Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

January, 2013:

Why is the Environmental Protection Department Like an Incinerator Salesman?

Jan 12th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download PDF : EPD as incinerator salesman

http://www.abhk.org/why-is-the-environmental-protection-department-like-an-incinerator-salesman/

I’m an environmentalist living on Cheung Chau, so was especially interested when I learned of the Environmental Protection Department’s plans for a huge waste incinerator on an artificial island beside nearby Shek Kwu Chau. This was around two years ago, and I then believed the department’s claims the incinerator would include new technology ensuring emissions were clean and safe; though I was concerned it would blight a beautiful area, and threaten Hong Kong’s small population of the globally endangered finless porpoise.

Since then, I have learned far more about waste treatment and incinerators, including major problems with incinerators. But also, disturbingly, I have found the Environmental Protection Department is extremely biased in favour of the incinerator, and unable to admit drawbacks with incinerators or really consider alternatives.

This intransigence was demonstrated at a meeting on waste last month [[Dec – I anticipate Jan publication]], during which I voiced concerns regarding incineration, and said there are far better alternatives. As the meeting closed, EPD assistant director Elvis Au told the audience he had known me for two years, and my concerns were based on 40-year old incinerator designs.

It’s true that Elvis has known me for close to two years – he serves as the EPD’s front man for the incinerator project, and in several meetings I’ve questioned him and attacked the plans, which remain in place despite strong opposition. But it’s nonsense to assert that my information on incinerators and health issues is outdated.

Elvis did note that newer incinerators produce far less dioxins than early designs. But this ignores a host of other poison emissions and the highly toxic chimney ash – which are of great concern worldwide.Screen Shot 2013-01-02 at 3.26.17 PM

For instance, incinerators belch massive amounts of particulates. Indeed, when Hong Kong closed its three waste incinerators in the 1990s, a key reason was that they contributed around 20 percent of local particulate emissions. Even newer technologies are far from efficient in trapping particulates – particularly the tiniest ones, which can travel hundreds of kilometres, and when inhaled may penetrate deep into the lungs, aggravating asthma, causing lung damage, and increasing risk of premature death. Gases also contain a wide range of organic chemicals, along with metals like cadmium and mercury.

If you still want to believe Elvis’ claims that the emissions will be clean and safe, consider that the design for Shek Kwu Chau incinerator include a 150-metre chimney. Then, I once suggested to Elvis that since the incinerator will be so fabulous, it should be sited beside the new government offices in Central. He replied that the emissions would lead to air pollutants over the harbour exceeding target levels. So, it won’t be so safe after all.

While discussions of incinerators often focus on emissions, the chimney ash is another major problem, as it may contain harmful chemicals that do not go up in the smoke, such as dioxins, mercury and other heavy metals. Indeed, it is listed as absolute hazardous waste in the European Waste Catalogue.

Elvis and others in the EPD have never mentioned this last fact, that I’ve noticed. But they do cite Europe when it suits their salesmanship, asserting that the incinerator emissions will meet European Union standards. If adopting a balanced approach to informing Hong Kong people, they might also highlight the European Parliament’s goal to ensure that, by 2020, there is no incineration of waste that could be recycled or composted.

But the EPD is quiet about this too. In the meeting, Elvis ignored my mention of new research finding significantly more cancers near waste incinerators in Spain. Nor does EPD tell of current research into infant deaths near UK incinerators, or high asthma rates around Detroit’s massive incinerator, or health concerns from badly disposed of chimney ash, or pollution from Singapore incinerators, or many other problems with modern incinerators around the world.

I have asked Elvis why he is such an avid promoter of incineration. It is not based on science; and though he’s an engineer, this does not qualify him to make grand statements regarding human health. As yet, no reply.

Nor have Elvis or other incinerator proponents made informed responses regarding an alternative treatment using plasma arc technology. This involves temperatures of perhaps 4000°C that blast molecules apart, creating a simple gas mixture plus material like solidified lava that seals heavy metals within. This is relatively new for waste treatment, but major facilities are being built and planned worldwide, with some generating electricity, others to make jet fuel and shipping fuel. Maybe similar facilities could be built here, and make Hong Kong a world leader in waste treatment.

With no real answers as to why the EPD remains wedded to incineration, we can only guess at the reasons. My suspicion is that there have been deals made or nearly made behind the scenes, and companies are eagerly expecting their shares of the estimated HK$15 billion for the incinerator and its island, and HK$8 billion to extend the life of landfills during the eight-year construction period.

Then, there’s the sad fact that under director Anissa Wong and former Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, the EPD seemingly forgot about protecting our environment, and became besotted with building yet another grandiose infrastructure project at taxpayers’ expense.

Dr. Martin Williams

Dr Martin Williams 衛林士 is a writer and photographer specialising in wildlife and conservation, who has lived in Hong Kong for 25 years. Originally from the UK, he has a PhD in physical chemistry, and is a keen birdwatcher with a special interest in migration. Martin believes nature tourism should be promoted in Hong Kong as it can help protect beautiful rural areas and their wildlife, whilst benefitting local people. Dr. Martin Williams

Chinese translation of this article published on 12-January-2013, MPW No. 2305

Act now on city’s pollution crisis, warn campaigners

Jan 12th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Submitted by admin on Jan 12th 2013, 12:00am

News›Hong Kong

  • ENVIRONMENT
  • px205_6c96_7.jpg

A haze of pollution as the sun sets over the harbour in Hong Kong on Jan.9 2013. Photo: AFP

Cheung Chi-fai chifai.cheung@scmp.com

Green group urges measures on roads and at sea as environment official pledges ‘big moves’ on city’s pollution crisis ahead of policy address

Air quality at shopping and commercial districts is continuing to decline ahead of new measures to curb the city’s pollution problem, says a green group’s review.

The group, Clean Air Network, has called for bold and immediate action to improve air quality, including implementing rules to scrap old diesel trucks and make all sea vessels switch to cleaner fuel.

[1]https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/styles/237x147/public/2013/01/12/scm_news_air12.art_1.jpg

Undersecretary for the Environment Christine Loh Kung-wai echoed their wishes, suggesting yesterday that tough action was on the way. “We will have big moves,” she told a meeting of the Legislative Council’s subcommittee on air quality. “After all the money is spent … there will be apparent changes on the roads.”

Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying is expected to announce, in his maiden policy address on Wednesday, a generous subsidy scheme to replace old vehicles .

Clean Air Network’s call came after their review found no improvement in the roadside nitrogen dioxide level in Mong Kok, despite bus firms agreeing in 2011 to deploy low emission vehicles to busy districts.

The pollutant’s annual average concentration in the area hit a new record of 122 micrograms per cubic metre last year – 1.6 per cent higher than the previous record set in 2011.

And although there were slight improvements the nitrogen dioxide levels in Central and Causeway Bay – dropping to 117mcg and 120mcg from 125mcg and 126mcg respectively last year – these levels were still at least three times the limit advised by the World Health Organisation.

The pollutant, which can cause respiratory and heart diseases in cases of over-exposure, has become one of the city’s biggest problems in recent years.

While roadside sulphur dioxide and particulate levels have fallen, nitrogen dioxide levels have surged since 2008, peaking in 2011. Officials blame bus and truck emissions, poor maintenance of LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) vehicles and chemical reactions with other pollutants.

Clean Air Network’s chief executive officer, Kwong Sum-yin, said old diesel trucks and franchised buses were the main culprits of pollution in Mong Kok.

The group’s review also found that Sham Shui Po and Kwai Chung – districts situated close to the container ports and key logistic routes – remained the most affected by sulphur pollution.

Addressing the issue of pollution by marine emission, Loh said legislation was necessary to make vessels switch to cleaner fuel. She said if this was done, Hong Kong would be the first in Asia to introduce such rules. “What should be done must be done with great force,” she said.

Loh said she had asked two local universities to submit proposals on long-term research on public health and air pollution.

This was crucial to show the health costs of pollution and the benefits of curbing it, she said.

Professor Anthony Hedley, of the University of Hong Kong, told the subcommittee yesterday that American studies had showed that for every US dollar spent on cleaning up the air, four dollars of benefits were generated.

An index, named after Hedley and which tracks real-time air pollution, showed that poor air quality caused more than 3,000 premature deaths and monetary loss of HK$39 billion last year.

A spokesman for the Environmental Protection Department said most roadside pollutants showed a slight to moderate drop in concentration last year, compared to the 2005 levels.

But the nitrogen dioxide level was 24 per cent higher than in 2005. He said the number of days when the roadside air pollution index was over 100 also fell, from 172 days to 142 last year.

Topics:

Environment

Pollution

Clean Air Network

Christine Loh Kung-Wai

More on this:

Paying for clean air can never be too expensive [2]

The sheer wilful stupidity of official inaction on pollution [3]

Source URL (retrieved on Jan 12th 2013, 12:27pm): http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1125929/act-now-citys-pollution-crisis-warn-campaigners

Links:
[1] https://www.scmp.com/sites/default/files/2013/01/12/scm_news_air12.art_1.jpg
[2] http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1072087/paying-clean-air-can-never-be-too-expensive
[3] http://www.scmp.com/business/article/1083330/sheer-wilful-stupidity-official-inaction-pollution

Paying for clean air can never be too expensive

Jan 12th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Submitted by admin on Oct 29th 2012, 12:00am

Comment›Insight & Opinion

SCMP Editorial

A government study has shown that the city achieved its overall clean-air targets in 2010, cutting emission levels of four pollutants by up to 60 per cent compared with 1997. But this ignores the real problem – roadside air pollution – which just keeps getting worse.

Since the study was released, Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying has named the environment as one of the deep-rooted problems he will address with an interventionist approach to governing, such as phasing out old diesel-run vehicles. And environment secretary Wong Kam-sing has said the government will consider tough measures, such as not renewing licences for diesel commercial vehicles more than 15 years old, which are among the chief roadside-pollution culprits.

We trust this is a taste of things to come. Road transport accounted for 286,000 tonnes of sulphur dioxide pollution in 2010, up 15,000 tonnes in one year alone. When other countries are preparing to introduce Euro VI emission standards starting next year, Hong Kong still has 60,000 Euro I and II emission standard vehicles of 12 to 18 years old on its roads.

Wong said what air-quality experts have been saying for years – that if Hong Kong is to tackle bad air seriously, it needs policies to specifically deal with roadside pollution.

That said, the operators of polluting diesel vehicles are not breaking current transport and environmental rules, since their vehicles are licensed under them. One operator has warned, reasonably enough, that some will be prepared to take legal action to defend their right to continue to earn their livelihoods.

Clearly, there will need to be effective incentives for drivers to upgrade willingly to acceptable standards. Existing subsidies have proven to be inadequate in value and coverage of the city’s 120,000 diesel vehicles.

The government is right to be prudent with such handouts. But in this case it can be confident that the public would see cleaner roadside air – the stuff that we breathe – as good value for a lot of money.

Topics:

Air Pollution

Environment

roadside pollution

old diesel vehicles

Source URL (retrieved on Jan 12th 2013, 12:25pm): http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1072087/paying-clean-air-can-never-be-too-expensive

The sheer wilful stupidity of official inaction on pollution

Jan 12th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Submitted by admin on Nov 16th 2012, 12:00am

Business

MONITOR TOM HOLLAND

Tom Holland

It would be far cheaper for the government to tackle air pollution now, rather than in a few decades when the health costs will be incalculable

This week’s Audit Commission report on the effectiveness of the Hong Kong government’s pollution policy makes depressing reading.

That is not so much because of the government’s repeated failure to meet even its own modest environmental targets, although that’s dismal enough.

No, the real reason the report is so discouraging is the sheer wilful official stupidity that lies behind the government’s failure.

Back in the late 1980s, the government introduced targets for the maximum permissible concentrations of harmful atmospheric pollutants and set up the Environmental Protection Department to enforce them.

A quarter of a century later those targets look feeble compared with the latest international standards.

For example, the World Health Organisation’s air quality guidelines recommend an annual average PM10 – that’s cancer-causing diesel soot to you and me – concentration of no more than 20 microgrammes per cubic metre.

The Hong Kong government’s target is not even half as onerous; a generous 55 microgrammes per cubic metre.

But the government has never come close to meeting even its own undemanding objectives. For instance, last year the average roadside concentration of lung-shrivelling nitrogen dioxide was 50 per cent above the government’s target, and three times the WHO’s ceiling.

Officials cannot blame their failure on pollution from the mainland. Yes, smog drifts down from Guangdong. But pollution concentrations are inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the source.

So although a factory 80 kilometres away in Dongguan might emit 100,000 times as many pollutants as that bus roaring past you in the street, the bus is doing twice as much damage to your health. In short, the harmful stuff is pumped out right here in Hong Kong.

Yet the government has consistently failed to tackle the problem. Despite 10 years of official promises to clear the air, there are still more than 50,000 trucks and buses with highly polluting pre-2001 diesel engines plying our roads.

Similarly, the government has failed to introduce new standards requiring shipping to use less polluting low-sulphur fuels.

Meanwhile, most of the electricity we consume is still generated locally by burning coal instead of natural gas, which is much cleaner.

Nor can officials blame their failure to do anything on a lack of resources.

At the last count the Hong Kong government was sitting on accumulated excess reserves of HK$1.3 trillion. That’s more than three years’ worth of government spending.

And this is where we encounter mind-boggling levels of stupidity. Asked what all this money is for, officials occasionally mutter something about needing the reserves to meet future health care liabilities as the city’s population ages.

Yet the single most effective thing the government could do to ensure it can meet its future health care liabilities would be to cut local pollution levels.

According to estimates compiled by the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health, last year the city’s high pollution levels were responsible for 8.7 million visits to the doctor, 24,500 hospital admissions and 3,600 deaths.

HKU estimates the total cost to Hong Kong’s economy was more than HK$42 billion.

What the cumulative health effects of living in such a polluted environment will turn out to be over the coming decades is incalculable. But it is safe to assume that the annual cost will be many multiples of last year’s figure, placing a massive strain on the city’s economy.

As a result, on the principle that prevention is better than cure – and far better than palliative care – the government should do now what it ought to have done 10 years ago and spend as much as it takes to cut local pollution levels to meet, and even exceed, the WHO’s most stringent guidelines.

In the short term, it should order all pre-2001 dirty diesel-engined vehicles off our roads. It should require all shipping to comply with the latest International Maritime Organisation emission standards, while insisting local vessels like ferries use only ultra-low-sulphur fuels. And it should compel Hong Kong’s power companies to stop burning coal entirely, switching to natural gas as soon as possible.

In the longer term the government should draw up plans to phase out diesel-engined trucks and buses altogether.

Starting with the city’s buses, it should replace them with electric-powered vehicles, moving the source of pollution away from street level where it does the most harm.

All this will be expensive. But Hong Kong can easily afford it. And in the long run the costs of doing nothing will be far higher.

Surely our officials aren’t that stupid.scmp_02aug12_ns_mk4_nora7254a_30319997.jpg

The single most effective thing the government could do to ensure it can meet its future health care liabilities would be to cut local pollution levels.

tom.holland@scmp.com [1]

Topics:

Air Pollution in Hong Kong

roadside pollution

Health Care

Environmental Protection Department

World Health Organisation

Air Quality Index

Source URL (retrieved on Jan 12th 2013, 11:52am): http://www.scmp.com/business/article/1083330/sheer-wilful-stupidity-official-inaction-pollution

Cleaner air urged to boost health

Jan 11th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://rthk.hk/rthk/news/elocal/news.htm?elocal&20130111&56&894991

Cleaner air urged to boost health
11-01-2013
An academic from the University of Hong Kong says big improvement in the SAR’s air quality would provide an immediate boost to people’s health.

Honorary Professor at the university’s School of Public Health, Anthony Hedley, told legislators that improvements to air quality in recent years had been insufficient.

The Under Secretary for the Environment, Christine Loh, said the government would do everything it could to control air pollution levels.

The government estimates air pollution in the territory leads to economic losses of HK$1.7 billion dollars every year, while the Hedley Environmental Index, run by the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health, puts the figure for last year alone at HK$40 billion.

New air quality costings needed: Loh

Jan 11th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://rthk.hk/rthk/news/englishnews/news.htm?main&20130111&56&895010

New air quality costings needed: Loh
11-01-2013

http://www.rthk.org.hk/rthk/news/video/asx/mfile_895010_1.asx
The Under Secretary for the Environment Christine Loh.
The Under Secretary for the Environment, Christine Loh, says the government needs to update its research on the health costs of Hong Kong’s at times appalling air pollution.

The government’s current estimate of economic losses due to illness and disease caused by poor air quality is HK$1.7 billion dollars a year.

That compares with a figure of nearly HK$40 billion for last year, calculated by the Hedley Environmental Index, run by the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public Health.

Ms Loh told a subcommittee of the Legislative Council’s Environmental Affairs Panel that a true cost-benefit analysis of cleaning up Hong Kong’s air is needed to help make decisions on how to do it and pay for it.

Almost half of the world’s food thrown away, report finds

Jan 11th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

Figures from the Institution of Mechanical Engineers show as much as 2bn tonnes of food never makes it on to a plate

Between 30% and 50% or 1.2-2bn tonnes of food produced around the world never makes it on to a plate. Photograph: Murdo MacLeod for the Guardian

Food waste

As much as half of all the food produced in the world – equivalent to 2bn tonnes – ends up as waste every year, engineers warned in a report published on Thursday.

The UK’s Institution of Mechanical Engineers (IMechE) blames the “staggering” new figures in its analysis on unnecessarily strict sell-by dates, buy-one-get-one free and Western consumer demand for cosmetically perfect food, along with “poor engineering and agricultural practices”, inadequate infrastructure and poor storage facilities.

In the face of United Nations predictions that there could be about an extra 3 billion people to feed by the end of the century and growing pressure on the resources needed to produce food, including land, water and energy, the IMechE is calling for urgent action to tackle this waste.

Their report, Global Food; Waste Not, Want Not, found that between 30% and 50% or 1.2-2bn tonnes of food produced around the world never makes it on to a plate.

In the UK as much as 30% of vegetable crops are not harvested due to their failure to meet retailers’ exacting standards on physical appearance, it says, while up to half of the food that is bought in Europe and the US is thrown away by consumers.

And about 550bn cubic metres of water is wasted globally in growing crops that never reach the consumer. Carnivorous diets add extra pressure as it takes 20-50 times the amount of water to produce 1 kilogramme of meat than 1kg of vegetables; the demand for water in food production could reach 10–13 trillion cubic metres a year by 2050.

This is 2.5 to 3.5 times greater than the total human use of fresh water today and could lead to more dangerous water shortages around the world, the IMechE says, claiming that there is the potential to provide 60-100% more food by eliminating losses and waste while at the same time freeing up land, energy and water resources.

Tim Fox, head of energy and environment at the IMechE, said: “The amount of food wasted and lost around the world is staggering. This is food that could be used to feed the world’s growing population – as well as those in hunger today. It is also an unnecessary waste of the land, water and energy resources that were used in the production, processing and distribution of this food.”

In order to prevent further waste, governments, development agencies and organisation like the UN “must work together to help change people’s mindsets on waste and discourage wasteful practices by farmers, food producers, supermarkets and consumers,” the IMechE said.

• This article was amended on 10 January 2012 to change the abbreviation IME to IMechE.

Pollution turns Hong Kong harbour from ‘fragrant’ to foul

Jan 11th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/world/15814737/pollution-turns-hong-kong-harbour-from-fragrant-to-foul/

AFPJanuary 11, 2013, 4:03 pm

AFP © Hong Kong’s skyline is shrouded in thick smog on January 9, 2013. Hong Kong is poised to get tough on ships burning dirty fuels that have turned the harbour into a city often covered in smog with air pollution killing over 3,000 people yearly.</p>

HONG KONG (AFP) – Hong Kong’s name may mean “fragrant harbour”, but cargo ships burning dirty fuel in what is one of the world’s busiest ports add to a foul layer of pollution that kills more than 3,000 people a year.

Now the government is vowing to get tough, with activists hoping mandatory restrictions on shipping emissions will be among a raft of measures announced next week aimed at making the city more environmentally friendly.

A total of 410,560 vessels arrived and left the port in 2011, with cargo ships vying for space in the crowded waters alongside public ferries, tourist junks and luxury yachts.

This level of activity means shipping is a key polluter in a city where, according to the University of Hong Kong, air pollution kills about 3,200 people every year.

Simon Ng of the Civic Exchange think-tank blamed the pollution, which often shrouds the city’s dramatic skyline in thick smog, for driving away talent.

“Just imagine a small power plant right next to your doorstep, producing a lot of pollution every day, almost 24 hours a day, what would you do?” he said.

“Ships are now producing a lot more pollutants than we had anticipated, and it is becoming a major problem that we need to address.”

Rising emissions from ships, which burn heavily polluting bunker fuel, will have seen shipping overtake the power industry as the biggest source of the colourless toxic gas sulphur dioxide last year, Ng predicted.

Nearly 400 Hong Kong people died last year from breathing in pollution from bunker fuel alone, he added, citing a study on marine pollution by his think-tank.

Activists say Hong Kong lags behind the rest of the world on environmental issues ranging from recycling to cycle lanes.

And when it comes to shipping, while vessels calling in northern Europe and North America are mostly restricted to fuels with 1.0 percent or less sulphur content, Hong Kong allows 3.5 percent.

Last year however, it did introduce a voluntary scheme in which ships using 0.5 percent or less are given a 50 percent discount in port dues.

Christine Loh, an environmental crusader who has become the government’s environment undersecretary, said the scheme was just a “small start”.

“We want to regulate. We want it to become mandatory and we want to take the scheme across the border to our neighbours in Guangdong,” she told an air quality conference last month.

“We would like, within the next few years, to collaborate and work very closely with the Guangdong province so the whole of the water of the (Pearl River Delta) could be turned into a low emission zone.”

The Environmental Protection Department said it was working with the mainland Chinese authorities to look into a switch to cleaner fuel for vessels berthed in the delta, which includes Macau and industrial hubs like Shenzhen.

But the Hong Kong Shipowners Association said the reduction in port dues was only enough to cover 30-40 percent of the yearly costs of using cleaner fuel, which amounted to about $2 million per company.

“Asking carriers to spend money that they don’t have on switching fuel is quite a difficult thing,” the association’s managing director Arthur Bowring said.

The industry was operating in a “terrible” environment amid an unpredictable trade volume due to the global financial crisis, he added.

But he said liners were prepared to work with the government and noted that about 18 companies had taken part in a two-year unsubsidised, industry-led initiative to use cleaner fuel that expired at the end of last year.

Orient Overseas, Hong Kong’s biggest container ship operator, which took part in the initiative, said mandatory regulation would at least create a level playing field.

The city’s chief executive Leung Chun-ying has pledged to make pollution one of his top priorities during his five-year term.

But when the Beijing-backed leader takes up the issue in his first annual policy address next week, the question will be not just whether the field is level but also whether he is willing to set the bar high enough.

New air quality objectives announced last year for seven pollutants including sulphur dioxide and carbon monoxide were criticised as too little, too late and in August the city choked under the worst smog it had ever recorded

Taipei investigates HK firm over illegal cash deals for Macau gamblers – The Standard HKG’s World famous laundry

Jan 10th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking_news_detail.asp?id=30315&icid=3&d
_str=20130110

Taipei investigates HK firm over illegal cash deals for Macau gamblers
(01-10 22:38)

Taiwanese prosecutors said they are investigating a locally-based Hong
Kong firm for allegedly carrying out huge money transfers for use in
Macau casinos, circumventing strict forex rules.
The company, which opened in Taiwan in 2009, allegedly accepted deposits
by Taiwanese gamblers allowing them to withdraw the money once they were
in Macau, said the Taipei district prosecutors’ office. Prosecutors, who
declined to identify the firm, said they suspected it was behind a total
of US$179 million in illegal transactions, AFP reports.
The head of the company was questioned yesterday on suspicion of
violating Taiwanese law which stipulates only banks are allowed to
handle domestic and international money transfers, it said in a
statement.
Taiwanese media said the services are popular among some gamblers due to
Taiwanese laws restricting the amount of cash travellers can take with
them abroad to US$10,000 per person.
The company reportedly also offered cash advances to entertainers,
elected officials, business tycoons and leading gangsters to help
promote business for the Macau casinos.
As there currently is no legal casino in Taiwan, many of the island’s
gamblers have turned to Macau, which is little more than an hour away by
airplane. The offshore Taiwanese island of Matsu last year passed a
referendum to open the first legal casino in Taiwan, although it is
still pending a separate law by the parliament on regulating gambling
establishments.

‘justify’ decisions that affect our world pollution and health

Jan 10th, 2013
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/ALEC_Non-Profits

Follow the money …………do a Google search of the ‘think tank’ names adding ‘tobacco’ , ‘Koch’, ‘Exxon’ , ‘Tax’ , ‘climate change skeptic’ , ‘global warming’ and you will start to get the drift …………………..

ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC’s operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy’s ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

This article contains the names of think tanks and other non-profit organizations that are known to be, or have been, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) members or supporters. For for-profit corporations, law firms and government groups involved with ALEC, see the list here. For corporate trade groups involved with ALEC, see the list here.

A

B

  • Better Education for Kids (B4K) (a 501(c)4 advocacy group whose tax exempt status was revoked by the IRS June 9, 2011[11]) – Derrell Bradford, Executive Director, spoke on “Enacting a Comprehensive K-12 Education Reform Agenda” at the 2011 ALEC Annual Meeting on August 3, 2011[6]

C

D

E

  • E&M Charities[14] (dissolved in 2010)[21]
  • Electricity Consumers Research Council[14]
  • European Conservatives and Reformists (“multinational grouping of 56 Members of the European Parliament”), Exhibitor at ALEC’s 2011 Annual Conference[2]

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

N

O

P

  • United Services Automobile Association (USAA) (“a diversified financial services group of companies [providing] financial planning, insurance, investments and banking products to members of the U.S. military and their families”[63]), “Trustee” level sponsor of 2011 ALEC Annual Conference[4] ($5,000 in 2010)[5][1]
  • UPS Foundation[1]
  • U.S. English Foundation (“a nonpartisan, Washington, D.C.-based 501 (c)(3) educational foundation that disseminates information on English teaching methods, sponsors educational programs, develops English instructional materials, represents the interests of Official English advocates before state and federal courts and promotes opportunities for people living in the United States to learn English”[64])[1]

V

  • Van Der Aa Foundation[1]

W

  • Walton Family Foundation, “Chairman” level sponsor of 2011 ALEC Annual Conference[4] ($50,000 in 2010);[5] program consultant Lori Drummer (former Director of ALEC’s Education Task Force) spoke on “Enacting a Comprehensive K-12 Education Reform Agenda” at the 2011 ALEC Annual Meeting on August 3, 2011[6]
  • WallBuilders (founded by “Christian historical revisionist” David Barton), Exhibitor and advertiser at 2011 ALEC Annual Conference[2]
  • Washington Policy Center[65] , State corporate co-chair of Washington[2] and Public Safety and Elections Task Force member[26]
  • Where’s the Line America? Foundation, Exhibitor at ALEC’s 2011 Annual Conference[2]
  • Windway Foundation (Windway Capital Corp., a Kohler family corporation headquartered in Sheboygan, WI, is the parent company of Vollrath, which manufactures commercial-grade pots and pans; and North Sails, which makes high-tech racing sails, including those used by America’s Cup winners[66])[1]
  • Workers Compensation Fund (WCF; non-profit mutual insurance company based in Salt Lake City, UT), Member of ALEC Utah Host Committee for 2012 annual meeting[35]
← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →