Friday 31 December 2010

Drivers In Singapore Take the Cake!

I used to think it was me getting old and fussy, but now feel vindicated after reading news reports and letters of complaint to the Letters pages of our local newspapers in Singapore.


It is apparent that ignorance and selfishness is universal: young and old, men and women, people of all races, shapes and sizes.


As with many things here, form is, at least as important, if not more, than substance. As a "new" driver you spend time waiting for your Basic then Advanced Theory tests. In between (provided that you have passed your Basic theory) test you then get in a queue for a series of driving lessons.


Then you sit for your Advanced Theory and Driving tests. This system is formulaic and has given rise to its own little niche - multi-language books and lessons that help one cram for the theory tests and driver teaching schools.


After one passes all the tests and is issued a licence, one must display - for one year - a fluorescent triangle on a plain background at the front and rear of one's vehicle to denote a new driver. But I have yet to see these signs inhibit whoever is behind the wheel!


Never mind the sales of these signs, the government could improve road safety and manners by being strict with young or inexperienced drivers (anyone who has been issued a licence for less than 3 years, including an 'exchange' licence from another country).


This should translate into giving them higher demerit points for traffic offences.


And why ever not? Insurance companies know that drivers under 26 years of age or inexperienced drivers are involved in more accidents than others, hence they bear higher premiums and excess.


In the absence of visible enforcement efforts (which writers to the newspapers also have complained about) we obviously need other means to ensure law and order on our roads.


Now that our Land Transport Authority (LTA) has been given the task of enforcement in cases of illegal parking, their 'flying' squads (blue uniforms with 'Enforcement' on the back) patrol various areas.


However they cannot be in all places at all times. And touring traffic and parking 'hotspots' on their motorcycles needs to be planned so that they can be at these 'hotspots' when traffic is at their worst.


They should also ticket government vehicles that break the laws by waiting or parking in no waiting or parking areas. There should not be one law for the everyday man and woman and a different one for popularly elected officials.




Here we have a car, with its "new" driver sign (top right or rear screen) at the Tiong Bahru car park at 9:38am on 28th Dec 2010 - in a parking space designated for vehicles that are loading and unloading.


I was leaving the car park when I saw a couple park the car and proceed to the lift, at a time when many people visit the Food Centre at the market for breakfast.


While I appreciate that our Police force is busy keeping terrorists from within and without from blowing us up, lack of uniformed policemen and women has a detrimental effect on road users who park as they please.




This is another common sight, sometimes driverless sometimes with someone in the driving seat. 


Taken at 12:54pm on 29 December 2010 when it was blocking access to our driveway and adding to the traffic jam along Claymore Road and Claymore Hill because vehicle had to form a single line to get by!




As those who live in the UK and USA can see, the meaning of some of these road markings are different to those captioned in the above.


But whichever way one interprets stopping, waiting and parking in Singapore, it is a terrible waste of taxpayers money to erect signs and paint our roads because few drivers pay any attention to them.


And unfortunately the parking wardens and enforcement officers are stretched too thin to be around when offences are committed.


Our government is preparing for what has been termed the "silver tsunami" when the demographic bulge will consist of baby boomers like me. 


Much has been mooted for staying relevant and working past 60 and I would suggest they recruit people with clean driving records to patrol their neighbourhoods and take photographs so that illegal parking and other traffic offenses can be ticketed.


Many people are sick and tried of not being able to access or exit their homes safely because  vehicles obscure their view. Or even worse, block their driveways. They'd be more than happy to perform their civic duty!


Besides, local residents KNOW when traffic will be bad, unlike planners in air-conditioned offices.


Recently, I discovered how irrelevant the Automobile Association of Singapore is to my car and to me. I rejoined when we returned and bought our car and have scarcely had to use any of its members benefits.


But when I was trying to make sense about the timing of the amber lights at so-called "red light" junctions, I copied their President who never even acknowledged my email.


My point then - and remains - that the size of the junctions (hence the distance the vehicle must travel) should dictate the timing for the amber lights. But the Traffic Police and LTA are adamant it should stay at a flat 3 seconds for ALL junctions.

Extract from Wikipedia:

Light timing length

The length of amber lights can differ, for example in many places the length of an amber light is usually 5 seconds, but elsewhere it may be as little as 3 seconds considerably reducing the time for reaction. It is typical for these times to vary according to the set speed limit, with longer times for higher limits. In the state of Georgia, United States, an amber light must be lit one second for every 10 mph of posted speed limit. In this situation, a 45 mph posted speed limit would have a 4.5 second amber light. For intersections with red light cameras, 1 extra second must be added. In Colorado Springs, Colorado, green lights at numerous intersections have been noted with durations of approximately two seconds. (Wikipedia does NOT give the size of any junctions)
The time from when a red light is displayed and when a cross street is given a green light is usually based on the physical size of the intersection. This intervening period is called the all-red time. A typical all-red time is 3 seconds to allow cars to clear the intersection. In a wider intersection, such as 4 lane road or highway intersection, the all-red time may be as much as 5 seconds, allowing drivers who could not or would not stop at the amber light enough time to clear the intersection without causing a collision.


Anyone with a little commonsense can see that as the population gets older, Singapore's Traffic Police and Land Transport boffins should allow for slower reactions. 


After all it costs 12 points (out of the 24 allowed for a period of 2 years) to be caught beating the lights as my soon to be 82 year old husband found out to his cost.


(A young man in a Ferrari can beat the lights easily unless intoxicated and unwary, 3 seconds is plenty of time in such a car)


The corollary to this is that I had to copy my request for the timing to my Members of Parliament  before it would be released to me - as if it were a matter of national security. 


It just shows how we are too fixated on the macro details and miss the bigger picture. Or is it just the bureaucratic mindset?


More recently, my attention was drawn to car insurance by a girlfriend who had noticed, when reading the fine print, that her insurer imposed a high excess ($3000) for claims incurred by young and inexperienced drivers AND drivers 65 and over.


As she is going to be 65 in a few years she thought it most unfair that experienced drivers like her were being unfairly penalised when most accidents are caused by young and experienced drivers.


She delegated the task of looking at car insurance to me and while I was looking through my own papers I discovered that, through AAS my car was insured by the same company and the same excess clause applied!


So I did a bit of looking around, especially as car (or motor) insurance can now be purchased online. 


Eventually I purchased my policy from Aviva because I could tailor my requirements and see the quotation change on the web page, in real time - instead of waiting a few days until someone responded.


Aviva was also the policy that offered the best value. And even though I tacked on one or two supplementary options, I still saved about $200 on my car insurance.


So much for the AAS being for motorists! My membership is up in April and you can bet that I am not going to renew it.


Maybe Singapore should have questions like these in the Theory parts of the Driving Test:
http://www.chinacartimes.com/quiz/

Chinese Driving Test

So you've heard all of the jokes about Asian drivers, you think Chinese are bad drivers? You think you're a good driver? Why not try the official English theory exam for foreigners who want to obtain their Chinese driving license - mandatory if you wish to drive in China. The test is surprisingly hard.


The exam questions are translated into English from the Chinese language exam, the translation is not 100% exact (we didn't translate them!). Chinese people who are studying for the theory test have a book containing 1000 questions and answers - only 100 of these questions will be in the exam. It is somewhat easier for foreigners to obtain their Chinese license in China - they only have to learn a 100 questions, which are the exam questions. 


Remember, to get your Chinese license you need obtain more than 90% on the exam. Can you do it?


NOTE: in China they drive on the RIGHT (same side as Europe and the USA)

Here are two samples of their test questions and multiple choice answers:



Monday 20 December 2010

Christmas and New Year Wishes

If Santa Claus were for real I would not hesitate to write to him with my list. Most of which would be taken up by remedies for the appalling state of


Most of my grouses arise from the direction our motor vehicle policies are taking us and the consequences, intended or otherwise, of the government's implementation of the policies.


Until recently illegal parking was under the purview of the Traffic Police. Now the LTA has taken over and they have a 'flying' enforcement unit.

However it still leaves us without adequate enforcement on the roads - especially as our motorcycle Traffic Police seem to be deployed on escort duty. If our VIPS insist on perks such as escorts, why can't these cops also manage and direct traffic and patrol nearby areas while their VIPs are engaged in meetings or having their medical check ups?


Instead of lounging around and chatting they could be nabbing errant road users.


Traffic Police and in fact all Police vehicles should obey the law unless in hot pursuit of criminals or terrorists. Otherwise they should set good examples for others to follow.


