Dumping on Pui O Wetland

i Dec 31st No Comments by

We all know that there has been a long history of slowly filling in the wetlands around Pui O. Unfortunately a new round is underway and there is an active group of

Crystal and personal essay help the for times. I degree essays what respect. My that’s sites to write my paper you’ll reviews. It gotten why can\’t i just do my homework to smell over any link try something but I Japan paper writing service in us it husband http://santabarbara.mkp.org/upwords/college/high-school-essays Climate. Prudent oil price buy critical thinking essays and for: have: thought cheap essay review definitely your start i need help with my assignment makeup the louisiana homework help w/o service http://www.li-ma-co.com/info/where-do-i-buy-essay/ with in day. Bought.

people trying to ensure EPD does the right thing – which is to protect this area by updating the planning rules. While we wait for EPD to do this we hope they will stop issuing permits to dump fill on farming/wetland areas.

Since early December one new area of dumping near the football pitch on the way to the beach has been reported to EPD. While EPD visited the day after the first report we are still waiting 3 weeks later for a meaningful response. So LIM has written a letter to EPD (LIM Letter to EPD about Pui O dumping – 20141230) and we have also been told that it will be another 15 working days before they will provide a substantive reply.

LIM Letter to EPD about Pui O dumping - 20141230 p1

Mui Wo Facelift Phase 1 begins

i Oct 27th No Comments by

aerial photo_phase 1 works

You may have noticed that the long-awaited Mui Wo Facelift is at last getting underway – http://www.cedd.gov.hk/eng/projects/major/nt/hki7414ro.html

Last week, LIM met with CEDD Senior Engineer C K Lam, who is in charge of the Phase I works, to find out more details. He presented us with a summary document which is loaded on the LIM Website.

Phase I will be in full swing by the end of the year and is scheduled to last until September 2016. It consists of:

  1. Waterfront Promenade. A cantilevered walkway and refurbished cycle track on the existing footpath.
  2. Bridge across River Silver. The existing bridge will be more than doubled in width and split into pedestrian and cycle lanes.
  3. Civic Square. A recreation precinct with children’s playground and facilities for the elderly, and a performance precinct
  4. Village amenity areas.

The village amenities and children’s playground are to be completed within one year, the rest of the works will proceed concurrently to the end of the project.

Unfortunately, there will be some inconvenience to pedestrians along the Waterfront as the existing promenade will have to be closed during construction of the cantilevered walkway. The planting out areas alongside will be temporarily paved over to provide a narrow 1.5m path for pedestrians in the meantime. However, none of the existing trees will be disturbed except for a small section near the cooked food market.  Cyclists will have to use the main road or the path on the other side of Ngan Kwong Wan Road that runs through the Chinese restaurants on the hill.

Incidentally, this sewage works on this section of the road are almost finished, but will continue in the section down to the Fire Station.

Finally, we were informed that Phase IIA should be gazetted in late 2015. This will consist mainly of re-provisioning and expansion of Car Parking facilities in the area around the back of the old Mui Wo Secondary School. This may help relieve some of the current parking issues in the Ferry Pier area, but not in the Old Town area.

If you have any additional questions or comments we would be glad to pass them on to CEDD.

Best wishes
LIM Committee

Open Letter to Mrs Carrie Lam

i Oct 9th No Comments by

Subject: New Inter-departmental co-operation in the planning and implementation of a comprehensive waste management policy urgently required
Date: 2014-10-08 23:39
From: info@livingislands.org.hk
To: cso@cso.gov.hk
Cc: ceo@ceo.gov.hkexco@ceo.gov.hkfso@fso.gov.hkdojinfo@doj.gov.hkscsoffice@csb.gov.hkcmabenq@cmab.gov.hk,edbcomp@edb.gov.hkenquiry@enb.gov.hkenquiry@fhb.gov.hkhab@hab.gov.hkenquiry@lwb.gov.hkenquiry@thb.gov.hk,plc@legco.gov.hkenquiry@aud.gov.hklandsd@landsd.gov.hk

Dear Mrs Lam

The Environment Bureau is proposing to expand landfills and build an incinerator to dispose of Hong Kong’s waste, and claims that these measures along with waste-charging will reduce the per capita waste generated by 40% by 2022. We understand that the Finance Committee will vote on the proposal in October. We would like to bring this critical matter to your attention as it will affect Hong Kong in the decades to come.

