Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

February 1st, 2012:

LCQ9: Waste management strategy

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://7thspace.com/headlines/404839/lcq9_waste_management_strategy.html

Hong Kong (HKSAR) – Following is a question by the Hon Lee Wing-tat and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (February 1):

Question:

At present, Hong Kong mainly relies on landfills to treat its waste.Of the 18 000 tonnes of solid waste generated every day, 13 300 tonnes are disposed of at landfills.According to the progress of the key initiatives in the “Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014)”, the Government has made a series of recommendations in respect of waste treatment, reduction and recycling, including the measures of developing an integrated waste management facility (IWMF) with a daily treatment capacity (including sorting and incinerating) of 3 000 tonnes of waste, raising the target of waste recovery rate from the present 49% to 55% by 2015, developing two organic waste treatment facilities (OWTFs) with daily treatment capacity of 200 and 300 tonnes respectively at Siu Ho Wan on North Lantau and Sha Ling in the North District, as well as reducing waste at source through direct economic incentives (e.g. introducing municipal solid waste charging and funding project of on-site food waste treatment), etc.In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a)of the breakdown of the volume of solid waste generated, the overall waste disposal rate at landfills and the waste recovery rate in Hong Kong in each of the past five years by type of waste, including glass, metal, plastics, paper, food waste, construction waste, sludge, electronic waste (including old computer and electrical appliance) and other waste (please specify the types);

(b)of the computation methods, standards and criteria for determining the aforesaid respective treatment capacity and target (including the daily capacity of IWMF to treat 3 000 tonnes of waste,the 55% target rate of waste recovery by 2015, as well as the daily treatment capacity of 200 and 300 tonnes of the two OWTFs);

(c)whether it has studied and assessed the amount of waste required to be reduced and the extent to which the waste recovery rate is required to be raised in Hong Kong in order to downsize the scale of the aforesaid IWMF and hence reduce its impacts on the environment with the adoption of waste reduction and recycling approaches for waste treatment; and

(d)given that at present, the Government has indicated that according to the medium to long-term planning strategy for waste management facilities, the construction of the IWMF on the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau as compared to Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun will achieve a more well-balanced spatial distribution for waste management facilities in Hong Kong as a whole, yet the Government pointed out in the “Integrated Waste Management Facilities Site Selection Report” in 2008 (the 2008 Report) that compared to Shek Kwu Chau and other potential sites, Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun had achieved the highest overall score because of “the ease of integration with the existing landfill and waste reception facilities, much less impact on local ecology, shorter construction time, lower construction cost”,

(i) whether the Government had referred to the 2008 Report in making the present proposal for the site; why the present proposal differs from the results in the 2008 Report;

(ii) of the respective overall costs for constructing the IWMF on the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau and Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun, with a breakdown by cost item (e.g. construction cost, operating cost and transportation cost, etc.); and

(iii) whether it had assessed the respective economic benefits to be brought to the two districts by constructing the IWMF at the two aforesaid sites, with specific figures to illustrate such benefits?

Reply

President,

Treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW) is an unavoidable problem for every city.Our policy objective is to implement sustainable waste management strategies.Hong Kong generates about 18 000 tonnes of MSW daily.After discounting 52% of recovered materials from this generated quantity and adding other solid wastes (such as non-inert construction waste), we have to handle about 13 500 tonnes of waste daily, which are mostly disposed of at landfills before the introduction of large-scale modern waste treatment facilities.For a small and densely-populated city like Hong Kong, the practice of disposing a large quantity of waste generated daily in landfills is not sustainable.

To provide a more comprehensive and timely solution to the imminent waste problem in Hong Kong, the Government announced on January 4, 2011 a long-term action agenda to tackle the waste management problem of Hong Kong after reviewing the “2005-2014 Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste” (the Policy Framework).With “reduce, recycle and proper waste management” as the objective, the action agenda put forward the following three core strategies and the specific implementation timetable:

(i) strengthening efforts in promoting waste reduction at source and recycling at source;

(ii) introducing modern facilities for waste treatment; and

(iii) extending the existing landfills in a timely manner.

It should be noted that all these three strategies are essential to effectively resolve our waste management problem.

The Government has proposed a series of measures on waste treatment, reduction and recycling, which include raising the recovery target of MSW to 55% by 2015 through stepping up publicity and promotional efforts on waste reduction and recycling; expediting the legislative process for introducing new Producer Responsibility Schemes and extending the existing programmes to encourage waste reduction at source; consulting the public on possible options to introduce MSW charging as a direct economic disincentive to reduce waste at source.We will apply for funding from the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council in early 2012 to expedite the development of advanced waste treatment facilities, including the integrated waste treatment facilities (IWTF) that can reduce the waste volume by 90% and turn waste into energy.In the meantime, we have to push ahead with the extension plans of existing landfills in order to maintain proper management of solid waste in compliance with the green requirements.

My reply to the question of the Honourable Mr Lee is as follows:

(a)A breakdown by quantities and major types of solid waste disposed of at landfills in the past five years, and as regards to waste recovery, a breakdown by the quantities generated and recovery rates of the major components of MSW in the past five years is available at the Annex.

(b)The Government has made reference to the historical trend of waste generation and recovery and the projections of social and economic activities in Hong Kong in assessing the future requirements for waste treatment.The assessments provided the basis for determining the demand and scale of the related waste treatment facilities.Waste reduction at source is a key component of our waste management strategy.As such, we will endeavour to forge a broad consensus within the community for the implementation of various waste reduction initiatives to complement the provision of facilities and upgrading of ancillary hardware.

Currently, the MSW recovery rate of Hong Kong stands at 52%, which compares favourably with many other cities at a similar level of development.Indeed, we have also exceeded the targets set in the 2005 Policy Framework (i.e.

which aimed for 45% by 2009 and 50% by 2014).But we need to boost the recovery rate further.To this end, we will introduce a series of complementary measures and engage the relevant government departments, district councils, community organisations, the property management trade, restaurant operators and social services groups in order to raise the environmental awareness of the people in all walks of life and broaden their participation in waste reduction and recycling.Our objective is to raise the waste recovery rate to 55% by 2015.

