Iran crisis: Government reassurances should not blunt the need for Singapore to save energy

[SINGAPORE] When a country faces any sort of crisis, it is important for its leaders not to spark panic. In relatively sheltered Singapore, however, it may sometimes be harder to get citizens to understand the gravity of the situation.

Walking that line on Friday (Mar 20) was Minister-in-charge of Energy and Science and Technology Tan See Leng, when he laid out Singapore’s fuel resilience efforts. He also called for companies and individuals to conserve energy amid the ongoing Iran conflict.

He noted that Singapore’s supply of liquefied natural gas is diversified across many suppliers from all over the world, and its stockpiles can last for months. The government is prepared for “multiple contingencies” and scenarios, he added.

This very prudence and preparation, however, may have enabled citizens to rest a bit too easy – and may weaken any call to action.

Asked if the government is concerned about a potential fuel shortage, Dr Tan said the Iran crisis is a reminder of how energy is “always existential” for Singapore, adding: “It should be ingrained in us that energy conservation, first and foremost, is key.”

Yet, as he also observed, residents are used to easy access to electricity at the flick of a switch. It may be difficult to get them to recognise that energy is indeed a scarce resource.

Lacking experience

In Singapore, scarcity tends to be experienced at the individual level – as a function of income – rather than at the societal level for supply-related reasons. Concepts such as rationing feel as if they belong to a distant past.

Sudden shocks can close this psychological distance, as demonstrated by brief bouts of panic-buying during the Covid-19 pandemic. But for the most part, this country is not used to shortages.

This is a fortunate state to be in, but can also breed complacency and inertia.

As Dr Tan noted, even if the Iran conflict were to end tomorrow, the rebuilding of Qatar’s Ras Laffan facility may take three to five years. In other words, even if an acute shortage does not materialise, the global fuel supply chain may be under long-term pressure.

While Singapore works to shore up supply, demand-side efforts can boost resilience, too. Dr Tan called for precisely that, asking businesses and residents to help by reducing their energy consumption.

He listed simple everyday tweaks – switching to energy-efficient appliances, relying less on air-conditioning – as well as bigger changes such as installing solar panels or switching to electric vehicles.

Rising utility costs may push more price-conscious households to make such changes, if they have not already done so.

Those who can absorb the difference, however, may choose to pay instead of compromising on their lifestyle – and thus fail to do their part to lower the island’s energy needs.

When it comes to getting Singaporeans to change their behaviour in the face of potential threats, the government may be a victim of its own success.

So perhaps the usual combination of warnings and reassurance can afford to put less emphasis on the latter.

Indeed, on Friday, Dr Tan mixed a pinch of bitter truth into his reassurances about utility costs. The government is ready to roll out more support, he said, but also wants to ensure it has “dry powder... to use for when the situation gets worse”.

Similarly, he observed that even as the island stockpiles fuel, it faces the straightforward constraint of physical space.

Singaporeans may occasionally complain about the government’s perceived failure to tackle one problem or another – but that very behaviour is rooted in the belief that the government naturally has the ability to do so.

Without being alarmist or compromising such trust, it could be helpful to remind the public that there are limits to how well Singapore can prepare for a potential global fuel crisis. Dangers must feel real if they are to prompt meaningful changes.