Idling Engines

Paggie Leung – SCMP – Updated on Jan 03, 2009

Amendments to proposed rules on idling engines have failed to please either drivers or environmentalists, who regard them as either too strict or too lenient.

Taxi union leader To Sun-tong said the government had not considered drivers’ difficulties in complying with the ban. Extending the exemption from the first two to the first five taxis in a queue was no help, said Mr To, director of the taxi driver branch of the Motor Transport Workers’ General Union.

Big taxi stops near places such as the Kowloon Tong MTR station often had 30 to 40 cars lining up, he said. Exempting only the first five meant those farther back would need to switch their engines on and off at least 25 times as they moved up the queue.

Restarting an engine created 10 times as many pollutants as a continually running engine, “not to mention the damage to the vehicle”, Mr To said. He added that it was not practical to turn off the engines in hot weather.

Taxi and Public Light Bus Concern Group chairman Lai Ming-hung said drivers of green-topped minibuses were happy with the revised proposal. But he said all taxis and red-topped minibuses should be excluded from the ban on idling engines.

“The proposal will not be feasible for red minibuses because we do not have assigned stops,” Mr Lai said. “Also, we can just find another driver to sit in a vehicle to avoid being charged.”

Friends of the Earth director Edwin Lau Che-fung acknowledged the need to include some exemptions for practical reasons, but said the new exemptions for taxis and minibuses were too lax.

“The government should be stricter on static queues,” he said. “Apart from excluding the first two minibuses in a queue, only the first vehicle of each route should be exempted, and only if there are passengers on it.

“It can’t achieve the goal to reduce the emission of pollutants if there are too many exemptions.”

Echoing Mr Lau’s view, Green Power chief executive Man Chi-sum said he would accept the revised proposal if it meant quicker passage of the relevant legislation.

The revised proposal “is already the bottom line and no more exemptions should be included”, Dr Man said.

Giving in to drivers may be only way to ban idling

Updated on Jan 03, 2009 – SCMP

The good news is that the government will finally press ahead with introducing a ban on idling engines. The bad news is that the draft ban will be significantly watered down by the time it is presented to lawmakers later this month. Under pressure from the public-transport trade, the government has devised complicated rules that will exempt more taxis and minibuses queuing to pick up customers. The rules are likely to make the law more difficult to enforce when it comes into effect.

A ban is long overdue. Leaving a vehicle engine idling not only causes pollution, but is also an annoying form of antisocial behaviour. A consultation last year showed the public overwhelmingly supports such a ban. But taxi and minibus drivers have vehemently opposed it, citing several reasons, some of them arguable, others spurious. Still, the government has promised to have legislation in place this year. Given the general public’s wish to see a ban introduced without delay, the latest compromises with the trade may be the only expeditious way forward.

The government had originally proposed that only the first two taxis in a queue be allowed to keep their engines running. Under the revised proposal, the first five would be allowed to do so. And if the queue is moving, every waiting taxi would be able to keep its engine on. Unless they are in long queues which move little – like those at the airport – most drivers waiting in line in urban areas would be able to claim they are in a moving queue. Similarly contrived rules will apply to minibuses. For example, green-top minibuses often wait in one queue but serve different destinations. The new rule would allow the first and second minibuses travelling on the same route to keep their engines on, regardless of their places in the queue.

Without going into all the details, it is easy to see that police officers and traffic wardens would face a tough time handing out tickets. Traffic conditions are fluid, especially in a city like Hong Kong; vehicles in queues are constantly moving. Often, minibuses switch places while waiting at stops. Some stops are busier than others; and conditions can vary greatly at the same stop during different times of day.

The trade probably wants these rules in place because they will make enforcing the new law difficult. If so, it is to be regretted that professional drivers cannot be more public-spirited. Understandably, they face declining business in the current downturn. But the ban will not affect their livelihood. At most, it will cause inconvenience, such as not being able to cool themselves with air conditioning.

It is now clear the city will not have the toughest ban many people were hoping for. However, breaches of the new law would carry a substantial fine of HK$320, so it does not lack teeth. It should still serve as a serious deterrent and have an educational effect on drivers and pedestrians alike. Even if police officers may be hamstrung, they can cite the law and warn drivers – professional and private – to operate their vehicles more responsibly.

Despite the new steps taken to placate the trade, some representatives of the taxi trade still oppose the revised proposal. It is unlikely anything can be done to satisfy these people short of dropping the legislation altogether. Let us hope officials will stand firm from this point on and move ahead to impose the ban. The discomfort drivers will suffer from not having air conditioning will be small relative to the serious impact on pedestrians’ health from their vehicles’ roadside emissions.

Updated on Aug 02, 2008 – SCMP

I am responding to the claim [made by a union representative] that overheated vehicles could become time bombs (“Heatstroke fear cited in campaign against idling ban”, July 31). Idling engines are already time bombs for every man, woman and child pedestrian. Also, how about the people who have to live and work near these vehicles? In Arran Street, Mong Kok (and other places) the engines of the coaches to the mainland are constantly idling, even if there are no passengers or drivers inside. How about the people working near these vehicles? The nearby 7-Eleven does not have a door and is open to the elements. What about the health of the young people working there and the newspaper vendors and other workers? The next generation is going to have terrible health problems if this problem is not addressed and we do not see drastic improvements. We have had enough of the debates and time-wasting discussions. We need action now.

Suzanne Chung, Mong Kok

To reduce levels of air pollution in the city, the government has proposed a number of methods to solve the problem, including banning idling engines. However, this well-intentioned proposal does not take into account the real situation. For example, taxi drivers would have to restart the engines of their vehicles several times a day if idling engines were banned. This would drain their batteries. Also on a hot summer’s day, the temperature inside vehicles will rise to 40 degrees Celsius within minutes if the air conditioning has been turned off (“Heatstroke fear cited in campaign against idling ban”, July 31). This makes drivers and passengers very uncomfortable when they are left sitting in the vehicles. I think it is possible to have a win-win result, by adopting a flexible policy. Vehicles would be allowed to keep their air conditioners running during hot summer days. Also, some cars, such as taxis, could be excluded from the legislation if their engines are idling for short periods. By adopting this approach we could see an improvement in air quality and still ensure a comfortable working environment for drivers.

I. K. Li, Ngau Chi Wan

Should more exemptions be made for idling engines?

Updated on Jul 19, 2008 – SCMP

I believe public vehicles should not be given any special consideration when a law banning idling engines is introduced. The ban should be across the board.

If it is not, it could create controversy.

The main concern drivers have about an idling ban is being comfortable while waiting for passengers and using excuses about giving passengers a more comfortable ride.

It is not fair to have drivers sitting comfortably in the vehicle with the air conditioner on, while pedestrians are suffering outside and being forced to breathe in the polluted air these vehicles produce.

That is why there should be no exceptions to the regulation after it has been introduced.

Joyce Yip, North Point

HK Standard – (2008-07-14 13:46:38)

The green policy to ban idling vehicle engines look set to be launched within the next 12 months, Secretary for Environment Edward Yau Tang-wah said today.

Yau said both the public and the district councils had come to a consensus that Hong Kong had to move ahead with the policy to protect the environment despite the concerns expressed by the transport sector.

A five-month public consultation on the proposal to ban idling vehicle engines ended in March.

The government document suggests if a driver does not switch off his vehicle’s engine when it is idle, he will fined HK$320.