The treatment capacity of waste treatment facilities was determined after a detailed analysis of various relevant factors.For instance, in planning the development of the local integrated waste treatment facilities (IWTF), we have reviewed the treatment capacities of similar facilities in other densely populated cities (such as Singapore which features similar demographic and geographical characteristics as Hong Kong) as well as our overall strategy on waste transfer and treatment (i.e. sending most of our local waste for compaction and containerisation at refuse transfer stations before transfer to landfills by marine transport).The final recommendation was phased development of IWMF in an appropriate scale with the daily capacity of the first phase IWTF set at 3 000 tonnes.

Currently, Hong Kong disposes of about 3 240 tonnes of food waste a day, of which about 840 tonnes are generated by the commercial and industrial (C&I) sector.Most of these food wastes end up in landfills.To address the problem of dumping food waste at landfills, the Government has adopted a multi-pronged approach.The key strategy is to prevent and minimise food waste generation and promote recovery and recycling to cope with unavoidable food waste through publicity, education and public participation.As storage of a large amount of food waste will give rise to odour nuisance and hygiene problems, it is not desirable to compact and containerise food waste at existing refuse transfer stations prior to long distance delivery.Instead, the food waste should be directly delivered to separate purpose-built facilities for special treatment.To this end, the Government plans to develop two organic waste treatment facilities (OWTF) with a daily capacity of 200-300 tonnes to treat source-separated biodegradable food waste from C&I establishments.A working group comprising representatives from the restaurant, hotel, property management and food manufacturing trades has been set up to draw up guidelines on ways to minimise, separate and recover food waste food waste.Through our site search study in 2007, we have identified possible sites at Siu Ho Wan of North Lantau and Sha Ling of North District for development of the first and second phases of the OWTF to treat food waste generated by the C&I sector in North Lantau, West Kowloon and Northern New Territories.We will also conduct site search studies for developing OWTF in other districts.

(c)We are committed to stepping up our efforts in reducing waste at source and recycling, as this is the only permanent solution to relieve the pressure for waste treatment.However, waste reduction at source and recycling cannot completely resolve waste problems in Hong Kong.The experience in Europe and other advanced cities shows that, even after the implementation of various measures on waste reduction at source, there is still a substantial amount of waste that cannot be recovered which requires treatment.As in Hong Kong, these cities handle their wastes by incineration in modern waste treatment facilities and landfilling the resultant ash.

For Hong Kong, there will still be a huge amount of MSW that cannot be recovered or recycled, amounting to about 8 000 tonnes per day (tpd), which requires treatment even after the target recovery rate of 55% is achieved.Given that our three landfills will become saturated in the next few years, we must plan for waste treatment by modern waste treatment facilities at the earliest opportunity to bring about a substantial reduction in landfilled waste.In view of the lead time required for planning and construction of waste treatment facilities, we must immediately commence the preparatory work for the first integrated waste management facility (IWMF) with a treatment capacity of 3 000 tpd and the two organic waste treatment facilities (at Siu Ho Wan and Sha Ling respectively).

(d)(i) The proposed site for the IWMF was chosen on the basis of substantial scientific studies and analyses and has taken into account the territory-wide spatial distribution of waste treatment facilities.

We first conducted an initial territory-wide site selection study to examine the preliminary data of all possible sites in 2007-08 before identifying the sites at Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons (TTAL) in Tuen Mun and the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau (SKC) for further consideration in 2008.

As required under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance and the Technical Memorandum on the Environment Impact Assessment, we have conducted detailed environmental impact assessments (EIA) for the development of IWMF at these two sites to evaluate the cumulative impact of the project and other projects in respect of noise, air, water quality, waste, ecology, landscape and cultural heritage.The EIA report also recommended suitable mitigation measures to be adopted for ensuring that the environmental impact was limited to an acceptable level.It also recommended an environmental monitoring and audit programme for ensuring the effectiveness of these measures.

The EIA findings indicated that both phased and simultaneous development of IWMF at the two sites would meet the EIA requirements.Having considered the spatial distribution of our waste management facilities, environmental factors and transport efficiency, the Government selected the artificial island next to SKC as the site for the first IWMF on the following grounds:

– The proposed choice ensures a more balanced spatial distribution of waste facilities.For the Western New Territories, there is West New Territories Landfill and the proposed West New Territories Landfill extension.There is also a sludge treatment facility with a capacity of 2 000 tpd under construction at TTAL.For the North New Territories, there is North East New Territories Landfill and the proposed landfill extension.For the East New Territories, there is South East New Territories Landfill and proposed landfill extension.For the urban area, there is Tsing Yi Chemical Waste Treatment Centre.The development of the IWMF at the southern tip of Hong Kong will help achieve a more balanced spatial distribution of facilities;

– The artificial island next to SKC is closer to the Island East, Island West and Kowloon refuse transfer stations, the catchment area for the IWMF.The sea route for delivering solid waste from these stations to the artificial island next to SKC is shorten by 25% when compared with the route to TTAL in West New Territories.Moreover, the choice would not cause significant impact on the marine traffic in the area.Instead, it can help reduce the marine traffic in Ma Wan;

– The SKC site is far away from the densely populated areas.It is located at about 3.5 to 5 km from Cheung Chau, which is not in the direction of prevailing wind (northeasterly wind towards southwest in the sea).The IWMF will have advanced incineration technology and air cleansing systems on site to further minimise impact caused by gas emission on ambient air quality and, hence, the residents nearby; and

– The IWMF and its on-site educational and community facilities under planning would bring considerable economic benefits to the nearby islands (especially Cheung Chau).Apart from more jobs and ferry services, the development will also bring in streams of workers and visitors that will, in turn, generate other economic activities and benefits.

