Download PDF : 4380
January, 2012:
Beautiful island should be developed for recreational use, not for incinerator
South China Morning Post – Jan 9, 2012
I agree with Craig Colbran’s letter (“Incinerator is a bad way to burn money”, December 30).
The Environmental Protection Department does almost nothing for the taxpaying public. My name for it has been, for some years, the Environmental Polluting Department and I think the title fits.
I recently wrote to the department to express my opposition to the plan to build an incinerator at Shek Kwu Chau.
I first visited the island in 1968 to see the superintendent of the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers’ (Sarda), drug rehabilitation centre.
We agreed that what was most suitable was to develop the island for recreational use and for tourists, but that the Sarda centre would have to be relocated.
Building an incinerator at Shek Kwu Chau would be irresponsible. It would lead to the destruction of an asset of great natural beauty. I gather that the estimated cost of the project would be far more than the cost of building the same facility at the Tsang Tsui ash lagoons in Tuen Mun. I have walked in the area where these lagoons are located and feel that if Hong Kong must have this type of incinerator, then Tsang Tsui would be a far better location and, as I understand it from the limited information available, a lot cheaper.
I visited a modern incinerator on the outskirts of Tokyo, only a few kilometres from Tokyo Disneyland, and was most impressed by its layout and the cleanliness. Hong Kong should consider adopting a similar design, although we would have to adopt a better system of separation of rubbish.
The rigorous system in operation throughout Japan is something that the Hong Kong government should introduce. In this regard the Environmental Protection Department can take a leading role.
Several years ago, I noted the clean way in which rubbish was separated in Japan for collection. I felt it was the only country in the world with what I would call gift-wrapped garbage.
I believe that achieving something similar when it comes to waste separation in the SAR is more important than building a super-incinerator.
Shek Kwu Chau is a pearl in the chain of precious islands to the south of Lantau. It must be saved from senseless and wanton destruction.
Gordon Andreassend, Tai Kok Tsui
Push for levy on rubbish disposal
South China Morning Post – 9 Jan 2012
Households would pay for what they throw away under government proposal to cope with waste
The government’s latest attempt to limit the immense amount of waste generated by Hongkongers is due to begin shortly, with a public consultation to gauge the public’s appetite for paying a rubbish disposal fee.
The consultation document, due to be released this week, will explain the purpose and methods of levying a fee for collecting and disposing of rubbish – although it’s probably too early to suggest an exact fee level, according to a person familiar with the situation. “The issue goes well beyond how much will be charged,” the person said. “It is also about overhauling the way people handle their household waste.”
The consultation document will highlight different ways of charging – including a fee based on the volume of rubbish discarded or a fixed fee like government rates. The latter, however, provides little incentive for people to cut back on their rubbish.
Taipei and South Korea, among other places, have cut their disposed waste by up to half by charging for garbage bags. In Taipei, a five-litre bag costs 58 HK cents.
A survey in 2009 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found Hongkongers were the most wasteful among 30 economies surveyed, producing twice as much rubbish per capita (921kg) as people in Japan (410kg) and South Korea (380kg).
Officials hope a dumping fee will give residents an incentive to separate their rubbish before disposal. There is no law in Hong Kong requiring people to do so.
One thorny issue to be tackled is how to prevent illegal waste dumping after a charge is introduced. Another question is whether streets should continue to have rubbish bins, where people might dump waste to avoid the charge. Any changes would also have to address whether waste collection officers should be authorised to refuse to handle rubbish that has not been dealt with in the right way.
The city disposes of an average of about 3.3 million tonnes of solid waste – excluding construction waste, for which charges are levied – in landfills every year. But the landfills will be full within this decade.
About one-third of the rubbish, or 3,000 tonnes a day, is kitchen and food waste.
Currently, the public does not pay directly for dumped rubbish; the expense, up to an estimated HK$1.8 billion per year, is borne largely by the government.
It costs the Environmental Protection Department HK$337 per tonne, or 33 cents per kilogram, to haul rubbish from waste transfer stations to landfills. The figure rises to HK$549 per tonne, or 55 cents per kilogram, if collection costs incurred by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department are included.
Michelle Au Wing-tze, the senior environmental affairs officer with Friends of the Earth (HK), said most places that charged for waste collection did not aim to recoup all costs. A fee need not create a heavy financial burden if the main goal was to get people to sort their rubbish, particularly kitchen waste, she said. Even so, the new system would probably encounter some difficulties, she said.
“It is too convenient for people to dump their rubbish now. It is all just steps away from homes. With a charge, that might have to be changed, too.”