For example, I saw a small convoy of government vehicles parked alongside road traffic barriers outside ION and surmised that some VIPs were on a shopping errand. Not long after, I drive by the other side of ION and remembered they have a good-size driveway.


Surely this convoy could have stopped at ION's vehicular entrance and the VIP's could have been ushered directly into ION's air-conditioned environment right away - without negotiating the wide expanse of pavement at the front of the building?


I would have thought that this sort of 'show' - which may be expected in lesser developed countries and third world dictatorships - was in the past in an educated, well brought up country such as ours. But maybe I have spent too many years away.









We could certainly do with more LTA enforcement unit visits to 'hot spots' for illegal parking.  By showing a presence and ticketing offenders, they can remind other drivers and motorcyclists that all the signs, lines and laws are not there merely so that we can say we have them.

As it is, too many road users (including cyclists) blatantly ignore the rules. 

Many others have written in to the newspapers to complain, but judging by the same complaints surfacing from time to time, not much has been done by the authorities. Except to state that we have laws, signs, lines, islands and such in place. Such a waste of taxpayers money and so much for educating road users and/or penalising those who are not compliant.


I could swear that learner drivers and riders memorise the Highway Code or whatever it is called here only in order to pass their tests. After that, the information is wiped from their minds.


For sure, have not been taught to understand the rules and regulations. If I had my way, I would 
modify the Basic and Advanced Theory tests and improving the Highway Code - first by removing all the ambiguities that exist in the wording of the Highway Code especially when it comes to stopping, waiting and parking (at what point does stopping turn into waiting?). Presumably parking means leaving one's vehicle unattended - why not say so?


Recently someone responded to letter in the Straits Times saying that he had telephoned the Traffic Police and been told that tail gating is NOT against the law.


That may well be, but according to a web page from LTA's website: 
Careless Driving costs 6 demerit points, Driving without due care or reasonable consideration for other road users costs 9 demerit points, and Reckless or dangerous driving earns the offender 24 demerit points.


If tail gating is not dangerous, I don't know what is. 


I am confident that if the TP venture out on their motorbikes they could find many drivers who fully deserve 9 points.


And any driver found guilty of causing a rear-end accident should immediately win himself 24 points. 


Word would get around (with the help of radio, TV and the mainstream newspapers) and we would have less accidents as a result of tail gating.


Since motor insurance policies reflect the propensity of young (under 26) or inexperienced (2 years) drivers to become involved in accidents, their demerit points should be doubled if they commit offences in their first two years on the road.


The information should still be fresh in these young, bright minds and higher penalties might provide the incentive to keep them in mind.


Ignorance of the law is not accepted as an excuse, so why does our government make it difficult for us to obtain details of the road traffic act? Important parts of it should be posted on the LTA website instead of it being hidden like a state secret?


I did find some laws on a website, and they concern bicycles. See how many you can spot that the bicycles and riders on our roads comply with on a regular basis.


My guess is that few of the laws from 5 onwards are obeyed. And that if stopped, the rider wouldn't know there was a law against what he or she is doing!

But never mind Santa Claus, I wonder when the Land Transport Authority and Traffic Police will make supreme efforts to bring courtesy, consideration, law and sanity back to our roads.



Hope springs eternal!

Sunday 5 December 2010

Selective Hearing and the Sounds of SIN City

Poor NEA (National Environment Agency), they really have a tough road to hoe.


There's not much they can do about air pollution if the pollutants come from our neighbours' backyards. As residents here well know,  when forests are set alight in Indonesia, we stifle and choke in Singapore. And there's not much anyone here can do.


And when it comes to noise pollution they have to work within the laws of Singapore which seem much more tolerant about construction noise than anywhere else we have lived, including Hong Kong.


A rise of 10 dB in sound level corresponds approximately to a doubling of subjective loudness. That is, a sound of 85 dB is twice as loud as a sound of 75 dB which is twice as loud as a sound of 65 dB and so on. That is, the sound of 85 dB is 400% times the loudness of a sound of 65 dB.


The way the sound limits are expressed in Leq (for laymen like me, it equates to an average sound level in decibels over a specified period) effectively means that construction activity can take place in loud bursts interspersed with relative silence.


