Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

Incineration – Solid Waste Disposal

Chairman’s Focus: Waste management consultation

Jan 9th, 2014
by Editor.
No comments yet

In Hong Kong, 43% of the city’s daily municipal solid waste (MSW) waste is food waste – ultra wet food waste (water content is 75% in mall waste and 90% in wet market food waste). The Government insists on burning this water-waste with an incinerator on a scenic island, but the feedstock does not have the required calorific value required for combustion. Previous tests at composting Hong Kong food waste failed miserably due to the low quality and water content, and the test samples were actually landfilled since they were neither saleable nor exportable.

If there could be a mandatory separation for food waste here, placed in a Green Bin (see below example on Santa Monica), then collected Free of Charge by Government contractors, delivered to Transfer stations and garburated into a puree, the food waste can be then poured into the sewage system network. The CEPT system at Stonecutters island alone (there are ten other smaller treatment plants also) can handle 2.45million m3 of sewage per day by 2016. For reference, the current daily load is under 1.3million m3, so 3,600m3 of ultra wet pureed food waste per day would be a negligible load increase. This idea came from a senior technical engineer working for a company that happens to be Government consultants and it is totally viable.

The removal of food waste contamination would leave dry MSW that could form a new recycling industry here – without this, you cannot sort MSW already mixed and contaminated by food waste. Our Government-provided recycling figures are inflated. They pad the figures using imported trash from Europe and America that was being transferred through HKG to China – this only came to light when China erected ‘Operation Green Fence’, leaving many incoming containers stuck here.

The current lack of waste pre-sort requirements leaves food waste to create methane (23 times more dangerous greenhouse gas then CO2) and hydrogen sulphide when buried in landfills. On top of that, trucks drip foul stinking water (again, because of the high water content in local food waste) onto the roads whilst delivering to landfills. Flies and rats abound. The above food waste option, aside from being a much cleaner option, will create sensible recycling industries here. Tuen Mun can become ‘Green Tuen Mun’ instead of the territory’s toilet.

Landfills: viable recyclables are currently being dumped in landfills since they are tainted with food waste and there is no viable local recycling industry. A major portion of the landfilling is construction waste. Whilst 18,000 tonnes of construction waste is hived off to CEDD daily for shipping to China the remaining 3,000 odd tonnes of unusable construction waste is landfilled.

In Belgium a joint venture between APP UK and Group Machiels is building a  plasma gasification plant at the Houtalen Hechteren landfill – this will reverse-mine the landfill back to its pristine state, the recovered metals will be sold, electricity will be generated from the plasma syngas hydrogen and sold to the local grid and the plasma’d soil will form Plasmarok, fused at 6,000 Degrees C into an inert saleable road aggregate. The Government was offered a FREE 150,000 tonnes per annum trial plasma plant and rejected it, as it went outside of their incineration blinkers. This could have been operational now at the Tseung Kwan O landfill.

Incineration requires increased oxygen, frequently the addition of low-grade coal or oil to obtain combustion of wet matter and burns at 850 degrees C. If the burn temperature drops due to wet feedstock dioxins can and do form. Dioxins also form mostly on startup and shutdown of the burner. There are numerous peer reviewed studies of cancers, orofacial child defects, and deaths in proximity to incinerators. These are facts. The Government consistently refuse to acknowledge the seriousness of this salient health matter. The proposed stack height at Shek Kwu Chau will affect the whole of Hong Kong with wind borne toxic pollutants and heavy metal emissions carried on PM1 and PM2.5 particulates that escapes bag house covers and other equipment. Meanwhile, 30% of what is burned by weight remains as toxic bottom ash and fly ash. This needs landfilling, hence the need to extend landfills instead of doing away with landfills. Government officials will start applying to Legco for funding to build mega islands in the sea for new ash lagoons, when Hong Kong is hit annually by tropical storms. Super typhoons like Haiyan are always ready to hit and destroy empty safety promises of protective structures and punish the city with a blanket of toxic ash.

With current judicial reviews and appeals, the mal-thought incinerator option would not appear until 2023, by which time the rest of the world will be using plasma gasifiers for years already. Thailand, Philippines and Indonesia, countries that Hong Kong citizens don’t usually consider superior in terms of progress, are moving ahead with plasma projects; Solena Fuels Inc already signed with Pertamina Indonesia for an MSW feedstock plasma plant.

