Carbon82

Suzuki Splash I think this is the 2nd or 3rd unit I have spotted in the past 9 - 10 years, as it was only brought in by PI. Quite decent size among compact Hatch.

Wife cooks Japanese Beef Curry, and 1st attempt with creating art rice (bear face).

Yesterday dinner at So Pho.

@Atrecord not entire space under the 3rd row are sunken, on a third the side, so probably good for some loose baggage instead of regular luggages. BTW, if my memory don't fail me, when you slide the 3rd row to the forward most position, can store up to 4x 28" luggages. Something like these:

Toyota Tank

Let me put it bluntly, IF our government can benefit from it (read: additional tax revenue), they WILL do it. But for now, PMD has nothing taxable, yet... I concur. The same applies for PCN and those "dedicated" lane at parks and seasides area. Lane demarcation will not work at any crowded space. I don't disagree with you on your view. But the authority should be looking at a total solution rather the taking a piece meal approach. Example: Silver Zone. For those who have been to estate like Bedok, Hougang, Redhill, Teck Whye, Whampoa, etc., have it ever cross your mind why are we wasting so much usable space for nothing but just to keep the lane narrower so that drivers cannot move any faster? Why convert the usable lane to grass turf, S-course, etc. instead of dedicated PMD lane? I think a few mentioned here before, while the aim is to go car-lite, it is the motorist that generate a steady stream of income to support infrastructure development, so it is a chicken and egg situation the way I see it. PMD is only a good alternative if we have: safer devices (battery and charging technology - UL2272 is just another BBS, speed limiting and tracking devices, more active & passive safety system) proper infrastructure (I am looking at nothing less than what Denmark did for the cyclist, including a highway for bicycle. In our context, a dedicated road NOT lane for PMD) better policy, regulation and governance (PMD user, as with other motorists, have to have legal obligation and liability to use their device in public space. And strict enforcement is a MUST)

Kway Zhup at Our Tampines Hub.

This article sum all up. Will the writer be fixed?! Is Singapore serious about going car-lite? Getting out of a taxi in Beijing the other day, I was almost run over by an e-scooter. But the delivery rider, whose reflexes had probably been honed from dodging pedestrians, swerved in the nick of time and averted disaster. In truth, it was my fault. The taxi had stopped beside a bike lane – a well-used artery by Beijing’s many delivery riders – and I swung the door open and stepped out without checking for an oncoming rider. In this city, these riders are a part of everyday life. Legions of them grease the cogs of the Chinese economy, delivering food for office workers in Beijing and elsewhere. They are also the backbone of the country’s e-commerce sector, with some delivering as many as 150 parcels in a single day. In a nod to their importance, a formation of riders rode past Tiananmen Square during the country’s 70th anniversary parade in Beijing last month – alongside tanks, drones and intercontinental ballistic missiles. Looking at them zip up and down Beijing’s streets brings to mind the situation back in Singapore. Two weeks ago, the Government effectively banned e-scooters from footpaths when it decided to take a tough stand against reckless riders. It meant that overnight, e-scooters – already banned on the roads – were confined to the 440km of cycling paths islandwide, instead of the 5,500km of footpaths riders could use before. It caused immediate consternation among riders worried that their means of making a living had gone up in smoke, leading many to petition their MPs. The Transport Ministry came up with a $7 million grant to help riders replace their e-scooters with e-bikes or bicycles. But coming just days after the initial ban, it felt a bit like putting a plaster on a bullet hole. More importantly, the ban has also caused some head-scratching among mobility advocates – they ask why the Government would effectively snuff out such a popular alternative to cars if it was truly serious about making Singapore car-lite. There are about 100,000 registered e-scooters in Singapore, roughly one-sixth the number of cars on the road last year. That their numbers grew so quickly is a testament to how Singaporeans view their efficiency, and also shows that these devices have a place in a car-lite Singapore. They are more energy-efficient and less polluting than cars, and take up less space on our land-scarce island. Singapore is not unique in its concerns over personal mobility devices (PMDs) – in China, these devices have also caused a spate of accidents and fires. During the five-year period from 2013, PMDs were involved in 56,200 accidents that resulted in injuries or fatalities nationwide. It prompted the Chinese government to slap limits on the speed, weight and power of these devices, boost enforcement and roll out public education campaigns on safe riding – all measures that Singapore has also taken. But China has done something else that Singapore has not. Here in the Chinese capital, bike lanes line almost every public road, serving to separate PMD traffic from pedestrians on the footpaths, and vehicular traffic on the road. If putting PMDs in the same lane as pedestrians is causing accidents, then we must find another way. Banning them from footpaths and then suggesting that riders switch to e-bikes or bicycles just transfers the problem elsewhere. Also, it is one thing to go out for a leisurely bicycle ride on the park connectors, but another thing altogether to have to deliver more than 20 orders a day on a pedal-powered bicycle. It stands to reason that e-scooters have surged in popularity over the last few years because e-bikes are also not allowed on footpaths; on the roads, riders are at the mercy of traffic. I am not suggesting that the lives of PMD users are any more valuable than those of pedestrians, but the Government should find a balance where it protects the most number of lives, while still moving Singapore towards its car-lite vision. Many have asked why the Government still seems to be prioritising road traffic while espousing the virtues of active mobility. Former Nominated MP Calvin Cheng wrote in a Facebook note last week that the Marina Coastal Expressway was built in five years to ease traffic for cars, “the precise form of transport the Government wants to discourage”. Although work is under way to build a network of shared paths and park connectors, this will only amount to a fraction of the road network – some 1,300km by 2030. Included in this network are also shared paths – lanes where foot traffic will still be mixed with bicycles, motorised wheelchairs and other powered devices. The end result will likely be that a car would still be the most convenient and efficient way of getting from A to B. The argument against segregated lanes for bicycles and PMDs always seems to lead to the point that ours is an island starved for space. But as many have pointed out, for a land-scarce country, we seem to be able to find a lot of room for roads. Recovering room from vehicular traffic is neither a new nor radical suggestion. As early as 2012, outspoken mobility advocate Francis Chu and other cycling enthusiasts had embarked on a project to measure road widths around the island as they tried to figure out if Singapore had room for segregated lanes. They found that widths varied widely, and in many areas, space could be carved out on the road shoulder for separate lanes – narrower roads also have the added effect of regulating traffic speeds, making the streets safer for all. This is a solution that does not require copious resources, but significant political will. Two years ago, before leaving Singapore for China, I was on the transport beat, reporting on the bike-share companies that were just then entering the local market. There was excitement in the community that the nascent industry would herald a car-lite Singapore. Two years on, shared bikes have disappeared, choked out by legislation targeting indiscriminate parking. Lee Kuan Yew Centre for Innovative Cities research fellow Julienne Chen wrote a widely shared commentary for CNA in August, arguing that Singapore should make room for PMDs, which were a chance for a “second bite at the apple” after the failure of shared bikes. It is a point worth mulling over – is Singapore serious about going car-lite? It’s time to have a long hard think about what that means.

As of yesterday evening, the cabinet door removed, both hose reels re-inspected by the maintenance contractor (with a new label affixed). Hose Reel #1 Hose Reel #2 BUT I there are still other violations which i have feedback to SCDF again. In accordance with SS 575 : 2012 (Singapore Standard Code of Practice for Fire Hydrant, Rising Mains and Hose Reel Systems), - An operating instruction notice plate should be provided next to the stop valve. The hose reel operating instructions shall be: “Turn on the inlet valve before running out the hose” - No placement/storage of items within hose reel compartment

I love this type of simple combi. Look very neat and tidy. Opps I OCD one, everything must be in pair and aligned.

Dine at home.

Actually all the electricity supply in Singapore are managed by EMA (Energy Market Authority). And in the worst case scenario that any of the generator folded, EMA will ensure that other generator make up the difference.

I am quite sure there are other similar violations. My point is that if I, a man on the street can spot these, the person in-charge have NO excuse to miss it, so was it someone sleeping on the job, or an organization culture issue?! What Accountability?

Senoko Energy seeking govt aid amid power supply glut: Report SINGAPORE - Local utility company Senoko Energy is reported to have requested aid from the Government as it rides out a supply glut expected to continue for a few more years. Nikkei Asian Review reported that it has asked to borrow between $100 million and $200 million from the Government. It is also lobbying for the Government to create a system that guarantees a revenue stream under long-term contracts, regardless of power plant utilisation. "With the severe business outlook for the next year or two creating the risk of a shortage of operating capital, the utility is battening down the hatches," an official at Japanese trading house Marubeni reportedly said. Senoko, which has been operating since 1977, has three subsidiaries - Senoko Energy Supply, Senoko Services and Senoko Gas Supply. The company was bought in 2008 by Marubeni, Kansai Electric Power, Kyushu Electric Power, Japan Bank for International Cooperation and French company GDF Suez, now Engie. The report said it slipped into the red in 2016, and its net loss widened to about $400 million in 2018. Singapore is facing overcapacity in its power generation market, as the peak supply capacity is now believed to be double its peak demand. Proceeds from electricity sales are not enough to cover costs of fuel, maintenance and financing. Asked about the current supply glut, a spokesman with the Energy Market Authority told Nikkei Asian Review that power companies made their investment decisions based on bullish projections for electricity demand growth that did not materialise. "Flexibility was provided for power generation companies to retire their steam plants," the official added. "While the power generation market is currently experiencing a situation of having more supply than demand, this looks to be changing as electricity demand is increasing with more data centres coming onstream, as well as older and inefficient generating units being decommissioned." And is that the reason why the government is finally opening it doors to EVs?