(ii) Regarding the overall costs, we are working on the estimates for the construction and operation costs of the integrated facilities, the necessary equipment and ancillary facilities. We will seek funding from the Legislative Council after completing the estimates.

(iii) Regarding the economic benefits generated during the construction and operation of the IWMF, there will be about 1,000 workers working on the island and in the surrounding waters during the peak construction period.When it commences operation, there will be about 200 workers working every day in the facility.Besides, the education centre and associated facilities for visitors at the IWMF under planning will also draw in students as well as other visitors.As the site on SKC is far from the urban areas, Cheung Chau will serve as its key back-up area, both during the construction and operation of the IWMF.This will provide a great boost to the economic activities related to accommodation, retail and catering trades in Cheung Chau.As for the TTAL site, it would also draw in comparable number of engineering staff, workers and visitors.But given its more convenient land transport, they are expected to spend less time at the nearby communities.As such, this option would generate less economic benefits for the local communities.

Source: HKSAR Government

Tackling odour problem of waterfront tourist attractions

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://7thspace.com/headlines/404819/lcq3_tackling_odour_problem_of_wate
rfront_tourist_attractions.html
LCQ3: Tackling odour problem of waterfront tourist attractions

Hong Kong (HKSAR) – Following is a question by the Hon Raymond Ho
Chung-tai and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr
Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (February 1):

Question:

There are many restaurants at the tourist attractions (e.g. Lei Yue Mun
and Cheung Chau, etc.) which are famous for seafood in Hong Kong, and
foul odour can be smelled from time to time at the seashore near these
restaurants. Such a situation has persisted for many years and it is not
hard to notice the situation, but the authorities still have not
properly tackled the problem.

In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) whether the reason for not properly tackling the aforesaid problem
over the past years by the authorities is that tourists’ interest in the
aforesaid attractions has not dropped, and that the authorities are
pleased with the present situation; if not, whether the authorities are
not fully aware of the problem;

(b) whether the authorities know the source of the odour; if so, whether
they have adopted any corresponding improvement measure; if they have,
of the details and effectiveness of the measure; and

(c) whether the authorities have any specific plan to improve the
environmental hygiene of the tourist attractions which offer culinary
delights as a selling point, so as to avoid tourists having a negative
impression on Hong Kong’s environmental hygiene and to reinforce the
image of Hong Kong as a culinary paradise?

Reply:

President,

The Administration has always attached great importance to maintain the
advantage of famous tourist attractions in Hong Kong. The question
mentions that the many seafood restaurants at the seafront of Lei Yue
Mun and Cheung Chau have been popular with local citizens and tourists
alike.While the departments concerned, including the Environmental
Protection Department (EPD), the Drainage Services Department (DSD) and
the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) have not received
any odour complaints associated with sea water in the waterfront areas
over the past three years (2009-2011), the Tourism Commission (TC) did
receive an expression of concern by an organisation in October 2009 over
the sewage disposal arrangements in Lei Yue Mun. Subsequently, the
District Management Committee of the Kwun Tong District Office discussed
the issue and closely monitored the progress of the implementation of
improvement measures by concerned departments at its meetings in April
and June 2010.

We would reply to the question in detail as follows:

(a) The sources of odour at waterfront areas vary according to the
actual conditions at different locations.

These would generally include rubbish piles on waterfront streets and
decomposing organic matters (such as residual food or drinks) that
accumulated inside storm water drains or catch pits in the vicinity of
waterfront shops and food premises. Other sources include decomposing
organic matters, such as dead fish and algae, accumulated in waters near
piers, shallow banks and places with slow water flow. These may also
give off odour if they are not removed promptly.

The odour may be aggravated by hot weather or under strong sun light.
Depending on the actual circumstances, the departments concerned,
including EPD, DSD and FEHD, will work closely to identify the causes of
odour and take follow-up actions.

The Government has always adopted measures to prevent pollutants
originating from their land-based sources from affecting marine water
quality. EPD diligently inspects the Lei Yue Mun (Sam Ka Tsuen) and
Cheung Chau areas to check whether the food premises in these areas have
caused pollution to the surrounding areas or illegally discharged
effluent into storm water drains.

As for the regulation of food premises, FEHD conducts regular inspection
of the food premises in Lei Yue Mun and Cheung Chau to ensure their
compliance with the hygiene standards as stipulated under the law and in
the relevant licensing conditions. In case of breaches, the departments
concerned will take enforcement action, such as issuing verbal or
written warnings and instituting prosecution. According to EPD, all the
food premises in Cheung Chau and Lei Yue Mun are required to install
grease traps to remove oil and grease from effluent to minimise
pollution.

The staff of EPD and FEHD also conduct inspection from time to time and
remind operators of these food premises to regularly remove waste from
their sewage treatment facilities (grease traps/septic tanks) and
conduct checks to ensure that their treatment facilities function
properly to prevent discharge of untreated or excessively greasy
effluent. EPD’s records also show that the sewage treatment facilities
of the food premises in Cheung Chau and Lei Yue Mun are in good order.
Moreover, FEHD always keeps a close watch on the provision of street
cleansing services at tourist attractions and, when necessary, increases
the frequency of street sweeping and washing.

DSD meanwhile is responsible for regular desilting of contaminated
sediments at public storm water outfalls to prevent their discharge into
the waterfront and, when appropriate, will increase the frequency of
desilting works.

In addition, to improve the marine water quality of Lei Yue Mun (Sam Ka
Tsuen) typhoon shelter, the Government had begun diverting trunk storm
water drains from the typhoon shelter to reduce direct pollutant
discharge into the typhoon shelter in the early years. Bio-remediation
works for facilitating decomposition of organic pollutants in sediments
were also carried out in the typhoon shelter at the end of 2004.

(b) As mentioned above, we have not received any complaints concerning
odour in the typhoon shelters at Cheung Chau and Lei Yue Mun over the
past three years. In fact, the marine water quality in the Cheung Chau
and Lei Yue Mun typhoon shelter areas continues to improve with the
conduct of enforcement, educational promotion and improvement works.

