Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

Incineration – Solid Waste Disposal

隔牆有耳:垃圾圍城 兩害如何取其輕  長洲居民反焚化 製造致癌氣體

http://hk.apple.nextmedia.com/news/art/20130803/18361950

隔牆有耳:垃圾圍城 兩害如何取其輕


長洲居民反焚化 製造致癌氣體

http://static.apple.nextmedia.com/images/apple-photos/apple/20130803/small/a1802a.gif

http://static.apple.nextmedia.com/adoinfile/Section_Logo/45.gif

【隔牆對論】
環境局局長黃錦星警告香港很快出現「垃圾圍城」,但三個堆填區擴建撥款申請仍全數墮馬。碰了一面灰之後,政府在焚化爐的司法覆核案中獲得勝訴。
垃圾為患,應該堆填還是焚化?
容忍了堆填區垃圾臭味20多年的下白泥村村民杜錫譽認為,建焚化爐勢在必行,「等如火葬同土葬,點解香港市民接受火葬,唔接受去焚化呢?」長洲居民Martin Williams則認為,焚化垃圾的飛灰不是無毒,「若焚化爐在石鼓洲或屯門兩個選址二選其一,很大機會形成長洲與屯門居民對立的形勢」。
記者︰蔡建豪 潘柏林

http://static.apple.nextmedia.com/images/apple-photos/apple/20130803/small/03lp2p1.jpgMartin指英國用等離子技術轉廢為能,不明白香港的廢物處理技術為何如此落後。朱永倫攝

記:《蘋果》記者
M:長洲居民Martin Williams

記:擬建焚化爐選址與長洲近在咫尺,居民最憂慮甚麼?
M:我由英國來港定居長洲已20多年,選擇居於長洲是因為這是一個美麗的小島,能吸一口新鮮空氣。政府選址石鼓洲興建焚化爐,長洲居民最憂慮的當然是空氣質素變差,在焚化廢物過程中產生的灰塵不是無毒的,隨風飄到長洲,肯定直接影響居民健康。上屆政府選取遠離民居的石鼓洲興建焚化爐,實情不知道該處也是一個美麗的小島,擁有該處獨有的蛇及蜥蜴。至於運載廢物的船隻造成海洋污染,以及魚排等生態環境受影響,更是無可避免。
政府一直宣傳焚化爐不會造成污染,更一面倒推銷焚化爐有很多好處,其實是誤導廣大市民。外國已有很多資料及研究顯示,焚化爐會製造重大污染,指明焚化爐與癌症和先天缺陷有關。香港過去也曾關閉所有焚化爐,就是知道釋出氣體有毒,今天焚化其實是一個落後的廢物處理方法。

記:政府現時的廢物政策,傾向由三數個區域承擔全港廢物帶來的惡果,你有何看法?
M:這安排對居於堆填區或將來焚化爐附近的居民,當然是不公平。我想強調,焚化及堆填均不是正確的廢物處理方法,若焚化爐在石鼓洲或屯門兩個選址二選其一,很大機會形成長洲與屯門居民對立的形勢,這是我不想看到的情況。我要說的是不論選址石鼓洲或屯門都不可接受,香港根本不應興建焚化爐。
焚化爐以外,現時已有一種先進的等離子體氣化技術(Plasma arc treatment),可處理有機廢物及過多的廚餘肥料。將有機廢物加熱至數千度後,再爆破分子,可化成用作飛機燃料的氣體,名副其實是轉廢為能。我的老家英國已沿用有關技術,但環保署卻一口否定引入技術的可行性,偏執於興建焚化爐。若廢物產量大減,更可挖掘已填滿的堆填區抽出有用的金屬,修復堆填區可作休憩用地,對居民是一項德政。

記:如何評價今天本港的源頭減廢成效?
M:不少城市如美國三藩市,已朝堆填區零廢物為目標的方向進發,三藩市回收率已達80%水平。我質疑香港回收率已達到48%的準確性,大家只要留意,就會發現很多可回收的廢物四處丟棄。政府定出每年減廢1%的目標是太低了,徵收垃圾費也不完全正確,何況最快也要2016年才推行。我經常問,為何香港作為一個現代化國際城市,廢物管理策略如此落後?為何政府不斷以荒謬的方法處理廢物?台灣及日本在回收方面做得很出色,為何香港未能做到?

記︰香港在減廢方面有空間做得更好嗎?
M︰當然,香港政府有充足儲備,不少香港人也願意付錢減廢。不過,我們不應該花費逾百億元去建造全球最貴的焚化爐,這只是走一條回頭路。可惜的是,不同組織向政府提議,任何焚化爐以外的技術及減廢方法,政府都一概以不可行推卻,未有深入加以考慮。或是口頭上說會考慮不同的意見,轉頭即加以否定,堅持焚化爐方案以外,別無他法解決本港的固體廢物問題。

記:你對環境局局長黃錦星有期望嗎?
M:上屆政府的環境局局長邱騰華已浪費了港人太多時間。坦白說,本是綠色建築師的黃錦星上任初期,我是對他有一定期望的,希望他帶來改變。不過,事隔一年,他表現是低於期望,政治環境已令他吃不消,公務員也存在不願改變的根深柢固文化,推行環保政策要收到美滿成效,是一件非常困難及艱巨的工作。

mailto:pf_lee@appledaily.com

Infant Mortality rates in Electoral Wards Around Kirklees Incinerator

Download PDF : kirklees

Download PDF : tyseley

Incinerator plans leave Lantau split

Rainbow Wong is naive.

There is no such thing as non-polluting incineration. Hong Kong’s proposed incinerator will emit 2 million kilos of toxic POPs, heavy metals, sulphur, oxides emissions into the air per day – no modern technology can catch the PM2.5 and PM1 respirable suspended particulates that carry heavy metals like mercury and cadmium + dioxins and furans. These particulates will eventually drop onto the land and into the sea, thereby polluting our food chain. These toxin laden particulates enter deep into your body unhindered by nose hairs or cilia.

Lantao and its surrounding islands within 10 kms of the site will be most affected by these emissions. Given the height of the proposed chimney stack the emissions would reach and affect as far as 25 kms negatively.

IT IS A PEER REVIEWED FACT THAT BIRTH DEFECTS, CANCERS AND DEATHS INCREASE WITH PROXIMITY TO WASTE INCINERATORS.

ASH

One third of what is burned each day remains as toxic ash. Hong Kong will have to build mega islands in the sea near Lantao and Cheung Chau to become the new ash lagoons.

At any time in our tropical cyclone region we could face mega waves that would wash this ash into the seas causing environmental disasters that would spread with the currents.

The incinerator would destroy any possible Lantao tourism increase .

43% of HKG’s daily MSW is ultra-wet (90% moisture) food waste. You cannot burn water without adding additional fuel . Our food waste could be handled by pulping the food waste and sending it into the existing sewage drainage system to Stonecutters that will have a capacity of 2.76 million cubic meters per day by 2016. Currently it handles 1.4 million cubic meters per day so 3300 cubic meters of food waste would be a negligible increased load.

Goldman Environmental Award 2013 – Rossano Ercolini

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hjgoimXaOY

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22039871

‘his campaign to encourage recycling and waste reduction has led to 117 municipalities across Italy closing incinerators and committing to zero-waste strategies.’

Some food for thought

http://news.newclear.server279.com/?p=7039

Ming Pao – Plan B

http://news.newclear.server279.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/32opinion_local.pdf

SCMP Online comment: Aug 3rd 2013 7:40am

ON-GOING HEALTH RISKS FOR COMMUNITIES LIVING IN THE PROXIMITY OF INCINERATORS – NO SUCH THING AS A “CLEAN” MODERN INCINERATOR.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23160082

Cancer mortality in towns in the vicinity of incinerators and installations for the recovery or disposal of hazardous waste
Javier García-Pérez, , Pablo Fernández-Navarro, Adela Castelló, María Felicitas López-Cima, Rebeca Ramis, Elena Boldo, Gonzalo López-Abente.
Cancer and Environmental Epidemiology Unit, National Center for Epidemiology, Carlos III Institute of Health, Avda. Monforte de Lemos, 5, 28029 Madrid, Spain
www.facebook.com/pages/Clear-The-Air/367584435467

Sint Niklaas Belgium incinerator
www.gainscotland.org.uk/feature_Sint-Niklaas.shtml


Risk of adverse reproductive outcomes associated with proximity to municipal solid waste incinerators with high dioxin emission levels in Japan
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15242064

CONCLUSION: Our study shows a peak-decline in risk with distance from the municipal solid waste incinerators for infant deaths and infant deaths with all congenital malformations combined

