The Blog

Environmental impacts – Letter template for PWSc

i Apr 26th No Comments by

Below is an email template for people to express their concerns about the “Environmental Impacts” issues associated with the proposed Mega-Incinerator to the Legislators on the Public Works Subcommittee (PWSc).  Send letters before Monday 5th May.

 Just click on this link to start your email to them, then copy the below information into your email, personalise it with your name and address details (and HKID number), change any of the content that you want to and then email.


[Your address]

[Your HKID Number (optional, but adds credibility to your letter)]

[Date]

Dear Member of the Public Works Sub Committee

Proposed Incinerator for Hong Kong

I am extremely concerned about the environmental impacts of the proposed Incinerator that the EPD plan to site on reclaimed land adjacent to Shek Kwu Chau.

The original selection process and criteria for the Shek Kwu Chau site were seriously flawed – there was false and misleading information about wind direction and environmental impacts, inadequate attention to the detailed transportation costings, and insufficient consideration given to the need for transporting 1,000 tonnes per day of toxic ash from the remote Island location to existing landfill sites. The best reason the EPD gave for selecting SKC is that it achieves a “balanced spatial distribution” of waste processing sites. This “beggar-my-neighbour approach” is surely not the way Asia’s World City should be conducting its Government?

Why hasn’t the Environment Bureau reconsidered options /alternatives to their only proposal?  There are valid and credible alternative proposals for multiple smaller locations around the SAR, that would,

  • be closer to sources of waste and existing landfill sites,
  • represent a much lower risk of failure,
  • be available to be brought on-line sooner,
  • be smaller scale and therefore more cost effective,
  • provide more integrated facilities for sorting and recycling waste,
  • provide more employment opportunities, and
  • could represent lower capital costs and lower overall operating costs.

The EPD proposal deserves to be rejected, for the good of Hong Kong. The people of Hong Kong expect you to make the right decisions so that the future of the SAR is not blighted by this infamous and single minded proposal.

Yours sincerely

[your name]

Comments