In a plasma gasification plant, plasma gasifiers operate with an initial fluidised bed at 1,200 – 1,500 degrees Centigrade that vaporises anything – construction waste, MSW, rock, metal – into its molecular gaseous state. The dirty syngas is then passed through multiple plasma arcs operating at the temperature of the sun, above 6,000 degrees Centigrade, which destroy any dioxins or other contaminants, leaving only pure hydrogen and carbon monoxide. The carbon monoxide is captured and the hydrogen is used to drive turbines to produce electricity. The plant emissions from the hydrogen are steam. There is no ash to landfill.

Alternative processes can add a Fischer-Tropsch backend process that takes the syngas and creates carbon neutral bio jetfuel, bio naptha, bio diesel or bio marine fuel as in the Solena Fuels system. Such systems are used in large-scale plasma plants that are being built in numerous countries, with some in the UK close to completion. The BA / Solena Fuels plant with a capacity of 1550 MSW tonnes per day and produces bio jetfuel is underway in London. (BA has ordered 3 more plants, one more in UK and two in Spain.) Lufthansa / Solena plant is underway in east Germany near the Polish border. A total of 14 airlines have signed agreements with Solena for projects, including Qantas, SAS, Alitalia, Fedex, Alaskan, American, Canadian Air etc. Maersk is seeking planning permission for a bio marine fuel plant with Solena in New Jersey. The US plant in Gilroy, California will supply the US based airlines.

Westinghouse Alter NRG has operated MSW / RDF plasma plants in Japan since 2001. Their Utashinai plant closed recently due to the loss of feedstock contracts to operate the plant. The Government and recently an alliance of Govt friendly academics are misleading the public by implying that the Utashinai plant closed due to technical problems, when the real reason is the lack of MSW feedstock. We challenged the academics, CS Poon from HK Poly U and Irene Lo from HKUST, to produce the evidence of Utashinai failure or retract their statements at an open public meeting in Tuen Mun this afternoon. They rejected the invites and any ‘evidence’ they might have is of course unavailable, still lying in the EPD’s imagination. (Coincidentally, Elvis Au – the prime mover of the incinerator idea from EPD, CS Poon, Irene Lo, and other EPD engineers are all on the Environment Committee of the HK Institution of Engineers, from whence the Alliance of academics has sprung.)

Westinghouse torches will power the Teeside Airproducts plasma plant in UK. The 1,000 MSW tonnes per day plant will open within the next few months. A second plant is also being built by Airproducts next to the first and will supply the UK Government Cabinet office with an 84 million pounds savings on its future energy bills.

http://www.alternrg.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Nov-13-2013-50-MW-Plasma-Gasification.pdf

Building an incinerator will cost 20 billion, landfill extensions 10 billion, operational cost per year 300 million + landfill management costs, new ash lagoons in sea 15 billion – treatment costs of illnesses caused by the emissions ??$ billion

Plasma gasifier – cost ZERO – funded by the design build operate company – operation cost funded by operator – emissions hydrogen/steam

Coming back to the Green Bin collection of food waste. This has been done successfully in numerous cities in California, especially with Santa Monica, where incidentally the undersecretary of environment, Christine Loh, has a residence. There is no excuse as to why Hong Kong should not take up the idea. By removing the food waste problem and initiating proper local recycling businesses, we obviate the need for an incinerator and the need to extend landfills.

The Government Environment minister previously stated unwisely that they have no Plan B – it’s time for a plan ‘G’ (‘G’ for Green Bin).

James Middleton

Chairman

8 Jan 2014

Food waste creates methane (23 times more dangerous greenhouse gas then CO2) and hydrogen sulphide when buried in landfills. The delivery trucks drip foul stinking water onto the roads whilst delivering to landfills. Flies and rats abound.

HK academics form panic-pressure group to push for incineration, hide dangers in backseat

Jan 6th, 2014
by Editor.
No comments yet

A group of academics and professionals has now melded their minds with the stubborn ones of Hong Kong officials, pushing for the building of an incinerator for the treatment of the city’s waste.

Representative statements include “We need to act now, or this will end with rubbish piling up on the streets,” from Professor Poon Chi-sun of Polytechnic University’s civil and environmental engineering department, and “Decision makers need to find the most sensible choice – can we take the risk of having so much uncertainty when we have thousands of tonnes of rubbish to handle?” from Professor Irene Lo Man-chi, of the University of Science and Technology’s department of civil and environmental engineering.

The most sensible thing to do, of course, is to first retain composure, lest such voices of panic pressures Hong Kong into making a disastrous decision just for the sake of having to ‘act now’.

