use on its own. Secondly, having established that this reclaimed water has met the potable standard, in USA today, they have stipulated that this reclaimed water should go through a process of naturalisation, meaning it is put into the reservoir, above ground or underground, and then treated again through conventional method before it is used for consumption.

Sir, in other words, what we are saying is that even though the NEWater plant in Singapore - using the words of the international experts - is the best of the best in the world today, even though the quality of NEWater is of the highest standard they know of, we still feel that, just to be prudent and cautious, we should follow established international practices, which is to let the reclaimed water go through a process of naturalisation in the reservoir before we treat it again for indirect potable use.

Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: May I ask the Minister if he can confirm that there have been tests conducted by countries overseas who have used NEWater in an indirect manner and that there are no long-term negative effects of such use?

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, we have gathered the international experts, people who are experienced in the area of water reclamation and who have done it for many years before to sit on our Expert Panel for NEWater. Take the case of USA, they have been doing that for the last 25-30 years. Today, you go to Orange County, or Upper Occoquan in North Virginia, it is quite clear that they have consumed reclaimed water in an indirect manner for the last 20-30 years and there is no sign at all of any long-term health effect.

Let me also add that anyone, including the reporter of Today's article, who still has any doubt about this should visit the NEWater Visitor Centre. The whole purpose of having the NEWater Visitor Centre is for members of the public to see for themselves and to convince themselves that NEWater indeed is safe and clean.

My favourite exhibit there is one that blows up the pore size of the reverse osmosis membrane by 100 million times. With the enlargement, the size of the pores of the membrane is now the size of a tennis ball. In that exhibit, it shows that pure water is the size of a ping-pong ball. As a result, a ping-pong ball can get through the reverse osmosis membrane. But in the case of an estrogenic compound, which could cause a change in the sex of a fish, it is the size of a football. Obviously, a football is much bigger than a tennis ball. So, no estrogenic compound is able to get through the reverse osmosis membrane. In the case of a virus, it is the size of a 3-ton truck, compared to the size of a tennis ball. In the case of bacteria, it is the size of a building.

So, if you go to the NEWater Visitor Centre, you can see clearly for yourself that NEWater is really clean and very safe. I want to repeat that we have established beyond any doubt that NEWater is clean and safe. Otherwise, we would not have introduced NEWater.

Dr Wang Kai Yuen: Sir, I would like to find out from the Minister, by the time we become self-sufficient in water supply, what would be the composition of the typical glass of water, in terms of rainwater, desalted water and NEWater. Of course, by then, it is unlikely that I would have a chance to taste that glass of water.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think Dr Wang asked a very interesting question. Assuming that post-2061 there is no new water agreement with Malaysia; assuming that there is no new technology, which is not likely to be the case; assuming that there are no other new sources of water supply; in effect, our four national water taps would have been reduced to only three, ie, local catchment, NEWater and desalted water. Based on PUB assessment, even if we are to be solely dependent on these three sources of supply alone, we will still be able to meet all our water requirements in the long-term and, at the same time, do it in an affordable manner.

Dr Wang asked what would be the projected mix for these three sources of water supply by then. Again, our assessment is that, firstly, we do not really have to use every drop of water again, again and again. In fact, all we have to do is to turn every drop of water into two drops of water. That would be enough for us to have a supply that is sufficient to meet our long-term requirements. Bearing in mind what I said earlier that more than 80% of the NEWater would be used directly for non-potable use in industrial and commercial buildings, for a glass of water coming out of the tap, we do not expect the contents of NEWater to be significantly higher than the 10% established in other countries. In the USA today, after 25 years, on the average, they are now achieving about 15-25% of water reclamation in terms of the contents of reclaimed water in the tap water. Based on our current projection, we do not have to come near to their practices. In other words, most of the water coming from the tap will still be water from the sky and the sea.

Mr Steve Chia Kiah Hong: Sir, in the naturalisation process, what would be estimated rate of loss due to evaporation in the reservoir when the water has been pumped back in? The second question is: since we are so kiasu in wanting to do so many tests, should we not be also a bit even more kiasu by waiting until the test results are out before we pump the NEWater back into the reservoir, rather than pumping it back in when we are still awaiting the results of the test? This is because the article did say that there is a long-term chronic toxicity and carcinogenic potential of the NEWater, which is an area of concern.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, Mr Chia's first question on evaporation, I am not able to answer it. It is a natural process. Water evaporates when the sun comes up! In any case, it goes up and comes down as rain. It is a closed loop.

Mr Steve Chia asked why not wait till the test results are out. Sir, it is very unfortunate that this article has created this doubt in the minds of the public, including Mr Chia. As I said, I was not at the interview. So, I leave it to the two experts to clarify with the reporter whether they did say that the long-term health effect has not been established. But, as I mentioned to you earlier, the international experts, in their report to the PUB, had in fact clearly concluded that NEWater is safe for potable use. This question of long-term health effect of NEWater was never a concern because it has been clearly established. It is unfortunate that the article has now created this doubt. As I said, the experts should clarify the issue so that the public would not be confused.

Mr Steve Chia asked, since we are so kiasu, why not wait till the test is concluded. Sir, today, there are many studies going on in the scientific community. Let us say, one study may be on the long term side effect of the sugar we take. Does it mean that the Government should now stop the sale of sugar in the marketplace? There are many studies on-going today saying that many things we eat, many things we drink, even the hamburgers that we eat in McDonald's, might have long-term implications. Does it mean that we should stop selling hamburgers, food and drinks? The answer is no, because, at the end of the day, the job of the research community is to continue to discover new knowledge that we do not know today. But just because they are pursuing new areas of research, it does not mean that we should now stop our life today, as we still need to survive.

Sir, let me assure this House again that the Government would not have proceeded with the introduction of NEWater if we were not fully confident that the safe consumption of NEWater was beyond any doubt. Let me once again encourage everyone to go ahead and drink our PUB tap water. We have said so before, and we say so again, that PUB's tap water is one of the best in the world today, and it is our intention to continue to maintain this standard. With the introduction of NEWater, the cleanness of PUB water has not only been maintained but has, to some extent, been enhanced.