Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

March 22nd, 2012:

Human waste project trumps the Bill Gates competition | Energy Live News

Sustainable Human Intestinal Technology program (SHIT) wins funding.

Researchers are seeking donor and sampler volunteers.

Sampler volunteers would preferably be regular Newcastle Brown Ale drinkers.

Sustainable Energy

Human waste project trumps the Bill Gates competition

Posted on 19 March 2012 by Tom Gibson

A team of researchers from British Universities has been granted funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to develop a prototype system for recovering drinkable water and harvesting hydrogen energy from human faecal waste.

The team of researchers from Imperial College London, the University of Manchester and Durham University beat more than 2,000 other proposals. They believe the technology could provide a cheap device for people in the developing world to generate clean water and energy from waste and a sustainable source of hydrogen energy that could be used to power homes in developed countries.

Bacteria in the device helps extract energy and clean water from human faecal waste. During the first stage of the project the team hope to develop a stand-alone sanitation device which could make it easier and cheaper for people in developing countries to adopt the technology where large sewage networks may not exist.

Martyn McLachlan, a research fellow from Imperial College said: “In the future we may see homes in the UK generating their own clean water, energy and fertilizer simply by doing what comes naturally to us all once or twice day. More important are the implications for developing countries, where the provision of clean drinking water is essential for supporting life and self-generated energy could be used to support economic growth.”

The researchers plan to have a prototype ready to demonstrate by 2013.

EPD seeks 23bn for incinerator and landfill extensions

Dear Legco,

Please pass to the Panel on Environmental Affairs prior to the meeting on 26 March 2012.

kind regards,

James Middleton








Tsang Legacy Pollution


Hong Kong as Dirtiest Global Financial Center Is Tsang’s Legacy

By Natasha Khan – Mar 22, 2012 12:00 AM GMT+0800

Harboring an unlicensed duck in Hong Kong can land a fine of HK$50,000 ($6,440) after the world’s first human deaths from bird flu were recorded in the city 15 years ago. That’s 50 times the penalty for driving a vehicle belching smoky fumes.

Failure to force aging buses and trucks off Hong Kong’s streets is a key cause of air pollution that results in more than 3,000 premature deaths a year, according to Civic Exchange, a think tank. In contrast, the H5N1 virus has killed 350 people worldwide since 1997, World Health Organization data show.

March 16 (Bloomberg) — Andrew Davis, associate director-general at InvestHK, and Phillip Overmyer, chief executive of the Singapore International Chamber of Commerce, talk about the attractiveness of Hong Kong and Singapore as financial hubs in Asia. Singapore is Asia’s most competitive city in attracting businesses, efficiency and promoting a clean environment, according to an Economist Intelligence Unit report commissioned by Citigroup Inc. Hong Kong was ranked fourth overall, the report showed. Davis and Overmyer speak with Rishaad Salamat on Bloomberg Television’s “On the Move Asia.” (Source: Bloomberg)

Attachment: Best Countries for Business Ranking

Enlarge image

Buses move down a road in the central district of Hong Kong. Average annual roadside levels of nitrogen dioxide, an auto pollutant that inflames lungs , increased 27 percent in Hong Kong last year from 2007, according to the city’s Environmental Protection Department. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

The Central Roadside Air Quality Monitoring Station stands in the Central District of Hong Kong. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

The air-quality meter in the Central business district has registered an average roadside pollution level of “high” or “very high” every day bar one this year. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

Commuters wait at a bus stop in Hong Kong. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

Airborne particles from vehicle exhausts and combustion in power stations have the greatest impact on human health, causing 9 percent of lung cancer deaths globally, according to WHO estimates. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

Traffic stands still in the Central district of Hong Kong. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

Enlarge image

A group of women stand on the waterfront with high rise buildings blanketed in a haze behind them in Hong Kong. Photographer: Jerome Favre/Bloomberg

“People normally don’t realize that air pollution can cause cancer, heart and respiratory diseases,” said Carlos Dora, coordinator at the Geneva-based health agency’s Department of Public Health and Environment, who puts the global annual death toll from filthy urban air at 1.3 million. “Those are the diseases that really are the big, big plague.”