Risk for non Hodgkin’s lymphoma in the vicinity of French municipal solid waste incinerators
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18959776

CONCLUSION: This study, in line with previous results obtained in the vicinity of the incinerator located in Besançon (France), adds further evidence to the link between NHL incidence and exposure to dioxins emitted by MSW incinerators

Incineration and Health Issues – Friends of the Earth

http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/briefings/incineration_health_issues.pdf

Clear the Air – incinerators – 359 news items

http://news.newclear.server279.com/?cat=59

Health Effects of Waste Incinerators

http://www.ecomed.org.uk/publications/reports/the-health-effects-of-waste-incinerators

http://www.ecomed.org.uk/content/IncineratorReport_v3.pdf\

Pollution and health impacts of waste incinerators – Greenpeace

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/MultimediaFiles/Live/FullReport/3809.PDF

Dancing for clean air

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpJBhZCS7YE

San Francisco Zero Waste by 2020

http://www.sfenvironment.org/zero-waste

http://www.sfenvironment.org/zero-waste/recycling-and-composting

Are rubbish incinerators killing our children? AN INVESTIGATION is to be launched into incinerators after claims they are linked to cancer and high death rates among babies and children. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/243962/Are-rubbish-incinerators-killing-our-children

· 0de26e5e2a58164d688e19f8d95ede71.jpg

· 5138a333f20fa4b0933921787e163d89.jpg

·

·

People gather on Pui O Beach to protest against a proposed incinerator near the island. Photos: Jonathan Wong

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (http://www.scmp.com)

Home > Incinerator plans leave Lantau split



Incinerator plans leave Lantau split

Friday, 02 August, 2013, 12:00am

Lifestyle

Charley Lanyon charley.lanyon@scmp.com

A huge incinerator that will be visible from pristine South Lantau has enraged some residents. But with tourism booming and a third runway on the cards, other locals want development

It was a perfect day when a crowd gathered on Pui O Beach in South Lantau. The sun shone from a clear blue sky, and the gentle swell – ideal for novice surfers – provided a picturesque backdrop. Casual onlookers could have easily mistaken the gathering for a celebration, if not for the people shouting into megaphones.

Sporting bright red “The Naked Islands Project” T-shirts, some protestors formed a circle while others carried a large model of an incinerator decorated with a skull and crossbones and belching dry ice from its stack. The July 22 gathering, known as “Motion in the Ocean”, was based on a traditional Hawaiian surfer’s funeral rite, and held to protest against plans for a massive waste incinerator off nearby Shek Kwu Chau.

To make Lantau more attractive to tourists we must develop

Jeff Lam Yuet, District Councillor

But for the residents and activists, a feeling of desperation hung in the air, with many believing the incinerator was the latest sign of growing pressure on South Lantau from the government and developers.

It was as if they were symbolically mourning the death of Hong Kong’s environment and their way of life on Lantau.

Also joining the protest were activists from South Lantau’s Living Islands Movement, a group that promotes the sustainable development of Hong Kong’s islands with a focus on Lantau, established 10 years ago by Lantau resident Bob Bunker. The group sees the problem as a two-pronged attack – one from developers keen to take advantage of the growing number of tourists and residents on Lantau, the other from a government that sees relatively remote South Lantau as an ideal dumping ground for facilities and projects unpopular with residents in more populated areas.

Bunker describes a decade spent protecting the area’s environment from planned government projects, ranging from super prisons and drug rehabilitation centres to container ports. He says Lantau already shoulders an unfair share of Hong Kong’s unpopular sites. “Radioactive waste is dumped on the Soko Islands, there is an explosives dump in Mui Wo and there are already seven prisons on Lantau,” he says.

But for Bunker, and other activists including The Naked Islands Project founders Lindsey Price and Michael Raper, the mega-incinerator is the most audacious government plan yet. Living Islands Movement’s treasurer John Schofield speaks for them all when he says: “It’s a travesty.”

If it goes ahead, the incinerator will be the largest of its kind in Hong Kong, at an estimated cost of more than HK$15 billion. It is being considered for a man-made island off Shek Kwu Chau, and will be visible from some of the most popular beaches in South Lantau. The area is also an important marine habitat for finless porpoises. It is expected to take eight years to build.

The government, which says the incinerator will be state-of-the-art and environmentally friendly, sees it as an urgently needed solution to the city’s waste crisis.

Rainbow Wong Fuk –kan, Mui Wo’s representative on the Islands Council, supports the incinerator. “Hong Kong needs a place to handle rubbish. And incinerator technology is now very hi-tech. It won’t pollute the environment like incinerators from the past.” He says half of his constituents support the incinerator.

Environmentalists, however, claim the incinerator will pollute the air, and spoil one of Hong Kong’s last pristine coastal areas. They believe the waste crisis can be better addressed through public education, with an emphasis on recycling, and argue that newer, less-polluting alternatives have not been fully considered. They believe their concerns are falling on deaf ears and claim the government’s environmental assessments of the project are flawed and incomplete. Most of all, they feel confused and shocked that, with constant encroachment into Hong Kong’s natural areas, the government would consider such a large waste-disposal project in sight of one of the city’s most beautiful areas.

On July 26, just days after the Motion in the Ocean event, the islanders suffered a defeat when the courts rejected all eight objections to the incinerator brought by neighbouring Cheung Chau residents. The government will now retable the project in the Legislative Council.

But for activists on Lantau, the incinerator is just the latest addition to a growing list of projects which they feel are threatening their way of life.

While the island has been largely spared from the development boom seen on Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon, things started to change in 1997 with the airport opening and a link connecting Lantau to Hong Kong Island. At first, development came slowly and the population influx was mostly limited to airport workers. But with developments such as the Ngong Ping 360 cable car and Disneyland, Lantau was transformed into a tourist spot in its own right.

Development on Lantau has so far been dictated by a widely understood but unwritten rule: North Lantau, led by Tung Chung, would be open for development while South Lantau, with its natural beauty and important ecosystems, would be kept largely untouched. But now, with the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge under construction, the island is bracing for an unprecedented influx of mainland tourists – and with it an influx in tourist dollars – fuelling fears that any agreement to leave South Lantau undeveloped will be ignored.

Residents point to two newly proposed developments in Mui Wo as proof. Schofield says the developments – home-ownership scheme (HOS) flats earmarked for government land – will provide housing for 2,000 people, and that one will be 18 storeys high, making it by far the tallest building in the village. While the development is small by Hong Kong standards, residents say it will have a big impact on Mui Wo. The 2011 census recorded 5,485 people living in Mui Wo and the surrounding area, meaning the development would increase the population by about 40 per cent.

Wong disputes these numbers. “The HOS will be low density and 13 or 14 storeys high. … after it is built, it will only have 400 new households. So with one household having four people, there will just be around 1,000 new people at most in Mui Wo.”

But District Council documents seen by the South China Morning Post show the planned HOS developments would house 1,420 and 500 people, respectively.

Residents also claim Mui Wo’s infrastructure will not cope with the influx, saying schooling, waste services and parking in particular are already tight. They also claim their concerns are not being addressed by their representatives in the Islands District Council.

When Schofield attended a District Council meeting, he was surprised to find the push to develop Mui Wo was coming from council members representing Tung Chung. Wong disputes this. “That North Lantau people dictate the development of South Lantau is not true; South Lantau people support development too, they just want slow development.”

Wong and Jeff Lam Yuet, the council member representing Tung Chung North, dispute claims the infrastructure in Mui Wo is inadequate.

“There are enough government facilities: there is a government building, a market and a pool, but they don’t have a big enough population. By building a home ownership scheme, or even public housing, they can fully utilise their resources and re-energise the community,” Lam says.

Mui Wo has lots of infrastructure so there’s no problem in accommodating 1,000 more people,” says Wong.

Tung Chung representatives, however, make no secret of their desire to see the development of South Lantau. “The whole of Lantau is one big community and South Lantau is in recession now … [North Lantau] is under pressure from tourists. If we develop the south it can alleviate some of the pressure,” says Lam.

He sees big changes for Lantau: “With the third runway and terminal three coming soon, we want to make Tung Chung a hub connecting all of the attractions on Lantau. To make Lantau more attractive to tourists we must develop.”

Lam also supports opening the South Lantau Road to the public, which is currently open only to drivers – mostly residents – with special permits. However, many residents in the south feel permits are given too freely – the number has recently swollen to more than 10,000 – and that the system is insufficiently enforced. They fear opening the road will result in a massive increase in tourists and that South Lantau lacks the roads and parking to deal with it.

Today, things are calm in Mui Wo. The buffalo still roam and the tourists visit on weekends. But the area’s future is uncertain and local opinion is deeply divided. While Lam sees a golden age of tourism, Price and Raper say they and their two children will leave if the incinerator is built.

Schofield has no plans to move, but has some choice words to describe development around the south of the island: “It stinks.”

charley.lanyon@scmp.com [1]

Topics:

LIFE



Links:
[1] mailto:charley.lanyon@scmp.com

Blocking protests only delays the inevitable

Saturday, 03 August, 2013, 12:00am

NewsChina

PEARL BRIEFING

Guangzhou officials showed new sophistication in halting a campaign against a planned rubbish incinerator but such opposition can’t last long

Guangzhou’s rubbish problem is again in the spotlight after more than 10,000 residents living in Huadu district rallied against a planned incinerator, one of the largest protest turnouts in the city in years.

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/styles/236w/public/2013/08/03/nlksdfjglksdfgdfg10000.gif?itok=SmXM9Q0h

The show of strength came at a heavy price – authorities are growing more efficient in cracking down on large demonstrations and are responding with numerous arrests.

Residents held three protests last month, with the first coming in July 15. It was targeted at the Shiling township government after the district government announced Qianjin village in Shiling had been selected as the site location for the city’s fifth incinerator.

Participants estimated the turnout was at least 10,000, while others said the figure was double that. Police officers were seen clearing a path for protesters who marched around the township. The event was peaceful.

The Shiling government is also against the incinerator proposal. The area is a leather goods hub responsible for making half of the world’s non-luxury handbags, and officials fear the project will drive away potential investors – and future tax revenue.

A number of villagers said the Shiling government backed their first protest. Days before the event, villagers communicated with Shiling officials, notifying them of the expected turnout and the route. This explains why such a large rally, with many participants holding banners denouncing a government project, was allowed to go ahead.

https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/styles/236w/public/2013/08/02/a015c1d5e09472e3314ac40b43125716.jpg?itok=-yVgVkmq

“Permission to protest had been granted,” said a Shiling resident who refused to be named. “I cannot elaborate any more but let’s just say it is also in the Shiling government’s interest to see the incinerator relocated elsewhere.”

Residents escalated their effort on July 19, targeting the district government. Residents staged a big rally outside the district government headquarters and also marched along its busiest streets, bringing traffic to a standstill. At least four people were injured in clashes with the police. The protest was broken up just before 6pm but authorities entered Qianjin village in Shiling that night and arrested at least nine suspected organisers of the event.

When it emerged residents planned to take their campaign to downtown Guangzhou, authorities stepped up their efforts. They targeted other suspected organisers, key players and village leaders, detaining some, confiscating mobile phones and tracking social media messages, residents said.

Several hundred residents who made the journey to downtown Guangzhou on July 23 were caught in a police dragnet. Stringent identity checks were carried out in public areas, especially outside city government offices.

Police took down the personal details of anyone with identity cards bearing a Shiling address. Officers immediately broke up any small crowds lingering outside government offices. Those who were detained were taken groups to a sports stadium at Yuexiu Mountain and put on coach buses that took them back to Shiling.

One has to applaud the efficiency and execution of the city government in pre-empting a large protest over a genuine grievance. The government appears to be growing more skilful at “maintaining social stability”.

Qianjin villagers and Shiling township residents were taking action out of fear for their health and their jobs in the leather goods hub. They said they were never consulted before the project was announced.

They have heard horror stories of hazardous emissions and underground water pollution from Likeng villagers in Baiyun district, which has the city’s first and second incinerators. Likeng villagers blame the incinerator for rising cancer rates in the area.

Protests like the ones by Huadu residents and the ones in Jiangmen against a uranium processing plant are part of a growing trend triggered in part by the Guangdong government’s obsession with drumming up economic indicators to protect its status as the mainland’s gross domestic product leader.

Solving the province’s environmental problems and addressing residents’ needs have to be tackled at some point. Clever tactics to head off protests is just putting off the inevitable.

mimi.lau@scmp.com [1]



Links:
[1] mailto:mimi.lau@scmp.com

Incinerator plans leave Lantau split

Friday, 02 August, 2013, 12:00am

Lifestyle

· 0de26e5e2a58164d688e19f8d95ede71.jpg

· 5138a333f20fa4b0933921787e163d89.jpg

·

·

eople gather on Pui O Beach to protest against a proposed incinerator near the island. Photos: Jonathan Wong

Charley Lanyon charley.lanyon@scmp.com

A huge incinerator that will be visible from pristine South Lantau has enraged some residents. But with tourism booming and a third runway on the cards, other locals want development

It was a perfect day when a crowd gathered on Pui O Beach in South Lantau. The sun shone from a clear blue sky, and the gentle swell – ideal for novice surfers – provided a picturesque backdrop. Casual onlookers could have easily mistaken the gathering for a celebration, if not for the people shouting into megaphones.

Sporting bright red “The Naked Islands Project” T-shirts, some protestors formed a circle while others carried a large model of an incinerator decorated with a skull and crossbones and belching dry ice from its stack. The July 22 gathering, known as “Motion in the Ocean”, was based on a traditional Hawaiian surfer’s funeral rite, and held to protest against plans for a massive waste incinerator off nearby Shek Kwu Chau.

To make Lantau more attractive to tourists we must develop

Jeff Lam Yuet, District Councillor

But for the residents and activists, a feeling of desperation hung in the air, with many believing the incinerator was the latest sign of growing pressure on South Lantau from the government and developers.

It was as if they were symbolically mourning the death of Hong Kong’s environment and their way of life on Lantau.

Also joining the protest were activists from South Lantau’s Living Islands Movement, a group that promotes the sustainable development of Hong Kong’s islands with a focus on Lantau, established 10 years ago by Lantau resident Bob Bunker. The group sees the problem as a two-pronged attack – one from developers keen to take advantage of the growing number of tourists and residents on Lantau, the other from a government that sees relatively remote South Lantau as an ideal dumping ground for facilities and projects unpopular with residents in more populated areas.

Bunker describes a decade spent protecting the area’s environment from planned government projects, ranging from super prisons and drug rehabilitation centres to container ports. He says Lantau already shoulders an unfair share of Hong Kong’s unpopular sites. “Radioactive waste is dumped on the Soko Islands, there is an explosives dump in Mui Wo and there are already seven prisons on Lantau,” he says.

But for Bunker, and other activists including The Naked Islands Project founders Lindsey Price and Michael Raper, the mega-incinerator is the most audacious government plan yet. Living Islands Movement’s treasurer John Schofield speaks for them all when he says: “It’s a travesty.”

If it goes ahead, the incinerator will be the largest of its kind in Hong Kong, at an estimated cost of more than HK$15 billion. It is being considered for a man-made island off Shek Kwu Chau, and will be visible from some of the most popular beaches in South Lantau. The area is also an important marine habitat for finless porpoises. It is expected to take eight years to build.

The government, which says the incinerator will be state-of-the-art and environmentally friendly, sees it as an urgently needed solution to the city’s waste crisis.

Rainbow Wong Fuk-kan, Mui Wo’s representative on the Islands Council, supports the incinerator. “Hong Kong needs a place to handle rubbish. And incinerator technology is now very hi-tech. It won’t pollute the environment like incinerators from the past.” He says half of his constituents support the incinerator.

Environmentalists, however, claim the incinerator will pollute the air, and spoil one of Hong Kong’s last pristine coastal areas. They believe the waste crisis can be better addressed through public education, with an emphasis on recycling, and argue that newer, less-polluting alternatives have not been fully considered. They believe their concerns are falling on deaf ears and claim the government’s environmental assessments of the project are flawed and incomplete. Most of all, they feel confused and shocked that, with constant encroachment into Hong Kong’s natural areas, the government would consider such a large waste-disposal project in sight of one of the city’s most beautiful areas.

On July 26, just days after the Motion in the Ocean event, the islanders suffered a defeat when the courts rejected all eight objections to the incinerator brought by neighbouring Cheung Chau residents. The government will now retable the project in the Legislative Council.

But for activists on Lantau, the incinerator is just the latest addition to a growing list of projects which they feel are threatening their way of life.

While the island has been largely spared from the development boom seen on Hong Kong Island and in Kowloon, things started to change in 1997 with the airport opening and a link connecting Lantau to Hong Kong Island. At first, development came slowly and the population influx was mostly limited to airport workers. But with developments such as the Ngong Ping 360 cable car and Disneyland, Lantau was transformed into a tourist spot in its own right.

Development on Lantau has so far been dictated by a widely understood but unwritten rule: North Lantau, led by Tung Chung, would be open for development while South Lantau, with its natural beauty and important ecosystems, would be kept largely untouched. But now, with the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge under construction, the island is bracing for an unprecedented influx of mainland tourists – and with it an influx in tourist dollars – fuelling fears that any agreement to leave South Lantau undeveloped will be ignored.

Residents point to two newly proposed developments in Mui Wo as proof. Schofield says the developments – home-ownership scheme (HOS) flats earmarked for government land – will provide housing for 2,000 people, and that one will be 18 storeys high, making it by far the tallest building in the village. While the development is small by Hong Kong standards, residents say it will have a big impact on Mui Wo. The 2011 census recorded 5,485 people living in Mui Wo and the surrounding area, meaning the development would increase the population by about 40 per cent.

Wong disputes these numbers. “The HOS will be low density and 13 or 14 storeys high. … after it is built, it will only have 400 new households. So with one household having four people, there will just be around 1,000 new people at most in Mui Wo.”

But District Council documents seen by the South China Morning Post show the planned HOS developments would house 1,420 and 500 people, respectively.

Residents also claim Mui Wo’s infrastructure will not cope with the influx, saying schooling, waste services and parking in particular are already tight. They also claim their concerns are not being addressed by their representatives in the Islands District Council.

When Schofield attended a District Council meeting, he was surprised to find the push to develop Mui Wo was coming from council members representing Tung Chung. Wong disputes this. “That North Lantau people dictate the development of South Lantau is not true; South Lantau people support development too, they just want slow development.”

Wong and Jeff Lam Yuet, the council member representing Tung Chung North, dispute claims the infrastructure in Mui Wo is inadequate.

“There are enough government facilities: there is a government building, a market and a pool, but they don’t have a big enough population. By building a home ownership scheme, or even public housing, they can fully utilise their resources and re-energise the community,” Lam says.

“Mui Wo has lots of infrastructure so there’s no problem in accommodating 1,000 more people,” says Wong.

Tung Chung representatives, however, make no secret of their desire to see the development of South Lantau. “The whole of Lantau is one big community and South Lantau is in recession now … [North Lantau] is under pressure from tourists. If we develop the south it can alleviate some of the pressure,” says Lam.

He sees big changes for Lantau: “With the third runway and terminal three coming soon, we want to make Tung Chung a hub connecting all of the attractions on Lantau. To make Lantau more attractive to tourists we must develop.”

Lam also supports opening the South Lantau Road to the public, which is currently open only to drivers – mostly residents – with special permits. However, many residents in the south feel permits are given too freely – the number has recently swollen to more than 10,000 – and that the system is insufficiently enforced. They fear opening the road will result in a massive increase in tourists and that South Lantau lacks the roads and parking to deal with it.

Today, things are calm in Mui Wo. The buffalo still roam and the tourists visit on weekends. But the area’s future is uncertain and local opinion is deeply divided. While Lam sees a golden age of tourism, Price and Raper say they and their two children will leave if the incinerator is built.

Schofield has no plans to move, but has some choice words to describe development around the south of the island: “It stinks.”

charley.lanyon@scmp.com [1]

Topics:

LIFE



Links:
[1] mailto:charley.lanyon@scmp.com

A review of the performance of municipal waste incinerators in the UK

Download PDF : GreenpeaceUKIncinerator

Emissions from a mass-burn incinerator at Capel become a major concern for those living within 16 miles due north, north-east and east of the site

download : CAG_Infant_deaths_report(1)

Swift action vital to solve Hong Kong’s garbage crisis

Tuesday, 30 July, 2013, 12:00am

CommentInsight & Opinion

LEADER

SCMP Editorial

Garbage disposal in a wasteful city like Hong Kong has proved to be a challenge. After a series of setbacks in expanding the landfills, there is finally some good news for the government. Last week the High Court ruled against a resident who was trying to stop the construction of a massive offshore waste incinerator on an island south of Lantau. The judge dismissed claims that the environmental impact assessment was flawed, saying the proposed mitigation measures met the relevant requirements.

The ruling is no doubt a relief for environment chief Wong Kam-sing. The beleaguered minister was dealt a heavy blow when he failed to push through proposals to expand three near-saturated landfills early this month. It remains unclear when the HK$15 billion incinerator project will be tabled to Legco again, barring a possible appeal by the resident. But Wong must be happy to see the green study upheld in court. It is to be hoped that the ruling will remove the uncertainties ahead and give officials a firm legal footing to move forward.

However, it would be naive to assume plain sailing ahead. Like landfill expansion, incineration is unpopular. But they are essential components of the city’s waste management strategy, along with a future garbage disposal charge. If the landfill proposals are anything to go by, the proposed incinerator will run into plenty of objections. There may be less opposition from residents because of the offshore location, but the impact on public health remains a major concern. The involvement of massive land reclamation in a marine habitat for finless porpoises is also bound to stir controversy.

The incinerator will take eight years to build. With the landfill expansion in limbo and the waste disposal charge not in place until 2016, it makes sense to get on with the project sooner rather than later. Officials should carefully assess the situation and re-table funding requests for the incinerator and landfills in due course. Residents and lawmakers should also drop their not-in-my-backyard mentality and support the plans.



Links:
[1] http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1291486/bid-halt-shek-kwu-chau-incinerator-fails

Cancer mortality in towns in the vicinity of incinerators and installations for the recovery or disposal of hazardous waste

Peer reviewed Report www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23160082

Cancer mortality in towns in the vicinity of incinerators and installations for the recovery or disposal of hazardous waste

Javier García-Pérez

a, b,

, Pablo Fernández-Navarro

a, b

, Adela Castelló

a

, María Felicitas López-Cima

,

Rebeca Ramis

a

b

a, b

, Elena Boldo

a, b

, Gonzalo López-Abente

a, b

Cancer and Environmental Epidemiology Unit, National Center for Epidemiology, Carlos III Institute of Health, Avda. Monforte de Lemos, 5, 28029 Madrid, Spain

CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Spain

Corresponding author at: Área de Epidemiología Ambiental y Cáncer, Centro Nacional de Epidemiología, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Avda. Monforte de Lemos, 5, 28029 Madrid,

Spain. Tel.: +34 918222643; fax: +34 913877815.

E-mail addresses: jgarcia@isciii.es (J. García-Pérez), pfernandezn@isciii.es

(P. Fernández-Navarro), acastello@isciii.es (A. Castelló), cina@isciii.es

(M.F. López-Cima), rramis@isciii.es (R. Ramis), eiboldo@isciii.es (E. Boldo),

glabente@isciii.es (G. López-Abente).

0160-4120/$ see front matter © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2012.10.003

J. García-Pérez et al. / Environment International 51 (2013) 3144

In this context, this study sought to:

(1) assess possible excess mortality attributable to 33 tumor sites among the Spanish population residing in the

environs of incinerators and hazardous waste treatment plants governed by the IPPC Directive and E-PRTR Regulation;

(2) analyze this risk according to the different categories of industrial activity, and for each installation individually; and,

(3) perform the analysis for the population, both overall and broken down by sex, using different statistical approaches for the purpose.

Conclusion:

Our results support the hypothesis of a statistically signicant higher risk, among men and women alike, of dying from all cancers

in towns situated near incinerators and hazardous waste treatment plants, and specically, a higher excess risk in respect of tumors of

the stomach, liver, pleura, kidney, and ovary. Furthermore, this is one of the rst studies to analyze the risk of dying of cancer related with

specic industrial activities in this sector at a national level, and to highlight the excess risk observed in the vicinity of incinerators and installations

for the recycling of scrap metal and scrapping of ELVs, regeneration of spent baths, and treatment of oil and oily waste.

Download PDF : CancerMortalityIncinSpain

Undignified announcement of judicial review outcome

Saturday, 27 July, 2013, 12:00am

Business

LAI SEE

Howard Winn

Call us naive but we were a little shocked yesterday at the way in which the judgment was announced on whether to grant a judicial review on aspects of the proposed Shek Kwu Chau incinerator.

We assumed a matter like this would be conducted with the dignity that accompanies judicial proceedings at the High Court and, for that matter, lower courts. About 30 people gathered outside Court No 14, including the press, green groups and other interested parties. Suddenly, the door opened and a clerk called out two names. Two figures appeared and signed for their copies of the judgment and then disappeared, leaving the assembled totally mystified as to what had happened.

We eventually gathered that leave to seek a judicial review had been dismissed. We wandered off to the press office at the High Court, which said it was printing 20 copies of the judgment which, at 80 pages a copy, seemed wasteful.

Why not hand out a brief summary of the judgment and put the full version online? We gather that the judgment won’t be online for a further three days. It was all rather shambolic and not what a casual observer might expect from the High Court. Many might agree it could do a lot better.

Have you got any stories that Lai See should know about? E-mail them to howard.winn@scmp.com [1]



Links:
[1] mailto:howard.winn@scmp.com