A look at their statements reveal aspects meant to mislead and hoodwink audiences. Poon, for example, says, “We have strong reservations about the proposal to double the size of the Tuen Mun landfill, especially when incineration could effectively reduce the volume of waste by up to 90 per cent.” Retailers also attract customers by offering discounts “up to 90 per cent”, when most of the discounts never come close. In the case of incineration, 30% of incinerated waste ends up as toxic fly ash – requiring more landfills and leaving even deadlier pollution than conventional landfilling of waste.

In discussing plasma technology, Lo is reported to have said that problems with plasma technology had led to the closure of a 10-year-old plant in Japan, which had been down for two-thirds of that time. These problems are, in fact, not technical, but a matter of business dealings – in a country with thousands of incinerators, the plasma plant had to close “due to lack of feedstock (loss of long term feed contracts).” Incinerators are both waste treatment and business, and they require feedstock and fuels to remain operational; it is not surprising that the plasma plant couldn’t compete with an established industry over feedstock supplies. Lo’s statement, however, makes it easy to mislead readers over the exact nature of the cited case.

Lo also said the technology had been proved to be a reliable option that was safe in terms of emissions, syncing her opinion with the ‘proven technology’ refrain of Hong Kong officials. ‘Reliable’ is a very attractive word for the public, but it is unclear what exactly is meant when incineration is ‘reliable’. Having the ability to reduce the mass and increase the toxicity of the materials going to landfills does not seem to fit the idea of ‘reliable’. Incinerator accidents in Guangzhou and Shanghai shows that incinerators are not necessarily accident-free ‘reliable’; U.S. regulatory agencies have also found that incinerators are prone to various types of malfunctions, system failures and breakdowns, which routinely lead to serious air pollution control problems and increased emissions that are dangerous to public health. What is ‘reliable’ about incineration is its ‘reliable’ business opportunity for the operator and its beneficiaries, and its ‘reliable’ demand for feedstocks and fuel, which actively discourages recycling efforts and increases consumption of fossil fuel.

Likewise, ‘safe’ also makes for attractive reading, but ‘safe emissions’ has no real meaning other than to indicate a high level of control over the emissions of pollutants. Emissions that are captured are actually re-released into the environment as ash or sludge after treatment, in even higher concentration of toxicity. Meanwhile, ultra-fine toxic particles such as dioxins can still escape emissions control and seriously endanger human health.

The stubborn attitude displayed by Hong Kong officials over incineration has always been frustrating, but it is especially worrying that academics and professionals – people walking around with an air of credibility – is choosing to join in and support a move that will endanger the future of Hong Kong’s waste management, environment, and the health of its citizens. It is imperative, therefore, that Hong Kong citizens recognize the panic pressure that they are trying to generate, and the shrewd sales language that they use in trying to cajole the public into accepting incineration.

The issue was reported by Cheung Chi-fai of the SCMP.
(more…)

SCMP Letters: Citizens support waste-cutting, opposed to incineration

Dec 30th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Incinerator will pose risk to residents

from Massimo Massarola, Lantau

Studies have shown higher rates of adult and childhood cancer and also birth defects around municipal waste incinerators. The results are consistent with the associations being causal.

Incinerator emissions are a major source of fine particulate, of toxic metals and of more than 200 organic chemicals, including known carcinogens, mutagens and hormone disrupters. Emissions also contain other unidentified compounds whose potential for harm is as yet unknown, as was once the case with dioxins.

Since the nature of waste is continually changing, so is the chemical nature of the incinerator emissions and therefore the potential for adverse health effects. Incinerators produce bottom and fly ash, which amounts to 30 to 50 per cent by volume of the original waste (if compacted), and require transporting to landfill sites.

Abatement equipment in modern incinerators merely transfers the toxic load, notably that of dioxins and heavy metals, from airborne emissions to the fly ash.

This fly ash is light, readily windborne and mostly of low particle size. It represents a considerable and poorly understood health hazard. Two large cohort studies in America have shown that fine (PM2.5) particulate air pollution causes increases in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and mortality from lung cancer, after adjustment for other factors.

A more recent, well-designed study of morbidity and mortality in postmeno-pausal women has confirmed this, showing a 76 per cent increase in cardiovascular and 83 per cent increase in cerebrovascular mortality in women exposed to higher levels of fine particulate.

The fine particles are primarily produced by combustion processes and are emitted in large quantities by incinerators.

We need to support zero-waste alternatives such as waste reduction, product reuse, recycling and composting, and oppose the planned waste incinerator in Hong Kong.