As Chief Executive Donald Tsang steps down after seven years in office, he leaves a city that boasts the world’s most valuable stock exchange, hosted three of the five biggest initial share sales in history, and is the best place on the globe for business, a new gauge by Bloomberg Rankings shows. Blotting the record is another superlative: the most polluted international financial center.

New York, London, Tokyo and Singapore all have cleaner air and more ambitiousimprovement targets, according to WHO data and the city governments’ websites. AsChina opens its economy, removing the capital controls that led investors to use Hong Kong as a proxy for Chinese growth, pollution risks undermining Tsang’s economic successes.

Singapore Bound

“I am leaving Hong Kong explicitly because of the air,” said Alex Turnbull, an Australian banker at a Wall Street firm, who plans a move to Singapore in May. “When capital controls leave, how on earth will this city stay competitive? Hong Kong is at risk of being irrelevant in the long run.”

The government will continue to strive for better air quality, “both for our citizens’ health and to attract overseas talents and enhance Hong Kong’s competitiveness as a financial hub and tourist destination,” Tsang’s office said in an e- mailed response to questions yesterday.

Sandwiched between the Asian headquarters of JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) and aTiffany & Co. (TIF) outlet, the air-quality meter in the Central business district has registered an average roadside pollution level of “high” or “very high” every day bar one this year. In 1999, 66 percent of days were at those levels. By 2010 and 2011, it was more than 90 percent.

Lung Cancer

Airborne particles from vehicle exhausts and power stations have the greatest impact on human health, linked to 9 percent of lung cancer deaths globally, WHO estimates.

Hong Kong’s average reading of particulate matter with a diameter of 10 micrometers — about 1/7th the width of a human hair — or less in 2009 was 50 micrograms per cubic meter, according to a WHO survey of 1,100 cities. While that was less than half Beijing’s, it compares with 29 in Singapore and London, 23 in Tokyo and 21 in New York. The WHOguideline is 20.

Average annual roadside levels of nitrogen dioxide, which inflames lungs, increased 27 percent in Hong Kong last year from 2007, Environmental Protection Department data show. The 2011 levels were more than triple WHO safety limits.

Hong Kong also adopted the lowest or second-lowest interim targets WHO offers. The agency has a number of objectives aimed at poorer countries just “getting onto the curve,” said Anthony Hedley, honorary professor of community medicine at the University of Hong Kong’s School of Public of Health. “It’s not intended for a modern developed city like Hong Kong.”

Trends Down

The government says pollution trends are down, with a one- third drop in particulates since 1999. Nitrous oxide is 28 percent lower and sulphur dioxide has fallen 56 percent, government data show. Still, Nitrogen dioxide is up 24 percent, ozone 21 percent, and those pollutants that had dropped are either up or little changed since 2009.

The city’s observatory recorded 750 hours of reduced visibility that wasn’t caused by fog, cloud or rain in 1999; that rose to 1,399 hours last year.

“It is such a shame as Hong Kong is an incredibly beautiful place the 10 days a year when you actually realize that the tree-lined hills are dark green and not a washed out gray-green color,” said Alexander West, founder of Blue Pool Capital, a hedge fund.

Tens of thousands of finance professionals and other visitors to this week’s Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN) Asian investment conference and the Hong Kong Rugby Sevens, the premier tournament in the truncated form of the game, were greeted by smoggy skies this week. The March 25 final of the Rugby pageant coincides with the election of Tsang’s replacement.

Peak Lookout

At Victoria Peak yesterday, tourists seeking the iconic view across Hong Kong’s skyscrapers to the mountains over the harbor were disappointed.

“I’ve been to the Peak six times and I’ve never seen the Kowloon mountains,” said Nadia Sturzengegger, from Lucern, Switzerland, who first flew into Hong Kong in 2007 when working for Swiss International Air Lines AG. “Maybe I was just unlucky.”

At the nearby Laurence Lai Gallery, Maurice Szeto, 48, mans the shop selling photographs of Hong Kong scenes. Tourists often complain about the visibility, he said.

“Some even take photos of our photos to show the skyline to their friends back home,” he said. “I used to come up here as a teenager and you could see everything.”

