Is climate change on Malaysia’s agenda?
I recently had the opportunity to spend a few weeks in Kuala Lumpur and given my interest on climate change issues, I was particularly interested to find out how the climate change agenda is being played out in Malaysia.
Malaysia ranked 52 in the 2009 Climate Change Performance Index, an instrument that evaluates and compares the climate protection performances of the 57 countries that are responsible for more than 90 percent of global energy-related CO2 emissions. In terms of energy use per capita Malaysia out surpasses other ASEAN countries such as Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, and Thailand. Malaysia’s consumption of natural resources rates amongst the highest in the region. On average a Malaysian uses 300 litres of water a day, double the recommendation by United Nations of 150 litres/day. In the most densely populated states, the river basins have reached their limit to maximize supply.
One sector that appears to be tackling these challenges is the building sector. Buildings and the built environment contribute significantly to green house gas emissions and hence the need for better designs that reduce the overall contribution of the sector to climate change. I was fortunate because I happened to be in Malaysia the week of the Green Building Forum organised by the Malaysia Institute of Architects. It was pleasantly surprising to hear such an honest discussion being had on the state of Malaysia’s efforts towards reducing energy consumption and the long way the country needs to go to better manage its natural resources in a sustainable manner.
The Forum had an excellent line up of speakers from both the engineering and architectural worlds that presented on the recently launched Green Building Index in Malaysia and other green technologies for building design. Malaysia’s Green Building Index (GBI), launched last month, was developed by Pertubuhan Akitek Malaysia (PAM) and the Association of Consulting Engineers Malaysia (ACEM). It is a profession-driven initiative to lead the Malaysian property industry towards becoming more ‘environment-friendly’. From its inception GBI has received the full support of Malaysia’s building and property players. It is intended to promote sustainability in the built environment and raise awareness among developers, architects, engineers, planners, designers, contractors and the public about environmental issues.
Green rating tools by their nature and role are very dependent upon location and environment and thus the local climate. A quick survey of existing green rating tools available in the world today will show all of them concentrated within the temperate climate zones. Some better known ones include UK’s BREEAM, USA’s LEED, Japan’s CASBEE and Australia’s GREENSTAR. Malaysia’s GBI is the only rating tool for the tropical zones other than Singapore Government’s GREENMARK. Whilst GREENMARK’s operational parameters are within the tropical climate, its scoring priorities are very much customized for the current state of Singapore where a lot of priority is given to energy and water efficiency scores. In addition its public transport network is also already in place and thus little priority is given to this in the ratings. Malaysia differs markedly in these areas and thus understandably rating priorities should be like-wise customized to suit – both the local climate and also the current state of the country’s development and existing resources.
The very existence of the Malaysia GBI is a very positive sign of more things to come. The rating system will provide opportunity for developers to design and construct sustainable buildings that can provide energy savings, water savings, a healthier indoor environment, better connectivity to public transport and the adoption of recycling and green landscaping for their projects. To tackle the transport problem, for instance, the residential tool includes criteria on urban transport. If the building is located close to a transport hub, it will receive points or alternatively the building owner should provide shuttle services to and from work. Providing cycling lanes for people to cycle to city areas results in further points.
To tackle the heat island effect, the rating encourages greening of buildings through landscaping and open spaces. Green roofs can contribute to 20-50 percent energy savings in a buildings energy use. The rating also encourages things like rain water harvesting and provides tools on how to calculate how much water can be collected and saved each year. It is likely that, in support of the new tool, there will be an increase in the number of events focused around raising awareness and sharing best practice.
Some examples of energy efficient and zero energy buildings already exist in Malaysia:
* The Malaysia Securities Commission Building received the ASEAN Energy Efficiency Building Award in 2001. It features passive designs like an atrium to maximise daylight, uses highly efficient air conditioners and lighting systems, and optimises energy consumption with a building automation system.
* The Low Energy Office (LEO) building of the Ministry of Energy, Water and Communications is the first government building to incorporate energy efficient features through an integrated building design process and computer simulation.
* Pusat Tenaga Malaysia (Malaysia Energy Centre) is the first Zero Energy Office (ZEO) building in Southeast Asia. The ZEO building is a pilot project and is the only such building in Malaysia that integrates energy efficiency and renewable energy in one working demonstrator building.
The term Zero Energy Office does not mean that the building does not require energy to operate. In principle, the amount of energy used by the building is counter-balanced by the amount of energy generated by its own renewable energy power generation system.
Likewise concepts such as zero carbon buildings were explored at the Green Building Forum, which go beyond simply looking at energy use and operations. An energy efficient building is not necessarily a ‘green’ building. Green buildings also look at materials and resource use. With zero carbon buildings energy is translated to a carbon metric and developers start to look beyond operations and consider lifecycle analysis of embedded carbon throughout the building and operations processes. Examples were given from developments in Australia and China, but unfortunately no local ones. A comment from one participant expressed the need for better knowledge and sharing on things like carbon auditing in Malaysia. There is clearly some way to go before the discussion moves to carbon measurement and low carbon strategies.
Despite a handful of good practice examples in Malaysia the reality remains that the average building in Malaysia consumes more than 250 kWh/m2 of energy per year. A limited number of buildings have building energy indexes of less than 150 kWh/m2/yr. This should be reason for some concern to building owners as it has been estimated that Malaysia will become a net importer of energy in 2015 and the likely consequence of this will be no more subsidizing of petrol and fuel.