For 24 hours in the day, 365 days of the year. No days off for Sundays and Public Holidays!


Therefore I was suitably impressed some Sunday's ago when, on my way to the NTUC Fairprice supermarket on Killiney Road,  I noticed that piling machinery was silent and still on a worksite slap-bang next to the supermarket which shares the premises with an hotel.




I only wish this gem of a considerate developer and construction company were re-building portions of the Thai Embassy (across the road from us) or renovating 8 Claymore Hill (to the side of us).


As our bedrooms are on the other side of CLaymore Hill, I suppose I should not complain too much about the firecracker-like bursts of noise (that's what it sounds like when metal and other debris is chucked down a chute from tens of storeys) 


And thus far, noise conditions are better than when they were building the Tate next door, since sold and occupied. 


At that time, we had to put up with the vibration and loud banging of piling works; later replaced by a constant metallic whine as the foundations were being poured. Trying sleeping the night through with non-stop sound and the sensation of a low pitch dental drill coming through the walls of your home.


Anyone who lives in high rise Singapore has at one time or another been affected by noise pollution because of our haste to build. The fortunate who have escaped this torture may yet face it some day.


We have a good friend whose home faces the construction site of a development which describes itself as the Urban Suites, on Cairnhill Road.


One day we were invited to lunch there. An incessant din made conversation impossible. And at times we felt the house shake.  But they had no respite because all this activity and noise fell within the acceptable limits for 12- and 24-hours!


NEA officers have been cooperative.


A sound measuring and recording device has been set up on their home, facing the construction, to track sound levels over a period of time. They have also extended (upwards) a panel which is meant to help deflect some noise.

But even they can only do so much because of the generous allowances for acceptable noise limits for 12- and 24-hours.  Sporadic bursts of much louder noise are permitted as long as they do not exceed a certain level for five minutes ! 


Site supervisors probably orchestrate construction at sites surrounded by irate residents, synchronising machines so that they squeeze the most noise-making activity into short periods.  Then they fill in the time with less ear-busting work.



How loud is too loud?

The noise chart below lists average decibel levels for everyday sounds around you.
Painful
150 dB = fireworks at 3 feet
140 dB = firearms, jet engine
130 dB = jackhammer
120 dB = jet plane takeoff, siren
Extremely Loud
110 dB = maximum output of some MP3 players, model airplane, chain saw
106 dB = gas lawn mower, snowblower
100 dB = hand drill, pneumatic drill
90 dB = subway, passing motorcycle
Very Loud
80–90 dB = blow-dryer, kitchen blender, food processor
70 dB = busy traffic, vacuum cleaner, alarm clock
Moderate
60 dB = typical conversation, dishwasher, clothes dryer
50 dB = moderate rainfall
40 dB = quiet room
Faint
30 dB = whisper, quiet library


But it isn't only construction noise we have to put up with; since the powers-that-be realised their teenage fantasies and enabled Formula One night racing, it has inspired want-to-be F1 drivers to take to the streets late at night.


Most nights my quality of my sleep is shattered by the sounds of screaming engines and exhausts.


The sounds made by some exhausts is like music. But there is a time and a place for everything, no matter how much one appreciates and likes them.


Hopefully, when we get a motor sports complex, it might reduce the incidence of such noise in residential areas between 11:30pm and 6:30am. 


But right now, these 'throat clearing' sessions are about as welcome to us poor folk, who are trying to get a good night's rest, as a pork chop in a synagogue.


For a few nights this week I mistakenly thought that the school holidays were providing relief from these drive-bys (families tend to take their holidays when school is out).


To show that it was just too good to be true, I was woken up at about 6:30am this morning by the sound of a loud car exhaust.


But, since we are a stone's throw from the infamous Orchard Towers and the exhaust sounded like that of a "mouse that roared" type of four door compact car, it could have been a bar, massage parlour or karaoke worker leaving for home.


To rub salt into the wound, our proximity to Orchard Towers also means that we sometimes hear screams and yells (sometimes blood curdling) on Friday and Saturday nights, as well as the occasional car alarm shrieking to be turned off.


However, yes, it is probably quite safe to walk around this area at night. 


Security is a point stressed by the American author who puts Singapore tops in his league of happy paces to live. 


To identify the happy spots, Mr Buettner relied on data from Gallup, the World Values Survey and the World Database on Happiness which have done comprehensive polls and studies over the past seven decades examining factors that directly impact happiness.


While there are many happiness indices out there, the data from the three organisations are 'by far the most authoritative and authentic', he told The Sunday Times.  


To give him credit, he also spent a little time here, conducting interviews with selected Singaporeans. 


Straits Times, Sunday, Dec 5:
He made two trips to Singapore, about a year apart, staying four weeks in all.


I too enjoy my home country when I don't have to live here day in and day out and put up with the mindset and service quality (or rather, lack thereof).


A friend once remarked that a successful marriage is based on many short absences; it's also true of countries.










Monday 29 November 2010

Recycling and Lateral Thinking - Why Not Redevelop Landed Property First?

I almost choked on my morning mug of tea, to read this:

ST Forum
Nov 27, 2010
60% of Singaporeans recycle now

WE THANK Mr Allan Harkness ('Going green in the heartland: Still stuck with an 'F'') and Mr Lim Beo Loon ('Other problems are cost...') for their letters on Nov 19.
Based on feedback from public waste collectors, the average household participation rate in our national recycling programme has increased from 14 per cent in 2001 to 63 per cent last year. Our surveys also indicate that more than 60 per cent of Singaporeans recycle now.
The National Environment Agency (NEA) organises community events, such as Recycling Week, Clean & Green Singapore, and NEA Community Day, to educate the public on waste minimisation and recycling.
The public can help by segregating waste into recyclable and non-recyclable, using reusable shopping bags and rechargeable batteries, while industries should work towards using less packaging materials.
As the value of recyclables depends on the market, all forms of recycling entails a cost that must be borne by the Government, consumer or waste collector.
NEA will consider requiring public waste collectors to provide more recycling bins and look into the frequency of collection when their contracts are up for renewal, if the benefits outweigh the costs.
Ong Seng Eng
Director
Resource Conservation Department
National Environment Agency



I instantly thought about Mark Twain and the saying he often used:

Mark Twain, the 100th anniversary of whose death was in April this year, was never known to be soft-spoken about his opinions. He popularized the phrase, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics,” caustically opining the view that numbers can be used to dissemble truth.

Not for a moment am I calling the NEA a bunch of liars, but I do question the sources and methodology used for the collection of the statistics fed to them. (LATER: see note below)

From what I have seen during these six months that I have been here, I wonder how the waste collection companies know how many households recycle their waste? 

Each household is given a number of plastic recycling bags - I live in an apartment block and they are placed in our mailbox. If I need more, I ask the management for more.

I don't know how many bags are delivered to homes on landed property, be it a terrace house, semi-detached or single family home.

Twice a month, on Tuesdays, we put out our recycling bag(s) and they are taken downstairs to await collection. On such a basis, how would anyone know how many units in this development (and others like it) recycle?

It would be nice to think that 60% of Singapore households recycle; and I would hope that more than 60% of individual citizens recycle.

The SCMP ran this cartoon which I think apt for the claimed 'green' credentials in Hong Kong and I daresay, Singapore too:






It has been our wont to spend part of each year in Hong Kong and north Florida and the impression I have formed from using my own eyes is that the people in both those places recycle far more than people in Singapore.

Hong Kongers, despite letters to the SCMP and cartoons like this, are far more environmentally conscious and their green groups much more active.

In northeast Florida, I find that some communities are more active than others; they put out their bright blue recycling bins on recycling day. 

In our community of some 500+ homes we have to take our recycling to a recycling corner where there are receptacles for bottles, plastics, plastic bags and paper. I could not tell you how many homes actually drive their recycleables to the recycling corner but the bins do fill up regularly.

Singapore is a different experience. Some years ago the management of our condominium estate installed recycling bins in the basement; it was not a success because household waste (think pampers for example) was thrown willy-nilly into the recycling bins. They were soon removed.

More recently we were issued the recycling bags provided by the public waste collection companies. I have no idea if and how they are being used by the householders.

But of I had not taught our helper (who arrived from the Philippines in June) what recycling means and showed her what to put in the bags, she would have either not used them or put all manner of things in them.

I had her put all the items she though might be recyclable into a spare bin and before recycling day we would go through the bin to sort out what to dispose down our chute (neatly bundled and secured) and what to place in the bags for recycling morning.

At that time I scoured the NEA's website for pamphlets to illustrate how to separate the different items but every poster I found did not play well with my A4 size printer format. I wrote in to NEA - on Oct 26th.

This morning (Nov 29th), I went back to their website and see little improvement. Visit these pages (which take some looking for): http://app2.nea.gov.sg/data/cmsresource/20100120281853527479.pdf
http://app2.nea.gov.sg/data/cmsresource/20090511531613540247.pdf

Print them out and decide how useful they are if you had a domestic helper who reads a smidgin of English. I would say that larger, more graphic illustrations that can be reproduced on a home printer are needed.

For another, the number of people living in Singapore has mushroomed in recent years. Many of our new residents and new workers come from countries where recycling takes a different form or is not a regular practice.

Now they are here, they all should get to know about recycling.

We all like to feel good or to feel we are doing some good; so why not divert some of the vast amount we spend on lighting up Singapore on a well conceived and well executed campaign to educate all and sundry about recycling and really provide the means for all to recycle?

I was at our country club the other day and while the intention is good, the execution is poor - we have rather ugly recycling bins prominently displayed at the main entrances to the swimming clubhouse. There must be some way to make them more part of the scenery.

As far as I can recall we don't have recycling bins in many other other locations, and certainly not tasteful looking ones (as befitting a grand clubhouse). I have not been into the kitchens and pantry areas and wonder if they recycle as that is where most of the waste would be handled.

Opportunities for Mr and Ms Public to recycle are not many. The bins along Orchard Road are often full, so perhaps more recycling bins could be deployed, especially close to fast food outlets.

The emptying of trash and recycling bins throughout Singapore, even at the brand new Khoo Teck Puat Hospital which I visited today, needs to happen with greater frequency. Certainly when these bins are along high traffic routes or outside food or convenience outlets.

But being ecologically responsible means more than sorting and recycling our trash; it's also using and re-using bags for groceries and shopping. 

I went to a fair over the weekend and every stall-holder offered me a plastic bag with my purchase.

At the wet market and even in supermarkets my purchases are bundled into plastic bags, which the hypocrite that I am, I accept. I then try to assuage my conscience by using them to contain our household rubbish prior to putting the rubbish down the chute.

In Hong Kong I am charged each time I need a plastic bag at the neighbourhood supermarket. In Florida I am offered a choice of paper or plastic.

NOTE: in rummaging through the NEA website today I came upon some tables and lists, none of them particularly helpful in arriving at precisely how much of our domestic waste is being recycled.


I am not of a scientific or mathematical bent so excuse me if I misunderstand things. Looking at total waste generated and total waste recycled (57%) it is easy to see that almost 60% of the population with access to waste collection services have their waste recycled.



Surely 
if ALL HDB estates have recycling programmes AND if 80-90 percent of people live in HDB estates why do only 60% of the population recycle?



Mind you, 
NEA has a 
List of Condominiums/Private Apartments with Recycling Programme (Updated as of Dec 07) 

which contains ONLY 353 names. 



So maybe the non-greenies are in private housing? But that doesn't sound right either.





As for what is recycled it is disappointing that glass (eminently recycleable) has a recycling rate of only 21%. Only 48% of cardboard/paper is recycled, 38% of horticultural waste (all that mulch and compost gone to waste?), a paltry 12% of textiles/leather is recycled and 9% of plastics.

But what do I know of the technicalities of recycling? Zip, zero I admit.

One would have to be blind not to notice that we light up Orchard Road like a Christmas tree, Marina Bay for tourists to admire our spectacular skyline at night, and the Formula 1 GP circuit for Bernie's tv coverage for the world. 


None of these are particularly eco-friendly.


Neither is enabling greedy developers to evict us from homes that are a mere ten or twenty years old in order to to demolish and build new buildings. Ten or twenty years is not old for buildings - or for people. So why the need to tear down and build when we should be minding our carbon footprint?


Considering that this demolish and build activity mainly affects non-landed property (low-,  medium- or high-rise) this displaces more happy families at any one go than tearing down a large bungalow (one family) to replace it with a 28-storey block of flats.


Hmmm, from a humanitarian point of view, it makes me wonder why we didn't start this redevelopment of Singapore with landed property?