Ban on Styrofoam Packaging in Hawker Centres

Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources whether NEA will consider imposing a ban on the use of styrofoam packaging in hawker centres in view of its detrimental effects on the environment.

The majority of our hawker stalls use reusable crockery. However, disposable wares made of polystyrene foam, commonly known as styrofoam, are still used by some hawkers to serve food and pack food for takeaways, due to its good thermal insulation and convenience.

Polystyrene foam packaging is of concern in some countries where waste is landfilled, as it is non-biodegradable, and consequently, remains in the landfill for a long time. In Singapore, however, all incinerable waste, including polystyrene foam packaging, is incinerated safely at waste-to-energy incineration plants, which are fitted with pollution control equipment.

Nevertheless, we recognise that there are benefits in switching from polystyrene foam packaging to more environmentally-friendly options, such as using reusable crockery for dining in and having consumers bring their own containers to pack food for takeaways. The use of reusable crockery also avoids the problem of disposable plates being blown off tables and helps reduce the overall waste volume.

My Ministry will continue to look into ways to discourage the use of disposable tableware in hawker centres. However, this would have to be weighed against practical challenges, such as the cost of alternatives and greater inconvenience to hawkers and consumers.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I would like to know what the costs and benefits of using the alternative materials are, since cost was mentioned, and when is the Ministry targeting for hawkers to be using the alternatives?

We have done a cost-benefit analysis internally for some of the commonly used disposable wares, as well as using reusable crockery. Basically, for commonly used disposable wares in the hawker centres, the cost of the other types of disposable wares, for instance, plastic containers or coated paper box or even the "tze char" paper box, they are about two to three times higher in cost than the clamshell polystyrene foam packaging. But using reusable crockery, including taking into account the cost of manual collection and washing of reusable crockery, is actually more cost-effective and relatively cheaper, compared to using styrofoam packaging. As I have said, we do not face this problem about Styrofoam packaging being landfilled as it is incinerated.

We are working with the hawkers, through the hawker associations and stalls to discourage them from using disposable wares, including polystyrene foam packaging, as much as possible. But we need to take into account the cost of alternative options, as well as manpower constraints for these hawkers and the inconvenience that may be caused. As much as possible, we will encourage them to not use disposable wares, particularly for dining in.