Monitoring results show that the water quality of Cheung Chau Typhoon
Shelter was good over the past three years (2009 -2011) and the 1986 to
2011 results of Sam Ka Tsuen Typhoon Shelter showed that the level of
dissolved oxygen has steadily risen while the E. coli counts dropped.

(c) Renowned as the culinary capital of Asia, Hong Kong offers a wide
selection of cuisine, which has attracted many visitors to come to
enjoy.

The Government has all along closely monitored the environment and
supporting facilities of the city’s dining districts. Whenever
necessary, TC would co-ordinate the relevant departments including FEHD,
EPD, the District Offices of the Home Affairs Department, etc ., for
suitable improvement, so as to maintain Hong Kong’s reputation as Asia’s
culinary capital.

Overall speaking, the environmental hygiene conditions of tourist
attractions which offer culinary delights as a selling point are
satisfactory. Nevertheless, the hygienic conditions of some individual
attractions have been a subject of concern as a result of various
factors such as their geographic environment, the mode of operations of
the food establishments, local culture, and pedestrian flows in the
vicinity, etc.

For example, the SoHo in Central District of Hong Kong Island is located
in an old residential area where the streets are narrow and steep, and
many pubs and restaurants there are opening into the streets.

As a result, the area has a greater demand for regular street cleansing
and refuse management, as compared to other dining areas in Hong Kong.
To address the situation, TC, in conjunction with the Hong Kong Tourism
Board, FEHD and other relevant departments, have liaised with the
operators of food establishments in SoHo earlier on to explore
environmental hygiene improvement measures. FEHD has since enhanced
street cleansing and street washing for the area, and stepped up warning
and enforcement against illegal littering by business operators and
other parties.

As another example, to further enhance the attractiveness of Lei Yue Mun
as a popular tourist spot, TC is planning to take forth the Lei Yue Mun
Waterfront Enhancement Project.

The scope of works includes the construction of a public landing
facility and a waterfront promenade, as well as other streetscape
improvement works. The relevant works departments are currently
arranging for the gazettal of works for the project. We expect that upon
completion of the project works, the number of visitors to Lei Yue Mun
would increase significantly.

To address the demand for improved sewerage facilities arising from the
acute increase in visitors, EPD commissioned a study in November 2010 to
examine the feasibility of providing interim and long term sewerage
improvement works for the whole Lei Yue Mun area. Taking into account
the topographical constraints and narrow alleys in Lei Yue Mun Village,
the Administration needs to conduct further detailed investigation on
the preferred options. The local communities will be consulted on the
feasible options in due course to expedite the sewerage improvement
works in the area.

TC will continue to monitor and review the environment and supporting
facilities of individual tourist attractions from time to time, and
co-ordinate with relevant departments for improvement where necessary.

Policy context

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/air/intro/policy-context

check out the links !

Within the European Union, the Sixth Environment Action Programme (6th EAP) aims to achieve levels of air quality that do not result in unacceptable impacts on, and risks to, human health and the environment. The EU acts at many levels to reduce exposure to air pollution: through legislation, through co-operation with sectors responsible for air pollution, through national, regional authorities and non-government organisations and through research. EU policies aim to reduce exposure to air pollution by reducing emissions and setting limits and target values for air quality.

The Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) programme, established under the 6th EAP, provided long-term, strategic and integrated policy advice concerning air pollution. The 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution, underpinned by the CAFE programme, sets out ambitious but cost-effective objectives and measures for European air quality policy to 2020.

New! – Review of EU Air policy

The European Commission has recently launched a comprehensive review of the EU air quality legislation, building on the 2005 Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution and Clean Air for Europe (CAFE) initiatives and including the National Emission Ceilings Directive (NECD).

Emissions of air pollutants

At a Member State level, the National Emission Ceilings Directive (NEC Directive) imposes emission ceilings (or limits) for emissions of four key air pollutants (nitrogen oxides, sulphur dioxide, non-methane volatile organic compounds and ammonia) that harm human health and the environment. Information concerning the revision of the NEC Directive is available on the website of the European Commission’s DG Environment here.

Other key EU legislation is targeted at reducing emissions of air pollutants from specific sources, for example:

Internationally, the issue of air pollution emissions is also being addressed by theUNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (the LRTAP Convention) and its protocols. The Gothenburg‘multi-pollutant’ protocol under the LRTAP Convention contains national emission ceilings that, for the EU Member States, are either equal to or less ambitious than those in the EU NEC Directive.

Air quality

The EU’s new air quality directive, the Directive on Ambient Air Quality and Cleaner Air for Europe, is one of the key measures in place to address air pollution under the Thematic Strategy on Air Pollution. It is the first EU directive to include limits on ambient concentrations of PM2.5 (fine particulate matter). It also consolidates various existing pieces of air quality legislation into a single directive. Governments have been given two years (from 11 June 2008) to bring their legislation in line with the provisions of the Directive.

Until then, the existing EU air quality policy framework remains in place. This legislation has established health-based standards and objectives for a number of air pollutants and includes:

  • The Air Quality Framework Directive. This describes the basic principles concerning the assessment and management of air quality in the Member States. The Directive also lists the pollutants for which air quality standards and objectives have been developed and specified in subsequent legislation (the four ‘Daughter’ Directives);
  • The ‘Exchange of Information’ Decision, which establishes a reciprocal exchange of information and data from networks and individual stations measuring ambient air pollution within the EU Member States.

More information on air pollution policies and legislation: European Commission’s Environment Directorate-General

The application of models under the European Union’s Air Quality Directive: A technical reference guide

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.eea.europa.eu/themes/publications/fairmode

his website has limited functionality with javascript off. Please make sure javascript is enabled in your browser.

Technical report No 10/2011

This technical reference guide provides a general overview of the use of models with regard to the consolidated Directive 2008/50/EC on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe (the AQ Directive). This report is an output of the Forum for Air Quality Modelling in Europe (Fairmode) established in 2008 as a joint action of the European Environment Agency (EEA) and the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC).

