Idling Engines

South China Morning Post – Dec. 15, 2011

For those who regularly have to put up with exhaust fumes emitted by stationary vehicles, there is finally some good news. After a wait of 14 years, the ban on idling engine comes into force today. But it is much too early to feel we can take a deep breath with confidence. It is unlikely that this law will make much of an impact on roadside pollution.

An array of exemptions and a delay in its enforcement to get around our city’s hottest season have already weakened public confidence in the law. Some critics have rightly questioned whether the ban will make any difference at all. To ensure the law means what it says, strict enforcement is therefore essential.

Up to 280 traffic wardens in uniform and 400 inspectors from the Environmental Protection Department will be looking out for vehicles parked with running engines. Hot spots like Causeway Bay and school areas will be the prime targets. But drivers have been assured that for the first month the fixed penalty of HK$320 will only be issued if verbal warnings are ignored. Understandably, the government wants to ease in the law without creating disputes. As drivers become more familiar with the scope of the ban, zero tolerance is needed to show the government’s determination in enforcement.

The real challenge, however, comes from the difficulties in policing a law that grants far too many exemptions. For instance, drivers have three minutes’ grace every hour. Taxis at ranks, buses and school vans that contain passengers are also exempt. The ban is even put aside during rainstorm and hot weather warnings. Confusion and disputes are therefore inevitable. There are already discussions about how drivers might get around the law.

The ban on idling engines is long overdue. Now that it is finally put into force, it is important to get it right. The law will become meaningless if enforcement is only half-hearted. The government should assess the impact of the ban and review the penalty and the scope of exemptions in light of experience.

South China Morning Post — 23 Sept. 2011

We have been waiting far too long for a law on idling engines. What should have been a relatively simple step in the battle against air pollution has been debated for 14 years. Now, legislation is finally on the way. But the law to take effect in December will have far too many exemptions and it will be difficult to enforce. There is good reason to doubt whether it will really make a difference.

The need for an effective law was highlighted by this newspaper’s recent testing of pollution levels at idling engine hot spots such as taxi stands and minibus stops. The carbon monoxide measurements recorded with a hand-held device on a single day last month are, of course, neither comprehensive nor conclusive. But they do provide an indication of the higher levels of air pollution we have to endure in places where there are many engines idling.

A carbon monoxide reading of 23,000 micrograms per cubic metre of air, was recorded on a stretch of Mong Kok’s Tung Choi Street lined by dozens of idling minibuses. That was 10 times the level of a nearby road with flowing traffic and no idling vehicles, and 30 times more than the reading at the district’s air quality monitoring station. At a minibus terminus in Lockhart Road, Causeway Bay, the temperature was 38 degrees Celsius, five higher than at the Observatory. More research is needed, but it is clear that idling engines have a significant impact and the new law must be effective if it is to have any meaning at all.

Legislators’ approval of the law in March followed much wrangling with transport interest groups. The proposals have been watered down so much that we appear to have lost sight of the objective – to curb the idling of engines by motorists. Among the 20 exemptions are taxis at ranks, buses and school vans that contain passengers, and all vehicles when the weather is particularly hot or wet. Drivers will have three minutes grace every hour. Enforcing this law is not going to be easy. It will be interesting to see if this law can really be enforced. The HK$320 penalty, less than for littering, is not much of a deterrent anyway.

The 260 wardens who police traffic will have watching out for idling engine offenders added to their duties. They will be joined by just 18 specially-trained officers. A weak law and inadequate enforcement add up to minimal change in roadside air pollution readings.

Officials, some of whom walked to work to mark No Car Day yesterday, have touted the law as a significant step in our city’s fight against air pollution, but its value is more symbolic. That need not be the case, though, if enforcement of the law is coupled with close monitoring, a thorough assessment of its impact and a determination to get it right.

South China Morning Post – 19 Sept. 2011

Tests show much higher carbon monoxide levels and hotter temperatures when streets are full of stationary vehicles rather than moving traffic

Streets full of stationary vehicles with their engines running could be 10 times more polluted than busy roads full of slow-moving traffic, new research has revealed.

Such streets could also be warmer than surrounding urban areas by as much as five degrees Celsius, according to a study by the South China Morning Post (SEHK: 0583,announcements, news) . Environmentalists said the research could provide useful clues as to the effectiveness of a ban on idling engines, which takes effect in December.

Using a handheld device capable of measuring the carbon monoxide level every two seconds, readings were taken in seven streets in Causeway Bay and Mong Kok on the afternoon of August 13, while a very-hot-weather warning was in effect.

A section of Tung Choi Street in Mong Kok between Argyle Street and Fife Street – where dozens of minibuses were idling – had the highest carbon monoxide reading, at 23,223 micrograms per cubic metre of air.

While that was below the maximum level of carbon monoxide set in the government’s air quality objectives, which is 30,000mcg, it was up to 12 times higher than the reading on a stretch of nearby Fife Street, where traffic was sporadic and there were no idling vehicles. It was also 30 times the level recorded by the Environmental Protection Department’s Mong Kok air quality monitoring station, near Nathan Road in Prince Edward, at the time.

At a bus stop on Nathan Road, near Fife Street, the Post recorded a carbon monoxide concentration of 2,450mcg.

Readings were also taken at Lockhart Road, Causeway Bay, between Cannon Street and Percival Street. One side of the road is a minibus terminus and the other is often occupied by private vehicles. The carbon monoxide level there was 8,285mcg, while a maximum temperature of 38 degrees was recorded, 5 degrees higher than at the Observatory.

Dr Lau Ngai-ting, of the environment division at the University of Science and Technology, said the results indicated serious pollution, although other environmental factors could have affected the findings.

James Middleton, from campaign group Clear the Air, said Tung Choi Street was a perfect example of the city’s urban canyon effect, whereby walls of tall buildings prevent pollutants from being dispersed.

But he said poor maintenance of minibuses was also to blame.

“Carbon monoxide can be produced if an appliance hasn’t been properly maintained or serviced regularly. How often do you think Hong Kong minibus owners service their vehicles? The correct answer is zero.”

Middleton said busy areas should be turned into low-emission zones in which only hybrid or electric buses would be allowed.

The Environmental Protection Department said the long-awaited ban on idling engines, first suggested in the 1990s, could cut roadside emissions by 1 per cent and help reduce nuisance to passers-by.

Environmentalists say the effectiveness of the ban will still be difficult to assess because the benefits could be offset by emissions from moving traffic nearby.

Lau said much more sophisticated studies would be needed to ascertain exactly how much of a contribution idling engines made to pollution and to evaluate the effectiveness of the ban on idling engines.

“The pollution may not necessarily come from the idling engine alone, as the moving traffic, the wind speed and direction and the urban topography will all have a role to play,” he said.

Lau said it was difficult to pinpoint why such a high reading was recorded in Tung Choi Street. It might be down to the ageing, slow-moving minibuses spewing more fumes, and also the poor air ventilation at the street, he said.

From December, drivers who leave their engines idling will face a fixed penalty of HK$320.

Air quality has long been a cause of concern for Hong Kong. In May, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen promised to set out new air quality objectives this year to replace the current rules, set in 1987.