In 2005, the Environmental Protection Department published a waste policy framework that aimed to introduce a rubbish fee by 2007. But that failed to happen as it said more studies were needed. Three years later, it launched an 18-month study on the ways of collecting the fee. But still, the department could not set out the way forward.
Instead, the government has pushed forward plans to incinerate waste and expand landfills. Last month, the government’s environmental advisory body approved of plans to build the world’s largest incinerator, at a cost of between HK$8 billion and HK$13 billion, on Shek Kwu Chau, an island south of Lantau.
Roadside pollution is worse than ever
South China Morning Post – 9 Jan 2012
Time to update 24-year-old air quality objectives, greens say; officials blame weather and old vehicles
Hong Kong’s roadside pollution levels were the worst ever last year, according to the Environmental Protection Department.
Readings at the three roadside monitoring stations in Central, Causeway Bay and Mong Kok showed that pollution levels were above the 100 mark more than 20 per cent of the time. This was 10 times worse than in 2005, when very high readings were recorded only 2 per cent of the time.
Exposure to bad air pollution can cause or aggravate respiratory problems or heart disease.
Environmentalists renewed their calls for the immediate introduction of new air quality objectives, claiming that the government had deliberately delayed their introduction to ease the way for major infrastructure projects.
The department blamed the figures on unfavourable weather conditions, worsening background pollution and the ageing vehicles on our streets.
It said a number of measures were in the pipeline to improve air quality, while the new air quality objectives would be tabled to the legislature as soon as possible.
At the roadside stations, hourly readings are taken throughout the year on major pollutants such as respirable suspended particles and nitrogen oxides. A reading over 100 means at least one pollutant fails the air quality objectives.
The station in Central showed the worst figures, with excessive readings a quarter of the time, followed by Causeway Bay at 21 per cent, and Mong Kok at 17 per cent.
The total number of hours with excessive readings was even more than in 2010, when a sandstorm hit the city in March and pushed up the figures. In that year the three stations had an average excess API reading of 17 per cent.
Pollution readings at 11 general stations, which reflect more background and regional pollution, however, remained steady and similar to previous years.
The department said increased nitrogen dioxide levels at the roadside and poor weather conditions were behind the worsening air pollution readings. While other pollutants such as sulphur dioxide have fallen, the department said the nitrogen dioxide level by the roadside has reached the highest since 1999, at 123 micrograms per cubic metre of air.
It said the increase was related to the formation of photochemical smog, which was more active last year because there was 16 per cent more sunshine. The lack of rainfall, down by almost 40 per cent on 2010, was another unfavourable factor as it lessened the removal of pollutants from the air.
To combat the nitrogen dioxide pollution, a department spokeswoman said, catalytic reduction devices were being tested on older buses, while remote sensing technology would be used to strengthen the control of petrol and LPG vehicles.
James Middleton of Clear the Air said people did not need reminders from the department to tell them that air quality was getting worse, and officials were obviously turning a blind eye even at the health risk to themselves and their children.
“The government servants working for the EPD have children too – they share the filth in our air. The deliberate prevarication obviously comes from the very top,” Middleton said. “This is a complete disrespect and disregard of the duty of care the administration owes to the health of the people of Hong Kong.”
Middleton said he suspected the government’s failure to update air quality objectives enacted 24 years ago was deliberate so that infrastructure projects such as a third airport runway and waste incinerator could pass environmental impact studies.
In a separate set of monitoring results, on the concentration of fine particles, those with a diameter of less than 2.5 microns, the annual average roadside reading at both Central and Mong Kok marginally failed the proposed new air quality standard of 35 micrograms.
The department has not published the data, but the figures were obtained recently by Clear the Air. Fine particles are not a statutory air pollutant at present. Scientists say these particles can infiltrate the blood vessels and lungs, causing more damage than larger particles.
The department said the average concentration of fine particles at monitored locations had declined by more than a quarter over the past five years. It also said at least 60 per cent of the fine particles were generated across the border.
Neath waste plant closed over emissions
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-12073314
24 December 2010 Last updated at 12:38 GMT
A waste incinerator has been voluntarily shut down after breaching its limit for emissions.
Environment Agency Wales said it was taking legal action against the council-owned plant at Crymlyn Burrows in Neath Port Talbot.
Officers said it had failed five out of 10 dioxin emissions tests since the summer although breaches were not at levels to cause health problems.
The plant’s operators said they were working to address the issue.
The plant, which opened in 2002, processes household waste for recycling and incineration from Neath Port Talbot and Bridgend.
It is operated by Neath Port Talbot (Recycling) Ltd – a wholly-owned subsidiary of the council.
The agency has issued an enforcement notice that will require the operators to take steps by a set date to improve emissions from the site.
The incinerator has been voluntarily shut down until mid January as investigations continue.
“Start Quote
We set the permit limits to protect people”
End Quote Steve Brown Environment Agency Wales
The agency said Public Health Wales had confirmed the breaches were not at a level to cause health problems to local people.
But the agency’s area manager Steve Brown said: “This situation has gone on too long.
“Out of the 10 dioxin results received since the summer, five of these have been over the permitted limit and this is unacceptable.
“Public Health Wales have reassured us that the levels of these breaches do not pose a risk for local people but are concerned if the situation was to continue.
“We set the permit limits to protect people and the environment and this is why we, as regulators of the site, have escalated our action.
“The company have done everything we have asked of them so far, but we will not stop our action until the site is back into compliance with its permit.”
Will Watson, a director of Neath Port Talbot (Recycling) Ltd, said: “We took a decision to temporarily close the plant for planned maintenance work two weeks early in light of the recent dioxin results.”
He said the plant was addressing the failed test results but they had to be put in context.
“The level of emissions which we have recorded are still well below the levels which are permitted for other industries by the Environment Agency for dioxin emissions,” he added.
Download PDF : crymlynburrows2008
Download : CTAPanelEnvJan2012
Hong Kong air pollution at worst levels ever: report
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/09/us-pollution-hong-kong-idUSTRE80803J20120109
A worker at ”sky100”, the 100th floor of the International Commerce Centre (ICC), looks at Hong Kong’s Victoria HarbourMarch 23, 2011.
HONG KONG | Sun Jan 8, 2012 9:43pm EST
HONG KONG (Reuters) – Air pollution levels in Hong Kong were the worst ever last year, the SouthChina Morning Post reported on Monday, a finding that may further undermine the city’s role as an Asian financial centre as business executives relocate because of health concerns.
Worsening air quality in Hong Kong caused by vehicle emissions and industrial pollution from the neighboring Pearl River Delta is already forcing many in the financial community to move to Singapore.
Readings at three roadside monitoring stations in Hong Kong’s Central, Causeway Bay and MongKok commercial districts showed that pollution levels were above the 100 mark more than 20 percent of the time, the newspaper said, citing the city’s Environmental Protection Department.
This was 10 times worse than in 2005, when very high readings were recorded only 2 percent of the time, it said.
The station in Central business district, home to the Asia headquarters of global banks such as HSBC Holdings Plc and Goldman Sachs Group Inc, showed the worst figures, with excessive readings a quarter of the time, the report said.
Hourly readings are taken at the roadside stations throughout the year on major pollutants such as respirable suspended particles and nitrogen oxides. A reading above 100 means at least one pollutant fails air quality objectives.
Environmentalists renewed their calls for the immediate introduction of new air quality objectives, claiming that the government had deliberately delayed their introduction to ease the way for major infrastructure projects, the newspaper said.
The department blamed the figures on unfavourable weather conditions, worsening background pollution and the number of ageing vehicles on streets.
The newspaper quoted the government as saying a number of measures were being considered to help improve air quality, and new air quality objectives would be discussed by Hong Kong’s legislature soon.
(Reporting by Charlie Zhu; Editing by Sanjeev Miglani and Chris Lewis)
Shanghai to begin PM2.5 pollution monitoring, after much whining over price
http://mobile.shanghaiist.com/2012/01/06/shanghai_to_purchase_pm25_monitorin.php
Jan 6, 2012
By Benjamin Cost
Shanghai will finally install PM2.5 air-quality monitoring equipment after more than two months since it pledged to do so.
With the system’s launch, the city will join a league of regions spanning Shanghai, Beijing, Tianjin, Yangtze River Delta, Zhujiang River Delta and elsewhere preparing to employ the PM2.5 monitor this year. Next year, the standard will encompass 113 new cities and by 2016, all of China will be covered.
What was the big holdup? According to Ministry of Environmental Protection authorities, their bellyaching over the exorbitant expense of implementation was the main hindrance to following through with the project:
One set of PM2.5 equipment cost at least 80,000 yuan (US$12,710), while the most expensive could cost 380,000 yuan. Provinces haven’t included the cost in their 2012 budget as PM2.5 and ozone monitoring was only recently mentioned by the ministry.
Zhu (a ministry official) said the country’s investment on such equipment could total more than 2 billion yuan.
Fu Qingyan, chief engineer of the Shanghai Environmental Monitoring Center, said the city hasn’t included the equipment in this year’s budget but the city government has already agreed on the extra expenditure.
Not only has Shanghai smog failed to fall in line with the PM2.5 threshold since 2005, but the watchdog (a bullshit-su, we assume) has been about as transparent as Shanghai air when it comes to relaying the present system’s readings.
Monitoring PM2.5 particles or those measuring less than 2.5 microns in diameter is a bigger deal than their microscopic nature would suggest. For all you laymen out there (which by now probably only includes fresh Shanghai arrivals), PM2.5 particles are microscopic pollutants able to infiltrate our respiratory and circulatory systems and cause long-term health issues and even premature fatalities. The current system in place in Shanghai only measures PM10 particles.
But thankfully, Shanghai officials have, albeit begrudgingly, prioritized the public’s health and safety above cost considerations – something that the city has struggled with for what seems like an eternity. Now, if only their pollution reports couldactually line up with those of the PM2.5 system itself.
Contact the author of this article or email tips@shanghaiist.com with further questions, comments or tips.
Incinerators’ good global track record
South China Morning Post
SCMP Letter Jan 07 2012
Incinerators’ good global track record
Plasma arc is a suitable and proven method for the disposal of small quantities of hazardous waste. However, for household refuse it would use large quantities of energy, and it is definitely neither needed, nor feasible, for the disposal of 3,000 tonnes per day of municipal household waste.
The “old-fashioned” moving grate technology is fully capable of addressing Lai See’s “noxious chemical cocktail” (“Making a hash of dash to ash”, January 4) and hundreds of plants operate worldwide in highly sensitive areas.
To demand that the Environmental Protection Department considers this technology, which is unproven at any commercial scale, for Hong Kong is about as ludicrous as suggesting shooting all our garbage by space rocket into the sun. What is needed is a plant that meets the highest standards in operational efficiencies. That is where the department could learn from my firm.
Alexander Luedi, general manager, Explosion Power Hong Kong Limited
Meanwhile SCMP’s Laisee counters:
SCMP Laisee : 07 Jan 2012
Garbage in, garbage out
A letter in today’s paper pooh poohs plasma arc technology as a means of disposing of municipal solid waste saying: “To demand that the Environmental Protection Department should consider this technology, which is unproven at any commercial scale, for Hong Kong, is about as ludicrous as suggesting to shoot all of our garbage by space rocket into the sun!” Strong words from Alexander Luedi, who is the general manager of Explosion Power Hong Kong.
A little context of interest here, which Luedi doesn’t mention in his letter, is that his company, according to its website, specialises in cleaning furnaces, boilers, ash hoppers, silos and other vessels. “We provide online boiler cleaning equipment and services to thermal power plants, waste-to-energy plants, … to improve thermal efficiencies, reduce downtime, and improve the safety of maintenance workers.”
http://www.explosionpower.hk/ (link thanks to CTA)
So it’s not unreasonable to think Luedi’s eyes lit up at the prospect of business opportunities from a monster incinerator that processes some 3,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste a day which, in turn, generates 1,200 tonnes of fly ash.
In his letter, Luedi says plasma arc technology, “is neither needed, nor feasible for the disposal of 3,000 tonnes per day of municipal waste.”
His views don’t appear to be shared by authorities in Japan, the UK, Mexico, India and China, which are all using plasma arc technology to process municipal solid waste and to convert it into energy instead of the conventional moving grate technology proposed for Hong Kong. The new technology produces little in the way of emissions of toxic dioxins and less mess for the likes of Luedi and his company to clean up.
Hong Kong’s government planners are out of control
South China Morning Post
Proposals to reclaim vast tracts of land from the sea are unnecessary; with population projections indicating that the city will not need that much space
The government-developer complex in Hong Kong is out of control and urgently needs to be reined in.
On Wednesday, the government announced proposals for new reclamation projects at up to 25 sites around Hong Kong’s coastline, with plans for vast new artificial islands complete with bridges and tunnels to connect them to the city.
The government says all this reclamation is necessary to provide the 1,500 hectares of additional building land Hong Kong will need by 2039.
(Although if all the proposed projects were to go ahead, the total reclamation area would come to around 3,000 hectares. That’s more than twice the size of Lamma Island and more land than Hong Kong has reclaimed from the sea since 1990, even including the massive airport and West Kowloon reclamation projects.)
The government says Hong Kong will need this new land to house its swelling population, which the Census and Statistics Department projects will grow by 25 per cent over the next three decades to hit 8.9 million in 2039.
Let’s examine those figures for a moment. According to official figures, in the middle of last year the city’s “usual resident” population numbered 6.9 million.
Over the past 10 years, our annual birth rate has averaged 9.2 babies per 1,000 inhabitants, while the death rate has averaged 5.6 per thousand.
If we assume those rates won’t change, and that there will be no net migration, projecting Hong Kong’s population growth over the next three decades gives us a city of just 7.6 million usual residents in 2039 (or 7.9 million if you count the “residents” that don’t actually live here); a far cry from the government’s 8.9 million forecast.
But even that projection overstates likely population growth, because our birth rates and death rates will change. Hong Kong has an ageing population, with more than half the population over 40 and one of the lowest fertility rates in the world. That means, as our population gets even older, there will be more deaths and fewer births. This declining natural growth rate means the city’s population will fall well short even of 7.6 million usual residents by 2039.
In other words, the government’s population projection assumes not only that the immigration rate will rise almost 50 per cent compared with recent years, but that those immigrants will be busy making lots of babies.
This is hard to swallow, especially given the government’s hostility even to granting permanent residency to long-serving maids.
Other demographers agree. Working from the same starting point and factoring in a moderate but declining immigration rate (which makes sense as the mainland grows richer relative to Hong Kong), the US Census Bureau projects that Hong Kong’s population will peak in the middle of the next decade and then decline to 6.9 million by 2039. That’s two million fewer than the government’s forecast (see the chart).
So you have to wonder why we need to reclaim all that building land from the sea. The truth is that Hong Kong is neither short of housing, nor of land to build on. In his policy address in October, Donald Tsang Yam-kuen admitted that the city has more than 200,000 flats sitting empty. That’s enough to meet all housing demand for the next eight years.
On top of that, the government is already freeing 3,000 hectares for building by re-zoning and re-developing unused or underused land, largely in the New Territories.
And if that is not enough, Hong Kong boasts an additional 2,600 hectares of industrial land (which doesn’t include land devoted to transport infrastructure), much of which can be redeveloped relatively cheaply in the future.
As a result the government’s latest reclamation plans don’t just look unnecessary, they look nuts.
It’s hard to conclude anything except that the planners and their construction industry cronies have run completely amok, crazed by the prospect of getting their hands on the government’s huge fiscal reserves and using them to build ever more grandiose, expensive and unneeded civil engineering projects.
They need to be stopped.
Smoke and obfuscation in defence of outdated incineration technology
South China Morning Post
LAI SEE
Howard Winn
Jan 06, 2012
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
RTHK’s Backchat programme on Wednesday generated a certain amount of heat with its discussion on the proposed Shek Kwu Chau incinerator project. Elvis Au was wheeled out to bat for the government. He is the assistant director of the Environmental Protection Department.
During the discussion, Au defended the decision to use old moving-grate technology, which essentially moves the material over a grate and burns it, producing a noxious fume that is vented through a chimney that, at 130 metres high, will be about half the size of the IFC 1 building. Scrubbers on the incinerator will eliminate some of the particulate matter (PM10) that are 10 micrometres in size. But it will not stop the more dangerous carcinogenic-causing particulate matter (PM2.5) which, depending on the wind direction, will add to the poor air quality in Kowloon or the Pearl River Delta. Some 1,200 tonnes of fly ash a day, complete with dioxins, will also have to be transferred to barges and dumped.
When pressed on why the government was not considering plasma arc technology, which produces considerably fewer emissions and is environmentally much cleaner, Au became somewhat cagey. He said the government had spoken to representatives from plasma arc firms, but remained unconvinced, saying the technology was untested and could only handle relatively small quantities. This does not seem to square with evidence elsewhere, which suggests that, in theory, any volume of waste can be handled by increasing the number of burners.
Despite the decision against plasma arc technology, we gather that Aecom, the government’s consultants, will be visiting a plasma arc firm in Britain later this month to further inform themselves. But Aecom’s counterparts in North America seem more informed. Commenting on Milwaukee’s plans to proceed with a 1,200-tonne per day plant using plasma arc technology,Aecom’s Mike Zebell said: “We believe that this technology is not only environmentally friendly, but ready for large-scale commercialisation.”
The suspicion is that the government’s reluctance to consider plasma arc technology is because it is pandering to business interests, in that the proposed incinerator plan involves significant reclamation work and contractors are already salivating at the prospect of another lucrative concrete pouring exercise
| 1 of 2 |
|