Content

http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/fairmode/at_download/file

European Commission Guidance on Waste Inspections and Enforcement Actions

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.waste-management-world.com/index/display/article-display/7911599356/articles/waste-management-world/waste-to-energy/2012/02/European_Commission_Guidance_on_Waste_Inspections_and_Enforcement_Actions_.html

1st Feb 2012

In 2011, DG Environment of the European Commission launched a study aiming at gathering from the EU Member States examples of best practice in permitting and inspections related to the enforcement of certain pieces of waste legislation, and preparing, on this basis, a set of recommendations and guidance documents.

The study focused on the following EU waste legislation:

  • Waste Framework Directive (WFD) (2008/98/EC)
  • Landfill Directive (1999/31/EC), together with the WAC Decision (2003/33/EC)
  • RoHS Directive (2002/95/EC to be replaced by 2011/65/EU)
  • WEEE Directive (2002/96/EC to be replaced in short notice).

The study resulted in preparing a set of guidance and best practice documents which are now available on the Commission website

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/framework/inspections.html

EEA: New Indicators Show Latest Data on Air Pollution

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.waste-management-world.com/index/display/article-display/8986262156/articles/waste-management-world/waste-to-energy/2012/02/EEA__New_Indicators_Show_Latest_Data_on_Air_Pollution.html

Updated air pollution indicators have been published by the European Environment Agency (EEA).

The updates include indicators presenting past emission trends, contributions of different sectors and analysis of reasons for past changes. The indicators cover a range of substances affecting the ozone layer, acid rain and air quality.

For the Waste-to-Energy sector the following substances could be of interest:

CSI001 assessment: Emissions of acidifying substances
CSI003 assessment: Emissions of primary particulate matter and secondary particulate matter precursors
APE001 assessment: Sulphur dioxide emissions
APE002 assessment: Nitrogen oxides emissions
APE004 assessment: NMVOC emissions
APE005 assessment: Heavy metal emissions
APE006 assessment: POPs emissions

China quietly shelves new diesel emission standards

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/feb/01/china-shelves-plan-diesel-emissions

The government has quietly postponed plans to clean the fumes from truck and bus exhaust pipes

Description: china motorway has 60-mile tailback

The Beijing-Zhangjiakou highway in China’s Hebei province. Photograph: Alexander F. Yuan/AP

It ought to have been a centrepiece of China‘s efforts to reduce smog, but the government has quietly postponed plans to clean the fumes from truck and bus exhaust pipes.

The 18-month delay of new diesel emission standards, which was announced this month, runs contrary to the authorities’ promises to tighten controls on air pollution.

Environmental scientists say the move shows public health concerns remain far less of a priority for China’s leaders than the economic interests of state-owned petrol companies, PetroChina and Sinopec.

It was not supposed to be this way. China is trying to shake the notoriously filthy hazes that envelop many of its cities and result in hundreds of thousands of premature deaths each year.

After years of obfuscation and inaction, the government has taken a series of high-profile steps recently to show that it is serious about addressing the problem.

Last year, state planners announced a new goal to reduce emissions of Nitrogen Oxides by 10%. Last month, Beijing began releasing hourly data on fine particulates, known as PM2.5, that cause smog and can enter the bloodstream.

But even as it announced ambitious new targets and improved transparency, the central government has repeatedly delayed one of the most important policies for clearing the air.

The China IV Standard for diesel emissions was issued in 2005 and was originally supposed to have been introduced nationwide on 1 January 2011. Similar to the Euro IV Standard, it would force truck manufacturers to install cleaner engines. But to be effective, it requires petrol stations to sell higher-grade fuel with lower levels of sulphur, which is currently not the case.

This is crucial because traffic – particularly heavy trucks that burn diesel – is increasingly more significant than coal burning as a source of air pollution. Studies suggest vehicle exhaust pipes contribute more than 70% of the nitrogen oxides in downtown Beijing and are the dominant source of roadside PM2.5 levels – and the biggest threat to health.

But it has proved difficult for the relatively weak environment ministry to impose the extra costs on the state’s biggest petrol companies, which have an equal political rank and considerably greater lobbying resources.

The oil firms are technically capable of improving the fuel quality – as they have shown in Beijing, which has higher standards than elsewhere – but they are reluctant to bear the costs. In other countries these would be passed on to drivers, but in China, pump prices are determined by the government rather than the market.

Last year, the government announced a one-year delay in introducing the tighter controls. In January this year, that was further extended to July 2013.

To the frustration of many of those involved in drafting the new controls, there appeared to be no fresh pressure from the ministry to overcome the logjam. The notice posted online simply stated the problem – “The current supply of diesel in China is still incapable of meeting the China IV standard” – rather than indicating how it might be overcome in the next 18 months.

Without the new rules, environment officials lack a vital tool for achieving pollution reduction targets. Truck and bus makers and fleet operators also have a weaker impetus to offset the impact of this setback.

Michael Walsh, who chairs the International Council on Clean Transportation, which has been working with the environment ministry for several years on the project, said the delay threatened the effort that China has made in dealing with air pollution.

“The irresponsible failure of the oil industry to respond to the serious environmental problems by providing the necessary low sulfur fuels is seriously hampering further progress especially with diesel trucks and buses, jeopardising public health and undercutting the government’s efforts to substantially reduce nitrogen oxide emissions as called for in the 12th five year plan.”

Walsh, a winner of the government’s “friendship award” last year, said the government now has to work harder to ensure the policy is next year.

• Additional research by Cecily Huang

LCQ9: Waste management strategy

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.waste-management-world.com/index/from-the-wires/wire-news-display/1596177569.html

Hong Kong Government News
February 1, 2012
Hong Kong, Feb. 1 — Hong Kong SAR Government issued the following news release:

Following is a question by the Hon Lee Wing-tat and a written reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Mr Edward Yau, in the Legislative Council today (February 1):

Question:

At present, Hong Kong mainly relies on landfills to treat its waste. Of the 18 000 tonnes of solid waste generated every day, 13 300 tonnes are disposed of at landfills. According to the progress of the key initiatives in the “Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste (2005-2014)”, the Government has made a series of recommendations in respect of waste treatment, reduction and recycling, including the measures of developing an integrated waste management facility (IWMF) with a daily treatment capacity (including sorting and incinerating) of 3 000 tonnes of waste, raising the target of waste recovery rate from the present 49% to 55% by 2015, developing two organic waste treatment facilities (OWTFs) with daily treatment capacity of 200 and 300 tonnes respectively at Siu Ho Wan on North Lantau and Sha Ling in the North District, as well as reducing waste at source through direct economic incentives (e.g. introducing municipal solid waste charging and funding project of on-site food waste treatment), etc. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:

(a) of the breakdown of the volume of solid waste generated, the overall waste disposal rate at landfills and the waste recovery rate in Hong Kong in each of the past five years by type of waste, including glass, metal, plastics, paper, food waste, construction waste, sludge, electronic waste (including old computer and electrical appliance) and other waste (please specify the types);

(b) of the computation methods, standards and criteria for determining the aforesaid respective treatment capacity and target (including the daily capacity of IWMF to treat 3 000 tonnes of waste, the 55% target rate of waste recovery by 2015, as well as the daily treatment capacity of 200 and 300 tonnes of the two OWTFs);

(c) whether it has studied and assessed the amount of waste required to be reduced and the extent to which the waste recovery rate is required to be raised in Hong Kong in order to downsize the scale of the aforesaid IWMF and hence reduce its impacts on the environment with the adoption of waste reduction and recycling approaches for waste treatment; and

(d) given that at present, the Government has indicated that according to the medium to long-term planning strategy for waste management facilities, the construction of the IWMF on the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau as compared to Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun will achieve a more well-balanced spatial distribution for waste management facilities in Hong Kong as a whole, yet the Government pointed out in the “Integrated Waste Management Facilities Site Selection Report” in 2008 (the 2008 Report) that compared to Shek Kwu Chau and other potential sites, Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun had achieved the highest overall score because of “the ease of integration with the existing landfill and waste reception facilities, much less impact on local ecology, shorter construction time, lower construction cost”,

(i) whether the Government had referred to the 2008 Report in making the present proposal for the site; why the present proposal differs from the results in the 2008 Report;

(ii) of the respective overall costs for constructing the IWMF on the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau and Tsang Tsui in Tuen Mun, with a breakdown by cost item (e.g. construction cost, operating cost and transportation cost, etc.); and

(iii) whether it had assessed the respective economic benefits to be brought to the two districts by constructing the IWMF at the two aforesaid sites, with specific figures to illustrate such benefits?

Reply

President,

Treatment of municipal solid waste (MSW) is an unavoidable problem for every city. Our policy objective is to implement sustainable waste management strategies. Hong Kong generates about 18 000 tonnes of MSW daily. After discounting 52% of recovered materials from this generated quantity and adding other solid wastes (such as non-inert construction waste), we have to handle about 13 500 tonnes of waste daily, which are mostly disposed of at landfills before the introduction of large-scale modern waste treatment facilities. For a small and densely-populated city like Hong Kong, the practice of disposing a large quantity of waste generated daily in landfills is not sustainable.

To provide a more comprehensive and timely solution to the imminent waste problem in Hong Kong, the Government announced on January 4, 2011 a long-term action agenda to tackle the waste management problem of Hong Kong after reviewing the “2005-2014 Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste” (the Policy Framework). With “reduce, recycle and proper waste management” as the objective, the action agenda put forward the following three core strategies and the specific implementation timetable:

(i) strengthening efforts in promoting waste reduction at source and recycling at source;

(ii) introducing modern facilities for waste treatment; and

(iii) extending the existing landfills in a timely manner.

It should be noted that all these three strategies are essential to effectively resolve our waste management problem.

The Government has proposed a series of measures on waste treatment, reduction and recycling, which include raising the recovery target of MSW to 55% by 2015 through stepping up publicity and promotional efforts on waste reduction and recycling; expediting the legislative process for introducing new Producer Responsibility Schemes and extending the existing programmes to encourage waste reduction at source; consulting the public on possible options to introduce MSW charging as a direct economic disincentive to reduce waste at source. We will apply for funding from the Finance Committee of the Legislative Council in early 2012 to expedite the development of advanced waste treatment facilities, including the integrated waste treatment facilities (IWTF) that can reduce the waste volume by 90% and turn waste into energy. In the meantime, we have to push ahead with the extension plans of existing landfills in order to maintain proper management of solid waste in compliance with the green requirements.

My reply to the question of the Honourable Mr Lee is as follows:

(a) A breakdown by quantities and major types of solid waste disposed of at landfills in the past five years, and as regards to waste recovery, a breakdown by the quantities generated and recovery rates of the major components of MSW in the past five years is available at the Annex.

(b) The Government has made reference to the historical trend of waste generation and recovery and the projections of social and economic activities in Hong Kong in assessing the future requirements for waste treatment. The assessments provided the basis for determining the demand and scale of the related waste treatment facilities. Waste reduction at source is a key component of our waste management strategy. As such, we will endeavour to forge a broad consensus within the community for the implementation of various waste reduction initiatives to complement the provision of facilities and upgrading of ancillary hardware.

Currently, the MSW recovery rate of Hong Kong stands at 52%, which compares favourably with many other cities at a similar level of development. Indeed, we have also exceeded the targets set in the 2005 Policy Framework (i.e. which aimed for 45% by 2009 and 50% by 2014). But we need to boost the recovery rate further. To this end, we will introduce a series of complementary measures and engage the relevant government departments, district councils, community organisations, the property management trade, restaurant operators and social services groups in order to raise the environmental awareness of the people in all walks of life and broaden their participation in waste reduction and recycling. Our objective is to raise the waste recovery rate to 55% by 2015.

The treatment capacity of waste treatment facilities was determined after a detailed analysis of various relevant factors. For instance, in planning the development of the local integrated waste treatment facilities (IWTF), we have reviewed the treatment capacities of similar facilities in other densely populated cities (such as Singapore which features similar demographic and geographical characteristics as Hong Kong) as well as our overall strategy on waste transfer and treatment (i.e. sending most of our local waste for compaction and containerisation at refuse transfer stations before transfer to landfills by marine transport). The final recommendation was phased development of IWMF in an appropriate scale with the daily capacity of the first phase IWTF set at 3 000 tonnes.

Currently, Hong Kong disposes of about 3 240 tonnes of food waste a day, of which about 840 tonnes are generated by the commercial and industrial (C&I) sector. Most of these food wastes end up in landfills. To address the problem of dumping food waste at landfills, the Government has adopted a multi-pronged approach. The key strategy is to prevent and minimise food waste generation and promote recovery and recycling to cope with unavoidable food waste through publicity, education and public participation. As storage of a large amount of food waste will give rise to odour nuisance and hygiene problems, it is not desirable to compact and containerise food waste at existing refuse transfer stations prior to long distance delivery. Instead, the food waste should be directly delivered to separate purpose-built facilities for special treatment. To this end, the Government plans to develop two organic waste treatment facilities (OWTF) with a daily capacity of 200-300 tonnes to treat source-separated biodegradable food waste from C&I establishments. A working group comprising representatives from the restaurant, hotel, property management and food manufacturing trades has been set up to draw up guidelines on ways to minimise, separate and recover food waste food waste. Through our site search study in 2007, we have identified possible sites at Siu Ho Wan of North Lantau and Sha Ling of North District for development of the first and second phases of the OWTF to treat food waste generated by the C&I sector in North Lantau, West Kowloon and Northern New Territories. We will also conduct site search studies for developing OWTF in other districts.

(c) We are committed to stepping up our efforts in reducing waste at source and recycling, as this is the only permanent solution to relieve the pressure for waste treatment. However, waste reduction at source and recycling cannot completely resolve waste problems in Hong Kong. The experience in Europe and other advanced cities shows that, even after the implementation of various measures on waste reduction at source, there is still a substantial amount of waste that cannot be recovered which requires treatment. As in Hong Kong, these cities handle their wastes by incineration in modern waste treatment facilities and landfilling the resultant ash.

For Hong Kong, there will still be a huge amount of MSW that cannot be recovered or recycled, amounting to about 8 000 tonnes per day (tpd), which requires treatment even after the target recovery rate of 55% is achieved. Given that our three landfills will become saturated in the next few years, we must plan for waste treatment by modern waste treatment facilities at the earliest opportunity to bring about a substantial reduction in landfilled waste. In view of the lead time required for planning and construction of waste treatment facilities, we must immediately commence the preparatory work for the first integrated waste management facility (IWMF) with a treatment capacity of 3 000 tpd and the two organic waste treatment facilities (at Siu Ho Wan and Sha Ling respectively).

(d)(i) The proposed site for the IWMF was chosen on the basis of substantial scientific studies and analyses and has taken into account the territory-wide spatial distribution of waste treatment facilities. We first conducted an initial territory-wide site selection study to examine the preliminary data of all possible sites in 2007-08 before identifying the sites at Tsang Tsui Ash Lagoons (TTAL) in Tuen Mun and the artificial island near Shek Kwu Chau (SKC) for further consideration in 2008.

As required under the Environmental Impact Assessment Ordinance and the Technical Memorandum on the Environment Impact Assessment, we have conducted detailed environmental impact assessments (EIA) for the development of IWMF at these two sites to evaluate the cumulative impact of the project and other projects in respect of noise, air, water quality, waste, ecology, landscape and cultural heritage. The EIA report also recommended suitable mitigation measures to be adopted for ensuring that the environmental impact was limited to an acceptable level. It also recommended an environmental monitoring and audit programme for ensuring the effectiveness of these measures.

The EIA findings indicated that both phased and simultaneous development of IWMF at the two sites would meet the EIA requirements. Having considered the spatial distribution of our waste management facilities, environmental factors and transport efficiency, the Government selected the artificial island next to SKC as the site for the first IWMF on the following grounds:

– The proposed choice ensures a more balanced spatial distribution of waste facilities. For the Western New Territories, there is West New Territories Landfill and the proposed West New Territories Landfill extension. There is also a sludge treatment facility with a capacity of 2 000 tpd under construction at TTAL. For the North New Territories, there is North East New Territories Landfill and the proposed landfill extension. For the East New Territories, there is South East New Territories Landfill and proposed landfill extension. For the urban area, there is Tsing Yi Chemical Waste Treatment Centre. The development of the IWMF at the southern tip of Hong Kong will help achieve a more balanced spatial distribution of facilities;

– The artificial island next to SKC is closer to the Island East, Island West and Kowloon refuse transfer stations, the catchment area for the IWMF. The sea route for delivering solid waste from these stations to the artificial island next to SKC is shorten by 25% when compared with the route to TTAL in West New Territories. Moreover, the choice would not cause significant impact on the marine traffic in the area. Instead, it can help reduce the marine traffic in Ma Wan;

– The SKC site is far away from the densely populated areas. It is located at about 3.5 to 5 km from Cheung Chau, which is not in the direction of prevailing wind (northeasterly wind towards southwest in the sea). The IWMF will have advanced incineration technology and air cleansing systems on site to further minimise impact caused by gas emission on ambient air quality and, hence, the residents nearby; and

– The IWMF and its on-site educational and community facilities under planning would bring considerable economic benefits to the nearby islands (especially Cheung Chau). Apart from more jobs and ferry services, the development will also bring in streams of workers and visitors that will, in turn, generate other economic activities and benefits.

(ii) Regarding the overall costs, we are working on the estimates for the construction and operation costs of the integrated facilities, the necessary equipment and ancillary facilities. We will seek funding from the Legislative Council after completing the estimates.

(iii) Regarding the economic benefits generated during the construction and operation of the IWMF, there will be about 1,000 workers working on the island and in the surrounding waters during the peak construction period. When it commences operation, there will be about 200 workers working every day in the facility. Besides, the education centre and associated facilities for visitors at the IWMF under planning will also draw in students as well as other visitors. As the site on SKC is far from the urban areas, Cheung Chau will serve as its key back-up area, both during the construction and operation of the IWMF. This will provide a great boost to the economic activities related to accommodation, retail and catering trades in Cheung Chau. As for the TTAL site, it would also draw in comparable number of engineering staff, workers and visitors. But given its more convenient land transport, they are expected to spend less time at the nearby communities. As such, this option would generate less economic benefits for the local communities.

Source: Hong Kong SAR Government Website: news.gov.hk

Copyright 2012 Hong Kong Government News, distributed by Contify.comAll Rights Reserved

Hong Kong Government News

Wire News provided by

Beijing to set up PM2.5 monitoring stations

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

China Daily – Feb 1, 2012

By Zheng Xin (chinadaily.com.cn)

BEIJING– The capital will set up more than 30 fine particulate pollutant monitoring stations to inform the public of the air quality by the end of this year, according to the city’s environmental protection bureau.

Six of the more than 30 PM2.5 (particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter) monitoring stations will be set up soon in both downtown as well as surrounding suburbs, based on existing facilities, the Beijing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau said on Feb 1.

Yu Jianhua, director of the air pollution control division of the bureau, said the bureau would carefully choose the locations of the stations, in order to represent the city’s air condition comprehensively and objectively. “The stations will be set up through all 16 districts and counties in the city,” said Yu.

Many residents are concerned with where the stations will be located and whether they can accurately reflect the city’s air quality. “Hopefully the stations will not be located close to any water reservoirs or forest park,” said Wang Yu, 26, a Beijing resident. “That would simply be a waste of money for the tax payers.”

Some non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on environmental protection also appealed to the government to set up stations where air quality can be provided.

“The monitoring station will be nothing but a decoration if it cannot reflect objectively an area’s air pollution and contamination,” said Wang Qiuxia, a researcher at Green Beagle, an environmental protection NGO based in Beijing.

The bureau said the capital would place the stations in accordance with the general international practice. “The station should be located selectively, neither around the most clean nor polluted areas,” said Yu.

Yu said that according to the national standard, the location should be 50 meters away from the pollution source, including automobile exhaust by the roadside.

The US embassy’s rooftop air quality monitor is only 15 meters from the road, which might detect a higher figure of Air Pollution Index, Yu said.

The bureau said it plans to purchase facilities from home and abroad in the near future and step up the training of inspection personnel.

The government plans to add another 200,000 mu (3,3000 acres)of forest planting in 2012, mainly in urban areas, freeways and arterial roads, to improve the capital’s air quality and reach the stricter standard of PM2.5 concentration laid down by the Ministry of Environmental Protection at the end of last year.

Forest planting, together with better oil quality and scrapping old and polluting automobiles, would greatly help improve the city’s air quality, said the bureau.

According to the ministry’s new standard, which is to be adopted nationwide by 2016, the average yearly ceiling for PM2.5, which is for the first time included as a detected pollutant, is set at 35 micrograms per cubic meter, while the daily limit is at 75.

Copyright By chinadaily.com.cn. All rights reserved

Budget 2012

Feb 1st, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

105. The planning of airport development and construction take time. Therefore, we should formulate long-term strategies in a timely manner to ensure that the handling capacity of the Hong Kong International Airport will fully meet the ever-increasing air traffic demand. Last year, the Airport Authority Hong Kong (AA) commenced Phase 1 works of its midfield expansion project to provide additional aircraft stands and apron facilities and a new passenger concourse. Upon completion of the project, the handling capacity of the airport will be increased to 70 million passengers and six million tonnes of cargo a year. Such capacity will be sufficient to cope with the air traffic demand up to 2020.

106. The AA launched a public consultation in 2011 on the findings of the Hong Kong International Airport Master Plan 2030. In their report submitted to the Government, the AA has recommended adopting the three-runway system as the blueprint for the airport’s future development and further planning. The future development of the airport, the construction or not of the third runway in particular, and the overall economic development of Hong Kong are inextricably intertwined. The project will have profound financial implications for our society. The Government is considering the AA’s recommendations carefully in a bid to make an early decision for the commencement of the next stage of work, which includes conducting an environmental impact assessment and preparing the associated detailed design and financing proposals.

107. Turning to the port, we have commissioned a preliminary feasibility study on the development of Container Terminal 10 at Southwest Tsing Yi to assess the project’s impact on the environment and on road and marine traffic. We have also commenced the Study on the Strategic Development Plan for Hong Kong Port 2030 to update port cargo forecasts and explore how to make better use of the existing port facilities in support of future development. Both studies are scheduled for completion by the end of this year. We shall take into account the study results, economic situation, the views of stakeholders, etc. when deciding on the need to develop Container Terminal 10 and the timetable.

108. While developing its services, the shipping industry is also very concerned about environmental protection. Last year, it launched the Fair Winds Charter. By signing the Charter, the industry voluntarily switches to low sulphur fuel for ocean-going vessels berthing in Hong Kong waters in a bid to reduce emissions. To encourage more carriers to switch to cleaner fuels when berthing in Hong Kong waters, I propose to reduce by half the port facilities and light dues charged on ocean-going vessels using low sulphur fuel while at berth in Hong Kong. The proposed scheme will span three years and cost the Government $260 million.

109. In response to the positioning of Hong Kong as an international maritime centre as set out in the National 12th Five-Year Plan, we shall continue to reinforce the local maritime service cluster, strengthen manpower training, and join hands with the industry to promote both locally and abroad our maritime services in areas such as ship management, maritime arbitration and ship finance.

← Earlier Posts