In terms of some government driven initiatives, the Five-Fuel Diversification Strategy (2001) introduced a fifth element under the government’s energy strategy which now includes non-hydro renewable energy (RE) alongside oil, gas, coal and hydro. The renewable energy focus to date has been on biomass, especially from palm oil and wood wastes. Being one of the largest palm oil producers in the world, Malaysia has abundant sources of palm oil biomass. Other sources of biomass include wood waste, rice husk and municipal solid waste. In the Ninth Malaysia Plan (which is the current 5 year national plan) the target of contribution towards the total electricity generation mix from renewable energy is 10% by 2010 (350 MW).
The government has conducted feasibility studies on power stations using biomass and co-generation technology and has a number of other projects underway, including a Solar Photovoltaic Power Generating Project. Perhaps one of the more well know initiatives implemented by the Malaysia Energy Centre (PTM) was a 4-year UNDP-GEF project entitled the Malaysia Industrial Energy Efficiency Improvement Project (IEEIP) to remove barriers to energy efficiency and energy conservation (EE&EC) in the Malaysian industrial sector. A number of publications and guidelines are now available for industries including energy efficiency and conservation guidelines and energy audit guidelines.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, Malaysia supports the implementation of projects which lead to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. To encourage Malaysian companies’ participation in Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects, income derived from trading of CER certificates will be given tax exemption.
More recently a Cabinet Committee on Climate Change chaired by the Prime Minister has been established to encourage action on climate change across ministries, but this is yet to meet. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) in collaboration with the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, is currently conducting a policy study on climate change, with a view to formulate a national policy for Malaysia. This is to ensure holistic responses to climate change challenges and the study has adopted broad stakeholder participation and consultative processes. At present the draft policy is undergoing the fourth phase of stakeholder scrutiny, prior to its finalisation for adoption by the Cabinet Committee on Climate Change. With regard to future climate projection the National Hydraulic Institute of Malaysia (NAHRIM), which falls under NRE, is studying the possible future changes to the hydrological regime of the Peninsula. NAHRIM is also the Asia-Pacific Water Forum’s regional water knowledge hub for water and climate change adaptation.
There are also plans for climate change to be incorporated into the 10th Malaysia Plan, which will take into effect in 2011.
The agricultural sector, one of the areas that will be hardest hit by changes in climate, appears to be starting to engage more in mitigation and adaptation discussions. The second National Conference on Agro-Environment organised by the Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute (MARDI) was held in April this year. The overarching theme of the conference was ‘Agro-environment: Adapting to climate change uncertainties through sustainable agriculture’, yet whether the business community was well represented remains unknown. The palm oil industry in Malaysia has seen a small number of leading companies start to report on climate change issues including efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in their production processes and developing CDM projects. In the airline industry, Malaysian Airlines (MAS) in collaboration with MNRE and The Forest Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM) set up a voluntary carbon offset scheme in June 2008. Travellers logging on to MAS booking system can type in the origin and destination of their flight and calculate how much carbon dioxide they are responsible for releasing into the environment. The proceeds from the offset scheme will ensure integrated management of a peat swamp area in South-East Pahang.
Unfortunately, as is the case in Hong Kong and other parts of Asia, such good examples remain a minority of a few large companies taking leadership in the area of climate change.
A one-day seminar held in Malaysia this year and organised by an independent, nonprofit organization called the Centre for Environment, Technology and Development discussed issues related to the Copenhagen COP15 meeting on climate change that will be taking place at the end of 2009. A public briefing was also held recently to report on the outcomes of the Asian Development Bank’s study: The Economics of Climate Change in Southeast Asia: A Regional Review, which confirmed that the region is highly vulnerable to climate change. So it appears that discussions and related events are on the increase in Malaysia.
Reverting back to the Green Building Forum that took place last week, it is encouraging that the professional community is taking the drive on rating tools, standards and discussions around green build in Malaysia and at the same time working through private and government sectors to get their message across. A number of professional bodies such as the Institution of Engineers Malaysia (IEM), Malaysian Chapter of American Society of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning Engineers (MASHRAE), the Association of Consulting Engineers Malaysia (ACEM); and the Malaysia Institute of Architects (PAM) are actively starting to encourage energy efficiency measures and sustainable resource use amongst their members.
Yet, at the end of the day commercial pressure and market competition tends to drive ratings performance so what is really needed to push the take up of sustainable buildings and technologies in Malaysia is perhaps a lot more discussion within the business community itself. Businesses are both the users and developers of Malaysia’s buildings and other sectors. Through their own environmental objectives and goals, if encouraged in the right way, we could start to see a real step change in the ways in which business consume resources and produce their own products and services. We are already starting to see big developers such as Sime Darby incorporate environmental considerations into their property developments. Large banks, such as Public Bank, are starting to demand sustainable build for their own office space as part of their own CSR programmes. So a number of opportunity areas exist, however, the potential is yet to be maximised. Businesses developing their own buildings can ensure sustainability criteria are included; businesses as tenants can demand certain building standards; there is even opportunity for banks as lenders to large development projects to develop policies on loan criteria to ensure sustainability issues are considered.
Serina Hijjas, member of the PAM Sustainability Committee and a Director of Hijjas Kasturi Associates Sdn, predicts that ‘the GBI will be regarded as a normal form of practice in the not-too-distant future’.
As soon as the Malaysia GBI is up and running, let’s hope that there will be a lot more demand from the government and business communities. It is also likely that once all the government studies have been completed we will start to see the government come out with certain statements related to climate change within the next year or so. Ultimately it is up to the public and business community to complement government initiatives and drive real change in Malaysia. ■