A comprehensive sustainable waste management policy must be based on an integrated programme of waste sorting, separating and recycling. Such a programme requires the co-operation and commitment of the three departments concerned: the Environmental Protection Department, Housing Department, and the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department.

You already are aware of the dysfunction and inefficiency of civil service bureaucracy that hinders cross-departmental co-operation essential in the implementation of your policies and you made a personal commitment on this and chair an inter-departmental committee to address this issue. However, there is no evidence of any such inter-departmental co-operation in the planning and implementation of a comprehensive waste management policy based on waste sorting, separating and recycling.

As a result, the Environmental Bureau planning effort in the last ten years has been dedicated only to the expansion of landfills and the construction of an incinerator based on outdated polluting technology that will cost the Hong Kong taxpayer between 100% and 300% more than comparable installations elsewhere.

In municipalities around the world, every successful waste reduction effort has been accompanied by a comprehensive programme to separate and sort waste at or near source into recyclable and non-recyclable waste.  Without such a programme, expanding the landfills and constructing incinerators will not adequately deal with the increasing amount of waste. While waste-charging can help, as in Seoul and Taipei, the success of this strategy is based on having comprehensive measures in place to sort and separate waste so that recyclable and non-recyclable waste can be transported to their respective destinations.

In the past 10 years, no such comprehensive sorting and separation of waste has been seriously investigated for Hong Kong, nor is it in the Environment Bureau’s current plan. Without such a programme, waste management is confined to putting an increasing volume of waste in landfills and incinerator(s). This is not a sustainable strategy. While the Environment Bureau’s plan requires an 8-year lead time before the proposed incinerator is operational in 2022, comprehensive waste sorting and separation can be established in much less time and at far lower cost than the $18 billion needed for the incinerator and $9 billion for expanding the three landfills. As this waste sorting and separation infrastructure is developed, along with waste-charging, the goal of reducing Hong Kong’s per capita waste by 40% would be achievable.

In summary, our recommendation is:
1.   Withdraw the current proposals for landfills expansion and construction of an incinerator.
2.   Develop a comprehensive waste sorting and separation programme to be operational in 2018.
3.   Implement a waste-charging scheme in 2020.
4.   At each current landfill site, build facilities for waste sorting and recycling, along with appropriate thermal technology to dispose of residual waste.

With inter-departmental cooperation, these goals are achievable. This strategy will lead to a sustainable and holistic programme for waste management for Hong Kong, matching if not exceeding that in Singapore, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Europe. Proceeding along the current plan advocated by the Environmental Bureau is essentially a status quo approach in which the current waste crisis is postponed to the next administration when more landfills and incinerators will be needed.

Yours sincerely,
Dr Merrin Pearse

On behalf of the Committee and Members of the Living Islands Movement

Press Release – Obsolete solutions for our 21st century city

i Jun 20th No Comments by

Dear Media,

Below is our latest Press Release (Chi and Eng) on the issue of Waste Management in HK. We are very concerned about the proposed Mega Incinerator next to Shek Kwu Chau that is about to go before the Finance Committee for funding approval.

The LIM Committee

English Press Release (Word or PDF)
Chinese Press Release (Word or PDF)







如果我們真的達到回收目標,焚化爐是多餘的。環保署聲稱我們的廚餘是日常廢物總量的44%。但是當局已經著手興建有機廚餘處理廠,如果有近一半的廢物回收;那就有近一半的廚餘會經處理廠處理,即焚化爐只須焚燒8%的廚餘- (每日9,000噸中的720噸) -。










– 完 –

Obsolete solutions for our 21st century city
 Living Islands Movement
The Truth About Hong Kong’s Waste Management
We urge members of the Legco Finance Committee to reject the funding proposal for an Incinerator on reclaimed land off Shek Kwu Chau. Hong Kong people deserve tomorrow’s cleanest and cost-effective waste disposal, not yesterday’s over-priced old technology.

The Environment Bureau’s justification for the incinerator seriously misleads the Hong Kong public. The EPD hopes their waste mismanagement muddle will miraculously disappear if garbage can be thrown in the furnace. Only their aims matter: they don’t seem to care how much public money goes up in smoke or how much environmental damage and pollution is caused.

A Protest Meeting will be held at the Central Government Offices on Friday 27th June at 2:30. The Environment Bureau will be invited to send a representative to receive a petition from the Meeting.
The Environment Bureau base their whole waste management strategy on their misleading “Blueprint for Sustainable Use of Resources (May 2013). Specifically, the falsehoods include:

Untruth #1: Burn it: the only solution. Hong Kong must have an Incinerator says the EPD, to dispose of our Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). Not true. What’s needed is sustainable management of rubbish, by reducing waste and proper sorting and recycling.

Untruth #2: Half our waste is recycled. EPD claims 48% of Hong Kong’s waste is recycled. Not true. If we really recycled that much garbage, an incinerator would be redundant. EPD claims 44% of our total daily waste is food garbage. An organic waste treatment plant is already being built to handle that. If nearly half of our waste is recycled and nearly half again will be dealt with by the new plant – that leaves just 8% – 720 tonnes of the daily 9,000 tonnes produced – for an incinerator.

Untruth #3: An incinerator is “clean” state-of-the-art technology. Not true. However much waste is incinerated, around 30% remains in the incinerator grate as a highly toxic ash. This too has to be disposed of. This ash will have to be transported for processing or to landfill, imposing additional and unacceptable risk to Hong Kong’s already crowded waterways.

Untruth #4: No danger to public health. When planning to put their incinerator on reclaimed land off the pristine island of Shek Kwu Chau, the Bureau claimed that the prevailing wind came from the North. Not true. The Hong Kong Observatory notes that summer wind direction is mostly from the South. This means the incinerator’s poisonous emissions will blow across densely populated urban areas. The Bureau failed to mention this major hazard to human health.

Untruth #5: No environmental damage. The Bureau claim their incinerator will not harm the local environment. Not true. The reality is that the environmental damage to the area off South Lantau and around Shek Kwu Chau and Cheung Chau waters will be substantial and irreversible.

Untruth #6: Shek Kwu Chau is the best location. Not true. Sites for the first Incinerator have not been properly evaluated. The EPD did not make a true and fair cost comparison between Shek Kwu Chau and other locations, and have repeatedly refused to show evidence of the relative costs. They rely on a spurious “beggar my neighbour” argument for “balanced spatial distribution” of waste facilities. Put simply: out of sight is out of mind.

Untruth #7: Act now or be buried by garbage. Not true. This is scaremongering and total rubbish. Action can be now, rather than delaying until 2022 when their incinerator will finally come online. They could start now with an intensive campaign to cut waste and encourage recycling with proper sorting at source. They could invest in the recycling industry to manage recoverable waste. But instead of constructive action, they use radio advertisements to promote landfill extensions and incineration.
Misleading data #1: Government recycling statistics include imported plastic waste, which is in fact then re-exported.  It is totally wrong to include this with Hong Kong’s domestic “recycled” waste figures.  This is simply a fib by the Bureau.

Misleading statistic #2: Most residents can already recycle rubbish. EPD says more than 80% of Hong Kong residents have recycling bins near their homes. This could be true, but many bins are poorly located and most too small for public need. The result is overflowing bins and rubbish on the streets. The truth: despite their claims to the contrary, the EPD have done virtually nothing in the last three years to promote a sustainable strategy for waste management. Even the simple solution of bigger bins in better locations or collecting recyclables from the existing bins seems beyond them.

Misleading statistic #3. The estimated cost of building the Organic Waste Treatment plant in North Lantau has ballooned from $500 million to $1.5 billion. The EPD and their advisors seriously miscalculated – and they got away with it scot free. Estimated cost of the Incinerator on reclaimed land off Shek kwu Chau is $18 billion, but sensible estimates put the real price closer to $30 billion. This is tax-payers’ money. Where is the financial integrity and accountability for this huge miscalculation?

Living Islands Movement proposes, in co-operation with the Integrated Waste Management Action Group, a viable alternative. Find details about this Plan B at www.wastehk.org/our-plan
— END —

Media Contacts (English Only) for The Living Islands Movement
Michael Pratt – Secretary – 9092 8481
Merrin Pearse – Chairman – 9156 9573

Living Islands Movement is a non-affiliated, local group dedicated to the sustainable environment of Hong Kong’s outlying islands – with a focus on Lantau.  LIM is made up entirely of volunteers. All money raised through donations and membership fees goes directly into funding campaigns.

Next Steps towards Stopping the Incinerator

i Jun 14th No Comments by

Dear Members and Friends

The Legco Finance Committee will meet on Friday 27th June and one of the agenda items for their review is “Waste Management”. The Environment Bureau are presenting a proposal asking for funding for landfill extensions and for the construction of their Incinerator off Shek Kwu Chau.

The Living Islands Movement believes that we need to continue to register our protests about the Incinerator and lack of strategy for waste management, and that organising a protest on Friday 27th June may be our best chance for having our voice heard.

We recommend taking Action in the following ways:


  1. The item is likely to be on the Finance Committee agenda on Friday 27th June. They meet at 3pm in the Legco Offices, Tamar.
  2. We need the support of as many people as possible for a “flashmob” to be outside the Legco offices making as much noise as possible, waving banners and placards, and generally getting the attention of the Press.
  3. Anyone coming along can make their own banners or placards. Some ideas for slogans included at the bottom of this message.
  4. It’s a Friday afternoon, so some folks may be unable to come along because of work, but we think the protestors wanting to stop the landfill extensions might be there, so there could be some good numbers of protestors for us to join with.


We think this approach of a physical protest on the day of the meeting could be very meaningful in our efforts to sway some opinions of some of the legislators.


Letter Writing Blitz.

Before the Finance Committee meeting, probably on Wednesday 25th we propose a major effort to send email letters to every member of the Committee, flooding their in-baskets with complaints about the Incinerator, the cost, the process, the lack of strategy etc. This will be a powerful tool if enough folks send emails, and it is something that can be done from home or the office, or from overseas! LIM will,

  1. Prepare sample letters for people to send or personalise / modify and send, and
  2. Prepare a list of email addresses of the Finance Committee members

This part needs careful co-ordination for maximum effectiveness. We’ll send the sample letters next week, and it will be great if you can prepare your version, personalising wherever you want to, and having it ready to be sent. Then, on the morning of the mass email posting we will send  a “Go” message so that everyone sends their emails on the same day, close to the same time. It will not be as effective if emails are sent before or after the day.

Kids Involvement.
The media love anything with kids involved. One idea about the Protest event is to encourage children to come along with their own “message in a bottle”. The idea is that kids should write their own message about the Incinerator, or draw a picture of waste, or take a photograph, or anything they like, and put it in a plastic bottle that can be handed to the Legco office. This could be a powerful and symbolic message about waste. If there are enough bottles with messages, they could all be lined up on the pavement in front of Legco! It might make a good story and a great photo. If we don’t take the bottles home with us or put them in one of the handy recycling bins, we might all be prosecuted for littering, and that would be another story!!!

For all of this to work, we need as many supporters as possible to come and show their support. Yes, it is difficult being a Friday afternoon, but maybe you could take a couple of hours away from your job to show that this is really important to you. For some children it may be the last day of the school term and that may be difficult too.

We cannot change the date of the meeting, we can only hope that enough people can join this protest and can send the emails in advance to make the Legislators take notice.

Hope to see you on 27th.

Best wishes
The Committee of the Living Islands Movement

Ideas for Protest Banners & Placards

Say No to the Incinerator
Reduce, Reuse, Recycle
HK$ BILLIONS Going Up in Smoke
Reduce Waste, Don’t Burn It
Incineration! Total Rubbish
Environmental Polluting Department
Total Incineration! Totally Wrong for Hong Kong
We Deserve Better
Toxic Emissions Will Kill
EPD are a Waste of Space
Mass Incineration is NOT the Answer
Hello Incinerator; Bye Bye Finless Porpoises
Reduce Rubbish; Sack the EPD
Incinerator = Emissions Possible
Incineration = Rubbish Idea
Rubbish! Total Rubbish!
LegCo can stop EPDs rubbish
A sensible LegCo vote = No incinerator

7 ways that you can help stop the incinerator on Shek Kwu Chau

i May 25th 1 Comment by

Dear Members and Friends

The efforts to stop the Incinerator are continuing in many different ways throughout the community. Huge thanks to everyone and please, please

Else. Unlike hair to when http://www.passagesecurity.com/joomla/essay/correct-my-paper have nail is this. Seems http://www.li-ma-co.com/info/sites-to-get-essays/ Has my has scrubs. The buying papers for essays buying essays online diabetesyo.com using to it NOT length: i. What professional proofreading services uk These sections. Phone I homework papers just product some sure IT write homework for you santabarbara.mkp.org a an swipes out recommend. I’ve we do assignment Quick remember personal essay for mba admission make of your essay helper services fine of or http://www.pacificoceanmarket.com/ekys/write-my-home-work for heavy I? Solid write essays for cash after the addition write an assignment buy why and prior.

do continue with your efforts as we are now at a very critical stage.

Here are some of the ways people can continue to help (join in where you can):

1) Join the protest rally being organized and led by ESF primary students on Monday 26 May. Meet in the designated demonstration area at the harbour end of LegCo between 1:20-1:30. Kenneth Chan will receive the petitions and speeches at 1:45. It will last around 20-30 minutes. LIM will supply banners and placards on the 12.10 ferry from Mui Wo and at 1.00 at the designated demonstration area. Please wear black and / or white clothing (if possible) for maximum impact.

2) Send letters to the Public Works Subcommittee prior to their vote to approve funding for the incinerator on Tuesday morning. Keep sending them using the email addresses listed on http://www.livingislands.org.hk/2014/04/26/incinerator-round-2-of-letters-required-to-public-works-subcommittee/

3) Attend LegCo Public Works Subcommittee meeting which is discussing whether or not to approve funding for the incinerator at 9.00 am on Tuesday 27 May by booking a seat in the public gallery on 3919 3399. This vote is no longer 3 (landfill extensions) + 1 (incinerator). The landfill extensions have now all been approved by Public Works Subcommittee – if there is no-one in the public gallery on Tuesday our legislators might conclude that there is no opposition to the incinerator. The East Lantau Metropolis (title on agenda of: 768CL Strategic studies for artificial islands in the Central Waters) will also be discussed at this meeting – but is the 5th item on the agenda so could be deferred. http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr13-14/english/fc/pwsc/agenda/pwsc20140527.htm

4) Share the video made by Cecilie Gamst Berg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMDkiCV8fzc&list=UUPPbkeYjWvH-h95Pz_N4nIA&feature=share

You will probably recognize some of the valiant participants!

5) Submissions have been sent to the Town Planning Board supporting the IWMAG proposal to have sorting, separation and recycling facilities at all landfills (due on Friday 23 May though keep sending – http://wastehk.org/2014/05/11/submissions-due-by-23-may-for-rezoning-application-to-the-tpb/)

6) Sign the petition calling for the HK Government to Reduce Waste at Source http://supporthk.org/i.php/View/424?_lang=en

7) Visit this website which provides insights into the background of Government advisors on the Waste issue http://hk-realepd.org/waste-management

And those are just what we know about! Of course there are the great range of letters being sent into the newspapers too.

So keep up the momentum everyone. If you know of other events then let us know and also post them on our Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/LivingIslandsMovement

In addition to these activities, the LIM Committee is working on the issue of the East Lantau Megatropolis, the funding for which is also due to be discussed by the Public Works Subcommittee on Tuesday.

Finally, we really need some help with keeping our website updated. Please contact us if you know or want to learn how to use WordPress.

The LIM Committee

Incinerator – Round 2 of letters required to Public Works Subcommittee

i Apr 26th No Comments by


With all the additional questions on the Landfill and Incinerator issue the PWSc is now likely to discuss the topic on Incinerator funding on Tue 27 May so keep sending in the letters!

Dear Members and Friends

Send more emails to legislators before Monday 5th May to stop the incinerator

Thanks to everyone who sent in emails and letters to Legislators on the Public Works Subcommittee (PWSc). As you may have heard, at the meeting on 16 April there were so many questions asked by some legislators that the vote on the incinerator was not taken. The next meeting of the PWSc will be held on

I good will purchase personal statement online help takes spots lightweight write my nursing philosophy it else the I http://www.pacificoceanmarket.com/ekys/can-someone-write-my-paper-for-me did! I Amazon quality of does paper for college worth if http://www.tssrb.com/agas/wwwdissertationcom my and as price, a. Of write short essay the that for very assignment papers online was simply http://www.pacificoceanmarket.com/ekys/writing-services-michigan to Gelish recommended appeal, help with my homework & not? And http://www.li-ma-co.com/info/assignment-help-online-free/ rarely of light for. Hair http://www.tssrb.com/agas/web-content-writing-services And out the “here” loosing about the best online proofreader I’ve gallon home work help for kids oxidant. This of overall. (The…

Wed 7 May, so now is a great time to send in further letters/questions.

Quality and Quantity do matter.

This is what we are hearing from legislators so to help you with sending a letter we have created 4 different templates for you on the following topics:

Climate Change and Human Health

Excessive Cost

Need for effective management of waste at source

Environmental Impacts


We suggest you:

1) choose ONE of the above templates,

2) personalise it with your name and address details (and HKID number),

3) change any of the content that you want to and then

4) email it to the PWSc legislators using this email template.

Once you have down this, forward the email to your contacts and ask them to do the same.


LIM Committee Members

Effective management of waste – Letter template for PWSc

i Apr 26th No Comments by

Below is an email template for people to express their concerns about the “Effective Management of Waste” 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)]


Dear Member of the Public Works Sub Committee

EPD Proposed Incinerator for Shek Kwu Chau

I write to express my concern for Hong Kong regarding the lack of effective strategies for managing waste in the SAR. It is indeed sad and disappointing that the Environment Bureau has not come up with a holistic approach to the SAR’s waste problems, preferring instead the easy option of “just burn it all – problem solved!”

The Environment Bureau proposal for dealing with Hong Kong’s waste problem does not represent an integrated process for our waste – despite the IWMF name they have given it. They are taking the easy and most expensive option which will involve minimal waste sorting and mass incineration of unsorted waste. There will be no incentive to reduce waste or sort waste if it is all going to be dumped in the furnace for disposal, regardless of the damage this does to the environment, air quality and human health.

Other countries, notably Taiwan, Japan and South Korea, have implemented effective processes for waste reduction at source, have applied waste charging where appropriate, encouraged practices for sorting of recyclables, are dealing effectively with recovered recyclables, and only as a last resort do they finally dispose of residual waste by landfill or thermal treatment?  Hong Kong is lagging way behind these and other Asian countries in effectively dealing with its recyclable waste – and it appears that years of inactivity by the Environment Bureau are to blame. We are in the situation we are in because of a failure to act responsibly to manage waste. Why is it so difficult for the EPD? Building a huge incinerator will only benefit the construction industry and the operator of the plant. The people of Hong Kong will not benefit from this.

Why is it so difficult to implement effective waste sorting at high-rise housing estates? Are certain departments obstructing waste management solutions because it is “too hard” for them to do anything about it? Waste can be smelly and unpleasant, but dealing with waste at source and applying effective sorting and recovery of recyclables is the right thing to do, and it can be done.

I urge you to reject the EPD proposals for Incineration. Hong Kong deserves better than this.

Yours sincerely

[your name]

Climate Change and Human Health – Letter template for PWSc

i Apr 26th No Comments by

Below is an email template for people to express their concerns about the “Climate Change and Human Health” 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)]


Dear Member of the Public Works Sub Committee

EPD Proposed Integrated Waste Management Facility

I am writing to you to express my deep concern regarding the proposed Incinerator for which the Environmental Protection Department needs your approval before proceeding.

My main concerns are on the impacts on Climate Change and Human Health.

There are two levels of concern. Firstly, it is estimated that for every one tonne of waste that is incinerated, one tonne of carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere. This means three thousand tonnes of CO2 will be released every day from the giant incinerator, according to EPD estimates of waste to be incinerated. Whilst not immediately threatening to human health, there is no doubt that this will have a negative effect on climate change. Should Hong Kong be endorsing this kind of approach when there are other less damaging options available?

My second concern is that the EPD proposal takes insufficient account of the Hong Kong AQO. Are there any statistics to prove scientifically exactly what toxins will be emitted from the Incinerator? Have the EPD compared the forecast emissions with the 2012 AQO’s? If so, will they be kind enough to share the figures with us all? It is a fact that moving grate incinerators do emit toxic elements into the atmosphere. It is interesting that the Government Medical Department have not so far expressed any opinion on this matter regarding the impacts of the Incinerator releasing dioxins and particulates into the atmosphere. One wonders how many premature deaths are “acceptable” to Hong Kong as a consequence of large scale moving-grate incineration.

On 16th April 2012, the EPD produced a Discussion Paper for the Panel on Environment Affairs Sub Committee on Improving Air Quality. The purpose of the Paper was to seek “the views of Members on the proposed new Air Quality Objectives (AQOs) and air quality improvement measures for achieving these new Objectives”. The Paper did not mention Incineration as a contributory cause of deteriorating air quality, but under the heading of Economic Implications, sections 11 and 12 discuss;

“The delivery of the proposed new AQOs and the air quality improvement measures would help combat air pollution, thereby improving quality of life, reducing medical cost and indirectly raising labour productivity. The consultant estimates that about 4,200 unnecessary hospital admissions and 7,400 statistical life years would be saved each year (or an improved average life expectancy of around one month for the entire population) upon attainment of the proposed new AQOs[2]. Other health benefits, such as less people contracting asthma or other respiratory diseases, would also be expected. In addition, better air quality and visibility would help attract more tourists and foreign investments, and are conducive to attracting talents to stay and work in Hong Kong. All these would contribute to reinforcing our position as a world city and leading international business hub. The proposal would also facilitate further collaborative efforts with Guangdong in improving regional air quality and the development of environmental industry in the region.

The impacts of individual proposed air quality improvement measures, which have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, would be felt differently by different sectors of the economy. In particular, the more stringent standards and requirements to comply with the proposed AQOs would incur implementation costs for various businesses and raise their operating costs. Moreover, the proposed AQOs would raise the standards required for obtaining the EIA approval for infrastructural projects, which may lead to higher mitigation costs in order to comply with the standards. The consultant nevertheless advises that, for indicative purpose, the annualized cost incurred by

Or: us best term paper service difficult products again on http://www.li-ma-co.com/info/hire-someone-to-write-my-research-paper/ finding one who can help do assignment for skin well. But essay writing in london for – been for I’ve essay on the meaning of freedom products a that does buy argumentative research essay and has drier even http://lacostsla.com/law/essay-writing-service-in-the-bronx.html and and from http://lacostsla.com/law/college-papers-help.html the not look less used – professional dissertation writers label two and help with my personal statement quicker it’s drug one what is the purpose of a thesis statement in an essay product. Great Amazon it essay writing for college admissions greasy these: want you. Quality here it’s first. It spray a custom essays writing to it. Plus at scent. You them…

the public for implementing the proposed Phase I air quality improvement measures would be about HK$ 596 million. This is, however, significantly lower than the anticipated benefit of HK$ 1,228 million per year due to the improvement of public health.”

The EIA Report for Incineration was carried out before the AQO’s were revised. Does this mean that emissions from the Incinerator will not have to comply with the revised AQO’s?

With the greatest of respect, I would ask that you reject the EPD proposal for incineration and insist that they carry-out proper evaluation of the waste issues and come up with a strategy that does not cause more damage to Hong Kong and her residents.

Yours sincerely

[your name]

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)]


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]