Down to fine detail as court review of bridge studies ends

A counsel for the government dismissed the need to assess a fine particulate in environmental impact studies for the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau bridge.

Benjamin Yu, representing environmental protection director Anissa Wong Sean-yee, was responding to the need for the assessment raised by Philip Dykes, counsel for Tung Chung resident Chu Yee-wah, who initiated a judicial review of the bridge study reports.

The government was continuing its attempt to overturn the Court of First Instance ruling that quashed the environmental permits issued for the construction of two parts of the Hong Kong section of the bridge.

The hearing wound up yesterday after three days.

Court of Appeal vice president Justice Robert Tang Ching, Justice Michael Hartmann and Justice Carlye Chu Fun- ling said they will deliver their judgment at a later date.

Dykes said the environmental impact reports for the projects fail to assess a pollutant called particulate matter 2.5, or PM2.5, which he said may pose health risks and should be assessed, although it is not listed in the territory’s air quality objectives.

But Yu argued that the reports look at the levels of respirable suspended particulates, which means particulate matter 10, or PM10.

PM2.5 particles, he said, are a subset of PM10, so it is already included.

Although PM2.5 is not separately listed in the air quality objectives, it has to be considered as a part of them, Yu added.

The projects are boundary-crossing facilities to be built on reclaimed land in waters northeast of Chek Lap Kok and a nearby link road.

Dykes also questioned a point made in the reports that 2031 would be the year of highest emissions. It did not necessarily mean overall air pollution.

COLLEEN LEE