Tsang repeatedly pledged to tackle the problem, including a vow in May to introduce air quality objectives before leaving office June 30. That timeline has slipped to 2014.

Economic Impact

The government has to “carefully assess the economic and social impacts” of tightening air-quality rules, Tsang said last year.

The laissez faire ideology of “big market, small government” that underpins policy in the city has enabled industries such as financial services and real estate development to flourish, generating taxes that endowed the government with a HK$595 billion pot of savings. It has also created the most unequal society in Asia, where the poorest 10 percent earned a median wage of HK$3,500 a month in the third quarter of last year, down from HK$4,400 in the comparable period of 1997, government figures show.

Forcing bus operators to modernize their fleets would mean higher fares that many already struggle to meet. The government last year allocated HK$5.17 billion to help low-income workers with travel costs.

Tourism, Infrastructure

Policies to spur economic growth and create jobs — such as more tourism and infrastructure spending — add to pollution. Tour buses ferrying some of the 28 million mainland Chinese visitors last year choke roads; the planned third runway at Chek Lap Kok would only be able to operate at 40 percent capacity to meet the proposed air-quality guidelines, a study found. The two-year delay in introducing the objectives may allow the project to go ahead using current standards.

Outside of environmental impact assessments for specific projects, the EPD has few legal powers to force change where it has no jurisdiction, such as transport.

For issues like bird flu that affect “all stakeholders — businesspersons, government officials and the general public” the government will be “highly motivated,” said Ming Sing, an associate professor of social sciences at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. “If interests are divided, such as for tackling air pollution, that’s another story.”

New York, Tokyo

In New York, Mayor Michael Bloomberg brought together 25 city agencies in 2007 to targetclimate change, green buildings, air quality and solid waste. The city legislated emissions cuts from school buses and heating oil, and reduced pollution from ferries, private trucks and construction vehicles. The mayor is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.

The Tokyo 2008 environmental plan seeks to “realize the cleanest air among the world’s largest cities.”

In Hong Kong, a ban on idling engines that came into effect on Dec. 15 took four years to pass from public consultation to law, and with so many exemptions that critics said it was meaningless. No drivers have been fined to date, the EPD said in an e-mailed response to questions this week.

The government also spent HK$90 million to fund a study on electronic road pricing in 1997, which was never implemented. Singapore’s ERP project, started in 1998, decreased traffic volumes up to 25 percent, according to a 2010 report sponsored by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration.

Bus Fleet

Hong Kong has lagged behind rivals in upgrading its bus fleet. More than half of the 5,798 buses plying franchised routes in the city at the end of last year were Euro II standard or earlier, according to a Feb. 22 statement from the EPD. London has about 1,000 Euro II buses in its fleet of about 8,500 vehicles, according to Transport for London. Singapore phased out its Euro I buses last year, leaving fewer than 600 Euro II vehicles out of more than 4,000, according to a document from Hong Kong’s legislature.

Euro II models emit 2 1/2 times as much particulate matter as Euro III standard buses, and 12 1/2 times as much as Euro V, according to Hong Kong-based Civic Exchange.

The Hong Kong government plans to retrofit buses with catalytic converters that scrub out noxious fumes, as well as trialing hybrid and electric vehicles.

To date, six buses have been fitted with the filters in a year-long test that started in September. The trial of hybrids is due to begin at the end of next year, while no funding has yet been provided to buy six electric buses, the EPD said in a Feb. 22 response to a question from a lawmaker.

Policy Delays

“These delays in policy are accountable in terms of illnesses, damage to quality of life, Hedley said. ‘‘We’ve got cohorts of children that have been exposed to the most intensive levels of exposure to very toxic air pollutants for quite a long time.’’

Meantime, construction of roads, including an expressway beneath an existing highway through Central, Causeway Bay and Wanchai, as well as a 19-mile (30-kilometer) bridge linking Zhuhai and Macau to Hong Kong, may spur demand for cars that offset their impact on current congestion. In the decade to the end of last year, the number of private cars jumped 21 percent, Transport Department data show.

‘‘The trend for many cities is to take care of the quality of urban life because they are competing for the same kinds of industries: finance, services, tourism,’’ WHO’s Dora said. ‘‘Cities are striving to be better, and those which don’t will suffer.”

NYC Recycling Law

See: recycling in nyc

UPDATE: The New York City Council leaving NYCWasteLesspassed 11 Local Laws in 2010 to update and expand the NYC Recycling Law. See Amendments for more info.

Law: NYC Administrative Code leaving NYCWasteLess(Search for Title 16: Sanitation, Chapter 3: Solid Waste Recycling) PDF version

Rules: Rules of the City of New York leaving NYCWasteLess(Search for Title 16: Department of Sanitation, Chapter 1: Collection) PDF version

Summary: The New York City Recycling Law, originally enacted in 1989 as Local Law 19, established the overarching “policy of the city to promote the recovery of materials from the New York City solid waste stream for the purpose of recycling such materials and returning them to the economy”. This Law mandates recycling in NYC by residents, agencies, institutions, and businesses, including the designation of what materials are to be considered recyclable, the recovery of those materials, tonnages of recyclable materials that must be recycled annually, and responsibilities of each relevant party. The Rules were developed by DSNY to detail the requirements, operations, implementation and enforcement of mandated recycling including residentialagency and institutional,commercialyard waste, and street events.

Amendments: The NYC Recycling Law established by Local Law 19 of 1989 has been amended several times. The eleven relevant Local Laws passed in 2010 are:

Local Law 40 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessupdates the overall recycling goals for DSNY-managed waste, and defines data calculation methodologies and reporting requirements related to tracking progress towards those goals.

Local Law 34 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessupdates DSNY’s public outreach and education requirements, residential building owner requirements, establishes fines for residential violations based on building size, and fines for impermissibly placed publicly accessible textile drop-off bins.

Local Law 35 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessallows for the designation of rigid plastic containers as recyclable if the commissioner determines that the cost is reasonable after the recycling processing facility at South Brooklyn Marine Terminal is built.

Local Law 36 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessand Local Law 41 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessrequire City Agencies and Public and Private Schools, respectively, to designate recycling or sustainability coordinators; to maintain labeled recycling containers in their buildings; and to submit waste prevention, reuse, and recycling plans, and annual implementation reports to DSNY.

Local Law 37 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessupdates the Yard Waste Composting Law to require collection from NYC Agencies and Housing Authority residential buildings, and annual reporting by composting facilities.

Local Law 38 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessestablishes Public Space Recycling requirements including the placement of recycling bins for designated materials, and city-approved textile drop-off bins.

Local Law 33 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessrequires DSNY to establish a pilot voluntary paint stewardship program.

Local Law 39 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessestablishes Hazardous Waste Collection requirements including events and drop-off sites, and annual reporting of materials collected.

Local Law 32 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessupdates the Commercial Recycling Law to require DSNY to complete a study of commercial recycling in the City.

Local Law 42 of 2010 leaving NYCWasteLessrequires the completion of a study on the feasibility of food waste composting in the City.

Previous local legislation affecting recycling:

Local Law 50 of 2007 leaving NYCWasteLessincreased the penalties for those who use a vehicle to unlawfully remove or transport recyclables intended for pickup by the DSNY or a licensed hauler; and mandated reporting requirements for those who receive DSNY refuse collection, but choose to receive private collection of recyclables.

Local Law 40 of 2006 leaving NYCWasteLessfleshes out the Yard Waste Composting Law.

Local Law 11 of 2002 leaving NYCWasteLesstemporarily suspended the recycling of glass, plastic, and beverage cartons starting July 1, 2002 through March 2004, due to budgetary constraints resulting from the September 11, 2001 tragedy. Local Law 50 of 2003 leaving NYCWasteLessreinstated the recycling of designated plastic containers and beverage cartons on July 1, 2003; temporarily implemented alternate-week recycling collection; returned glass recycling and weekly recycling collection on April 1, 2004; and temporarily suspended yard waste collection starting July 1, 2003 to be returned no later than June 30, 2004.

Local Law 59 of 1998 leaving NYCWasteLessestablished the weekly collection of designated recyclable materials to all local service delivery districts citywide by April 15, 2000.

Local Law 87 of 1993 fleshes out the Commercial Recycling Law.




Clear the Air says:

The decision to move to Mass Burn by the EPD was made in 2005.

The incumbents are seeking funding just now.

They expect the project to take 7 years.

That means the mass burn technology on startup will be 14 years older than when the mass burn decision was made in 2005.

The Shek Kwu Chau island decision means that eventually other islands, probably the south Cheung Chau proposed man made island will become a further landfill for the ash.

Government’s own figures in the EIA showed an expected 22% bottom ash per massburn day. That means the landfills will continue to be required and to expand. When we add 6% fly ash that must be treated as well as the bottom ash approx 29% of the items incinerated will remain in the form of ash per day. This immediately defeats the Govt statement that our landfills are full.

The lack of RRR in Hong Kong is diabolical and laws should be enacted to enforce the public’s recycling and collection thereof by Govt.

It is ludicrous to spend more on extending landfills when the easily assembled installation of a plasma gasification plant at each landfill site can mine the existing landfills and create space in the landfills whilst generating electricity or producing jet fuel from the syngas.

The only waste generated by the plasma system is plasmarok that can be re-used as road aggregate.

This inadequate Government is playing with our public money in a stupid manner and it needs to be stopped by the Finance Committee from doing so.

Incinerator, bigger landfills cost HK$23b

Environmentalists say they will lobby politicians to reject funding request for Shek Kwu Chau project and vow to launch further challenges

Cheung Chi-fai 
Mar 22, 2012

The government will seek HK$23 billion in June to fund construction of a waste incinerator and expansion of at least two landfills, amid strong opposition and looming legal challenges.

The Environmental Protection Department (EPD) has put a price tag of HK$14.9 billion on an incinerator with a handling capacity of 3,000 tonnes on a reclaimed site next to Shek Kwu Chau island off south Lantau, far more than the HK$5 billion spent on a similar project to burn 2,000 tonnes of wastewater sludge in Tuen Mun, approved in 2009.

The incinerator will also cost about HK$353 million a year to run. A contractor will be selected to design, build and operate the plant, for an initial period of 15 years.

Opponents are vowing to step up their lobbying of politicians in different parties to ensure the request for what they call misallocated funding will be rejected.

Some Cheung Chau residents, who live five kilometres away from the proposed plant, vowed to file a legal challenge against the project once it was approved. One resident has already filed a judicial review.

Environmental officials said the funding was crucial for long-term waste management. If approved, Hong Kong could start burning waste by 2018. This would fill the vacuum in a waste-treatment strategy that has relied on landfills as the sole disposal channel since 1997, when the last incinerator was shut down over pollution concerns.

Officials will also seek about HK$8 billion to lengthen the life of the Tseung Kwan O landfill by six more years to 2020, and the Ta Kwu Ling landfill in North District by eight to 10 years to 2026. A HK$33 million consultancy will also be carried out to review a Tuen Mun landfill expansion plan.

All three plans also face strong opposition from local residents.

The government hopes that with the incinerator, stepped up recycling efforts, and organic waste-treatment plants in planning, the amount of daily waste dumped in landfills could be cut by 2,000 tonnes to 10,000 tonnes by 2018.

Living Islands Movement chairwoman Louise Preston opposed the incineration scheme, and plans to lobby politicians to block the funding. She said the moving grate technology the incinerator used was outdated. Instead, she favoured plasma arc technology, which she said was cleaner and more efficient, although the environment department said it was only suited for small-scale operations and was used mainly for hazardous waste. “Technology has developed dramatically over the past year and the EPD’s information is absolutely outdated,” Preston said.

She also said siting the waste-treatment plant in Tuen Mun, an alternative site also found acceptable in the environmental-impact assessment study, would be substantially cheaper, as the site had industrial land ready for use. She believed a substantial amount of the plant’s cost was due to the need to reclaim 16 hectares of land. The reclamation work will cost HK$2.4 billion.

Friends of the Earth described the funding request as “robbery” of taxpayers’ money, since the government had failed to deliver the waste reduction targets it set out in 2005, and now proposed to spend a huge sum to fill the gaps.