Cut waste with far better recycling

from Chan Wing-ki, Ngau Tau Kok

There has been strong opposition to the government’s proposal to expand our landfills, which are nearing capacity.

Residents living near the landfills are concerned because of the odour caused by the waste. Other people are against the expansion proposals because they will encroach on country parks.

Another proposal is to build an incinerator. If this option is chosen, I hope the government will give careful consideration to the site and have a thorough public consultation.

The most effective way to deal with this problem is to reduce the volume of municipal solid waste generated. The administration should be putting more resources into the recycling industry.

11 Dec 2013

Xinhua: 1 Dead in Shanghai Garbage Explosion

Dec 30th, 2013
by Editor.
1 comment

from CRI English:

One person was killed and five injured when a garbage incinerator blew up on Thursday afternoon in Shanghai. One person remains unaccounted for.

Police received reports at about 3:15 p.m. that a garbage incinerator on Suide Road, Jiading District, had exploded, causing a workshop to collapse and burying several people.

One person died at the scene and another is missing. Five people have been rescued from the rubble and taken to hospital.

Rescue work continues. An investigation is underway.

上海一垃圾焚烧厂爆炸1死5伤 300米外有震感

Eunomia: English Local Authority Recycling Limited to 60%

Dec 28th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

from Eunomia:

The Fifth Issue of Eunomia’s Residual Waste Infrastructure Review, published today, shows that residual waste treatment facilities already in the pipeline could limit the rate of recycling in 2020 for local authority collected (LAC) wastes in England to no more than 60%.

This limit will be in place for as long as the infrastructure remains operational and well beyond 2020 unless contracts can be renegotiated. If the country is successful in its efforts to reduce waste arisings or if more treatment capacity is commissioned, this will further limit recycling rates. Meanwhile, Scottish and Welsh authorities have invested in less infrastructure and will be able to achieve much higher recycling rates.

This is on the conservative assumption that only the 2 million tonnes per annum (tpa) of residual waste treatment capacity commissioned by local authorities that has reached at least ‘preferred bidder’ status reaches financial close. The finding is in stark contrast to the potential recycling rates for LAC in the devolved administrations, which the report shows could reach 82% in Scotland and 79% in Wales.

Adam Baddeley, the report’s lead author said:

“It’s worrying that we are already in danger of limiting how far we can go with recycling in England. If we genuinely aspire to develop a circular economy, then we must shift the focus of investment away from residual waste towards options further up the hierarchy.”

The report is based on local authorities’ annual WasteDataFlow returns to Defra, and Eunomia’s Facilities Database, which holds information on all residual treatment facilities in the UK (both operating and under development) to model the balance between the two. Data is analysed on both a national and regional basis, to provide a detailed picture of where insufficient or excess capacity is anticipated.

28 Nov 2013

China Daily: Five injured in plant explosion (Jan 2010)

Dec 28th, 2013
by Editor.
1 comment

by Qin Quanlin, reporting for China Daily:

GUANGZHOU – Five people were seriously injured when a water-cooling pipeline cracked at the city’s major garbage treatment plant yesterday, local authorities said.

Those who have been protesting the building of more garbage incinerator plants said the accident gives them even stronger convictions that the facilities are not safe. Meanwhile, plant officials still maintain the incinerators are safe and eco-friendly.

A large amount of boiled water and steam leaked from the pipeline after the accident, causing the injuries, according to a statement from the Guangzhou urban planning and administrative committee.

The five were immediately sent to a nearby hospital for treatment, said Li Tinggui, the committee’s director, adding all were in stable condition.

Initial investigations indicated that the accident was caused by a sudden burst of the No 1 water-cooling pipeline at the controversial Likeng garbage incinerator, which was put into operation in 2005.

“I saw a huge stream of mushroom-shaped smoke and heard a terrific noise following the burst,” said a villager who lives near the plant.

Other facilities at the incinerator, located in Baiyun district of Guangzhou, capital of Guangdong province, ran smoothly after the accident, according to the government release.

“We will repair or replace the pipeline as soon as possible to ensure its normal operation,” Li said.

Following the accident, local authorities stopped the operation of the plant.

Francois Guyon, general manager of Veolia Environmental Services, the France-based operator of the Likeng project, said the accident had nothing to do with technology and facilities.

“This garbage incinerator has been operating very well since 2005. It was designed as an environmental-friendly project,” he said.

The general manager was not in Guangzhou yesterday, but he told China Daily in a telephone interview that the accident also had no relation to the freezing weather as the city witnessed a sharp drop in temperature.

Following the accident, netizens said the local government should more strictly supervise the garbage treatment project to ensure that it runs smoothly.

“We don’t trust the so-called state-of-the-art facilities for garbage incinerators,” said a netizen at the city’s popular online forum of dayoo.com.

“No one can ensure the incinerator’s safety in operation, let alone the great damage it poses to people’s health and the environment,” the netizen said.

At the end of last year, local authorities suspended construction of another planned large garbage incinerator in Panyu district due to a wide range of protests from local residents over fears of health and environmental damages.

In addition to Guangzhou, major Chinese cities, such as Beijing and Shanghai, are also planning to build incineration plants to tackle the huge amounts of garbage.

8 Jan 2010

China Digital Times: The Dirty Truth About China’s Incinerators

Dec 28th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

by Josh Rudolph, posted on the China Digital Times:

A heated debate burns around the topic of waste incineration, the flames of which are stoked when the practice turns mountains of trash into usable energy through a toxic transformation. An article from China Dialogue outlines the practice and politics of garbage-incineration and the use of waste-to-energy technology in China, and how it will continue through the 12th five-year-plan:

Most of China’s garbage meets with one of three fates: around half is placed in landfill, 12% is burned and a little under 10% used for fertiliser. The rest is mostly left untreated, much of it simply dumped. However, plants that burn waste – and in the process generate electricity –are on their way to playing a significant role in the disposal of Chinese refuse.

[…]China is set to increase its daily waste-processing capacity by 400,000 tonnes over that five-year period, said Shi. New investment of 140 billion yuan (US$22 billion) will be pumped into the sector, bringing total spending on waste-disposal to 260 billion yuan (US$41 billion).

[…]Evidently, China is gearing up for a Great Leap Forward in garbage incineration.

The path China has chosen will not be smooth. Local governments find themselves squeezed between mountains of rubbish piled around their cities on one side, and residents’ objections to on the other.

(more…)

Miami New Times: Toxic Ash Closes Douglas Park

Dec 28th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

by David Milano of Miami New Times:

Miami-Dade’s newest toxic playground is the City of Miami’s Douglas Park. City officials say arsenic, lead, barium, and other hazardous substances have been found at levels far above the threshold considered safe for human exposure.

The park will be fenced off and closed to all visitors, says assistant city manager Alice Bravo. No clean-up plan has been announced.

Douglas Park is a former quarry that was acquired by the city in the 1930s to be used as a dump site for incinerator ash and other hazardous materials. It is less than a mile from Coconut Grove’s former Old Smokey municipal trash incinerator. The park was tested for toxic soil in August as part of a wider study to gauge the residual fallout from decades of pollution. The incinerator closed in 1970, but soil in the immediate vicinity is highly contaminated, county files reveal.

Even after the incinerator has been closed for 40 years, the landfilled toxic ash continues to contaminate the soil at what is now Douglas Park in Miami. (CBS4)

Initially, city and county officials overseeing the cleanup and monitoring efforts said the soil readings at Douglas Park remained in the normal range for arsenic and other contaminants — consistent with other areas in a dense, urban setting. But a follow-up inspection, explains Bravo, revealed melted glass and other debris visually similar to the toxic soil found at other ash dump sites. Subsequent soil analysis confirmed the suspicions of county environmental regulators, prompting the park’s closure.

Early Friday morning, city workers began turning away visitors from the multiuse facility at Douglas Road and SW 28th Street. A parks department employee, who declined to provide her name, said she and other workers had not been told the cause of the closure but added that work crews were arriving soon to fence off the ten-acre park.

Bravo said the soil test results coincided with the discovery of historical records that indentified the park as a former ash dump site. The city and Miami-Dade’s Department of Environmental Resources Management will work in tandem on the cleanup.

Coconut Grove’s Blanche Park and Merrie Christmas Park were closed in September after officials discovered buried incinerator ash. The City of Miami’s Melreese Golf Course and adjacent Grapeland Park are also former dump sites for ash, though they remain open. Earlier this year, a private, multimillion-dollar, waterfront estate in Coconut Grove was found to contain more than 100,000 tons of soil tainted with incinerator ash. Bravo says city officials are searching records for other former dump sites.

Incinerator ash — a grainy mix of carcinogens such as arsenic, barium, lead, antimony, and PCBs — is often detected by the telltale presence of melted glass and metal. The chemicals can easily leach into groundwater, contaminating the drinking supply.

22 Nov 2013

SCMP: Activists to show why incinerator plan should be thrown out

Dec 15th, 2013
by Editor.
1 comment

from Howard Winn of the SCMP:

A New Territories group will tomorrow publish a report recommending that the government does not proceed with the controversial Shek Kwu Chau incinerator.

The New Territories Concern Group (NTCG) has taken up the issue of Hong Kong’s waste management and recently sent a delegation to Europe to inspect waste management systems including incinerators, and gasification plants.

The group is chaired by Ronnie Tang, who is also a village representative and the founding chairman of the Pat Heung North Environment Attention Group. The group’s spokesman is Junius Ho kwan yiu, who in addition to being a former president of the Hong Kong Law Society also has the distinction of having deposed Heung Yee Kuk chairman Lau Wong-fat as chairman of the Tuen Mun Rural Committee.

The group’s findings to be released tomorrow will include a recommendation that food waste should be dealt with separately instead of dumping it in landfills as the government does at present.

The suggestion is that food waste, which comprises 42 per cent of the waste sent to landfills and is between 70 and 90 per cent water, should be shredded at source by garburators and handled by Stonecutters Water Treatment plant, which is currently operating at 50 per cent of capacity.

To cope with the residual non-organic waste, which cannot be recycled, the group recommends gasification as a more mature and appropriate technology to meet Hong Kong’s present and future waste management needs. These measures would obviate the need for the incinerator, the report says.

It suggests the establishment of one or more pilot plants to determine the suitability of gasification technology for Hong Kong.

The report also recommends there should be no further delays to territory-wide charging for waste.

The Environmental Protection Department in recent years has stoutly resisted gasification technology and is apparently wedded to incineration. The incinerator is currently on hold as a result of being denied funding by the Legislative Council and because of the appeal which has been lodged against the rejection of the judicial review by the High Court in July. This is unlikely to be heard until June next year.

Those opposed to incineration are hopeful that with opposition within Legco, together with the efforts of lobbying groups such as the NTCG, it will be possible to redirect government policies in dealing with waste.

22 Nov 2013

Letter from NT Concern Group: Waste Management in Hong Kong

Dec 15th, 2013
by Editor.
1 comment

Dear Green Groups and Friends of the Enviroment:

Re : Waste Management in Hong Kong

As you may well be aware, under government’s proposals, their solution to Hong Kong’s growing waste production problems are to extend the three landfills currently at Tuen Mun, Twa Kwu Ling and Tseung Kwan O as soon as possible as they are projected to become saturated between 2015 and 2019.  In addition, government intends to build incinerators on an artificial island just off Shek Kwu Chau.

We, the New Territories Concern Group (“NT Concern Group”), a non-politically affiliated group, are concerned with these proposals and have committed ourselves to commission a report to spark national debate and interest in this area.  We went on a fact-finding mission to the Netherlands and to the UK between 16th September 2013 and 22nd September 2013. From our research findings and for the following reasons, we have concluded that Plasma Gasification is superior to government’s proposed incinerator as it is:-

  1. CLEANER as there are no dioxins, fly ash or carbon dioxide discharged;
  2. MORE EFFICIENT in that the syngas produced allows for greater energy potentials;
  3. MORE ENVIROMENTAL FRIENDLY in that the by-product, vitrified inert slag, does not need to be put in landfills and the technology allows for backmining of landfills; and
  4. MORE COST EFFECTIVE in construction and maintenance.  It occupies less land and does not require reclamation of land.

The NT Concern Group aim to build up constructive communications with government so that they will seriously consider alternative technology such as plasma gasification before they commission the construction of the incinerators and expand the landfills and therefore:-

  1. WASTE BILLIONS of dollars of your money;
  2. WASTE HUNDREDS of hectares of Hong Kong’s precious land;
  3. FURTHER POLLUTE Hong Kong’s environment; and
  4. HARM and have an adverse impact on your health and the health of your future generations.

To that end, please find our Waste Management Report for your kind attention. We welcome your kind comments and questions and our Mr. Junius Ho (public relations and spokesperson) and Mr. Vincent Chung (researcher) can be contacted on 2523 3846 and 2106 9824 respectively.

We believe plasma gasification to be a better solution for “Hong Kong: Our Home”, for the environment and for the people of Hong Kong. Government should give Hong Kong a chance. Give ourselves a chance.  Give our future generations a chance.

Yours faithfully,

NT Concern Group

按此閱覽中文信

← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →