Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan


Green Island would only want dry MSW with calorific value above 7 MJ/kg since it is cheaper than coal to fire the kiln

Our current system mixes our food waste with our MSW since we have no at-source separation laws; our former ENB boss was too busy travelling overseas visiting incinerators & a Scottish whiskey distillery to enact the legislation

Our wet market food waste is 90% water <3 MJ/kg versus 30% water value in Europe, 50% Japan & 55% Korea

You cannot burn water for calorific value so they would have to add coal to co-combust

Solution: Our world class existing sewerage treatment system could easily absorb all our daily food waste if pulverized after collection as Green bin waste

Indeed at 2016 capacity 2.4+ million m3 per day Stonecutters could handle our daily 3,300 m3 food waste in just two minutes

To have a functioning incinerator the Govt needs a guaranteed supply of dry MSW per day every day since dioxin emissions are highest on startup and shutdown of the burners

This daily MSW feedstock requirement defeats recycling aims + explains why Govt is not willing to share its commodity, waste, with Green Island where cement kilns operate more efficiently at 1450 deg C versus only 750-850 Deg C for a Neolithic (modern) incinerator

Of course we need man made islands as our new landfill ash lagoons since 1/3 by weight of what is thermally converted remains as ash

But landfills do not leak – ask Govt – you can trust them not to lie, right ?

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (

Home > No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan

No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan

Friday, 30 August, 2013, 12:00am


I refer to the letter by Elvis W. K. Au, assistant director of environmental protection (“Cement plan not yet viable refuse solution [1]“, August 16).

Mr Au says the government has refused to consider Green Island Cement’s Eco-Co-Combustion proposal for the treatment of municipal solid waste because the company must first deal with “technical feasibility and reliability, environmental acceptability and planning issues”. I wish to clarify some of the points he raised.

Regarding technical feasibility and reliability, our Eco-Co-Combustion waste treatment process uses proven conventional technology, which can be either kiln-based or moving-grate-based. It just means integrating conventional technology with a cement plant. There are no technical feasibility and reliability problems.

On environmental acceptability, over the last decade we have completed more than 100 separate technical studies, and have set up a pilot plant to demonstrate the feasibility, environmental impact, and public acceptability of the proposal. One of the main objectives of our study was to verify the air emission results which, when scaled up, yielded no discernible impact on nearby villages. Also, our Eco-Co-Combustion proposal uses heat energy very efficiently and it has a very low residue to be sent to landfills.

With regard to the environmental impact assessment study, when it became clear in 2008 that, no matter what we did, the government would not consider our proposal, we ceased expenditure on the project. If we were given the chance to participate, we would carry out such an assessment promptly. As there is virtually no adverse environmental impact, we are confident that our assessment would be successful.

On planning issues, according to studies conducted by law firm Mayer Brown JSM and international planning, design and environmental firm EDAW, since Tap Shek Kok is an existing industrial site and the cement plant is already in operation, our Eco-Co-Combustion System does not face any land-zoning/planning issues as it is a cement-related activity. In fact, we received a letter from the Lands Department stating that the operation of the Eco-Co-Combustion System would not change the land use.

We believe that the Eco-Co-Combustion System is a good option for solving Hong Kong’s imminent waste problem. We hope the Environmental Protection Department will reconsider the benefits of our proposal and let us participate in the municipal-solid-waste-management tender process.

Don Johnston, executive director, Green Island Cement (Holdings) Limited


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *