About HKSDF

Hong Kong Sustainable Development Forum (HKSDF) is a non-profit NGO based in Hong Kong. Membership is FREE. To find out more visit http://www.hksdf.org.hk  Feel free to circulate HKSDF news amongst your friends and colleagues.

 

Chairman's Message

Merry Christmas!

Dear Members and friends of HKSDF,

It certainly has been a busy year for HKSDF and Sustainable Development as a whole in Hong Kong. Throughout the year countless issues emerged, including the Hei Ling Superprison, and many more.

The Council for Sustainable Development (CSD) consultation and our response paper absorbed efforts for the latter part of the year, we organised a great event last month and the future outlook seems no less challenging. There is still much work to be done, and we look forward to the challenges in the year ahead.

I wish you, and your family and friends, a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Mr Raymond H.M. Leung
Chair, HKSDF

 

 

HKSDF Events

Luncheon with Mr Alan Watson Featherstone  << NEW >>

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date: Friday 21 January 2004
Time: 9.30 - 11.30 pm
Location: Environmental Building, Kowloon Tong
Cost: $80
Booking

Co-organised by HKSDF, Business Environment Council (BEC) and PositiveNews, we are very pleased to announce that Mr Alan Watson Featherstone - founder of Trees for Life and recipient of the 2001 prestigious Schumacher award will present an illustrated lecture. His reputation for forest restoration around the globe is well established.

 

Previous Events

Sustainable Hong Kong - 10 November 2004

 

Photo: Prize Winners - 10.11.2004

The three luck prize draw winners, smiles evident, received a copy of the SD bible "Sustainable Development in Hong Kong" edited by Terri Motterishead

Donated and published by HK University press

 

Our last event, held on 10 November 2004 at the Helena May was a great success, with Paul Zimmerman and Prof. Tony Hedley presenting different angles on SD current affairs. The HKSDF committee would specially like to thank the speakers, the staff at the Helena May for a superb evening and HK University Press for providing three prize draw great books!

 

Web-Site

First, we must everyone for your positive feedback, we are trying hard to remain at the forefront of SD in Hong Kong and your comments are appreciated. It has been a busy very period, with the Council for Sustainable Development hosting a number of events during the First Strategy consultation period. HKSDF has been well represented at both forums and workshops. Read More Here

Our website www.hksdf.org.hk is regularly updated and comprises information and news from Hong Kong and around the world. Everyone is encouraged to visit and give their views, suggestions and comments. How can we better serve your needs? Let us know - email

Articles

If you have written an article regarding Sustainable Development, please submit a copy to HKSDF so it can be placed in our library of articles on the web-site. Publishing decisions rest solely with HKSDF.

 

Consultations

CSD Consultation

The Council for Sustainable Development's First Strategy consultation period closed on 12 November 2004. Our response paper can be downloaded (pfd format) here. Subsequently, having read most of the major response papers submitted, it is clear that the HKSDF paper was a leader, and the EXCO would like to thank every member for their comment, critique and assistance during its preparation.

The SDU (the administrative arm of the council) have complied and published a summary of the engagement process, and views submitted - the papers in English and Chinese can be downloaded from our CSD web page.

HKSDF took the position, from day one, to support the first attempt by the council to solicit views from the public. HKSDF participated in every stage of process, attending various workshops, forums, etc. One must fervently hope that these views reach government ears.

 

EMSD Consultation

HKSDF were privileged to be invited to participate in the EMSD Life Cycle Costing (LCC) consultation. HKSDF have been represented, attending both seminars offering our views to the consultants and EMSD.

The goal is to create a free of charge computer programme for the construction industry, providing a valuable tool that will help sustainable construction efforts in Hong Kong. The tool should be available in February 2005.

 

EPD Consultation

Review of Integrated Waste Management Technologies - 20 November 2004 - by Alexi Bhanja

In 2002, EPD issued an invitation for Expressions of Interest (EOI) to suppliers and organisations world-wide to propose innovative and proven technologies for the development of Integrated Waste Management Facilities (IWMF).  The driving force behind the EOI invitation was the realisation that Hong Kong’s existing landfills are running out of capacity and that landfilling is fundamentally a non-sustainable solution to waste management.

The Review of Integrated Waste Management Technologies – Feasibility Study is being carried out by consultants CDM to assist EPD in identifying the preferred technologies.  The View Sharing Session was attended by a range of invited Government officials, NGOs and green groups, including the Alexi Bhanja representing HKSDF.

After an introduction by Paul Chung, CDM’s Managing Director, a presentation was made by Bob Hurdle, CDM’s Project Manager covering the background, the scope of the EOI exercise itself and the findings to-date.

At the close of the EOI exercise, EPD had received 59 EOIs from 16 countries, with the most EOIs received from the USA.  The information provided by suppliers was examined to see if the technology was consistent with goals of waste management in Hong Kong. Furthermore, the technologies had to meet the following initial criteria to be considered :

• Throughput capacity no less than 500 tonnes/day

• Proven technology and commercially viable

• Can meet stringent environmental targets during operation

• Compatible with Hong Kong’s existing waste management infrastructure

The 59 EOIs were classified into the following broad categories :

• Mechanical (sorting, separation, etc.)

• Biological (composting, anaerobic digestion)

• Thermal (incineration, gasification, plasma)

• Refuse Derived Fuel

• Hybrid (e.g. Mechanical Biological Treatment – MBT)

An Advisory Group of 24 people was established to examine each EOI submission in terms of 129 criteria, divided into 5 sub-groups :

• Technology (operating performance, “provenness”)

• Environmental (air emissions, contributions to climate change)

• Social (impacts of visual, noise, odour, etc. on nearby communities)

• Economic (capital and operating costs)

• Consumer (reliability, public concern)

The findings of the evaluation exercise were that no one single technology stood out as being significantly better than others.  It was therefore suggested that the IWMF may, in fact, be a combination of 3 or 4 technologies, possibly at multiple sites within Hong Kong.

Based on the evaluation, the following technologies were considered to be suitable for further consideration :

• Anaerobic Digestion

• Composting (source-separated waste)

• Co-combustion (in a cement kiln, with coal)

• MBT

• Gasification

• Incineration (moving grate and fluidised bed)

The following technologies were not considered suitable for further consideration because they failed to meet the initial four criteria

• Acid Hydrolysis

• Composting (mixed MSW)

• Pyrolysis

• Sterilisation

• Plasma Gasification

Mr Bob Hurdle then gave a brief description of each of the technologies that were taken forward. It was assumed that the IWMF would need to process some 6,000 tonnes/day of MSW.  This is deliberately less than the 9,000 tonnes/day that is currently landfill and so recycling and recovery will still need to form part of the overall waste management plan for Hong Kong.  Mr Bob Hurdle also explained the multi-pathway (direct contact, ingestion, inhalation, etc.) health risk analysis that was carried out for each of the processes.

Those technologies taken forward were then compared side-by-side against a number of criteria, including :

• Energy generation

• Cost/tonne

• Greenhouse gas emissions

• Landfill diversion rate

• Emissions to air

After a short coffee break, the floor was opened to discussion, moderated by CDM’s General Manager Mr Chris Chen.  The following topics were raised for discussion, with answers provided by CDM and a number of the attendees :

Q  :  Were criteria weighted

A  :  Criteria were weighted by the Advisory Group

 

Q  :  Did the IWMF consider the existing waste collection system

A  :  Yes.

 

Q  :  Since the design of the IWMF will be dependent on the character of the waste stream, has this been included in the evaluations ?

A  :  The preferred technology will be matched to the prevailing waste character

 

Q:    The EOI was invited in 2002.  This round of professional consultation is in 2004.  The first round of public consultation will be in early-2005.  The second “formal” round of public consultation will be in late-2005.  The earliest decision on which technology(ies) to adopt will be made in 2006, then the site(s) will need to be found and agreed upon, then the contract will have to be prepared and then the IWMF constructed.  Thus, it probably won’t operate for another 10 years, by which time even the “state-of-the-art” technology will be a decade old and newer as yet unknown technologies, may be on the market.  Therefore, how can we be sure that the eventual recommendation of this Feasibility Study will be valid by the time the IWMF becomes operational ?

A  :  CDM believe that there will be no “new” technology within the next 10 years and so whatever is recommended now will still be “state-of-the-art” by the time it is operational.  The Chemical Waste Treatment Facility was cited as still being “state-of-the-art” despite being constructed more than a decade ago.

 

Q  :  Is the programme constrained by the filling up of the existing landfills ?

A  :  No.  The by the time the IWMF is operational, the existing landfill capacity will likely have been reached.  The reduction in landfill requirement made possible by the IWMF will be of benefit only to the capacity to be provided in the planned landfill expansions.

 

Q  :  Will competition be encouraged between operators of the different IWMF technologies ?

A  :  This will depend on how many technologies there are, and how many sites will be needed.  It may be possible to award different components of the IWMF to different operators on a competitive basis.

 

Q  :  The evaluations have assumed that, for example, power generated by waste-to-energy facilities will be sold and the income used to offset operation cost.  Similarly, compose has been assumed to be sold to offset operation cost of composing or anaerobic digestion plants.  How likely is this ?  If ash is melted, can it be used in construction within existing Government guidelines ?

A  :  The Scheme of Control (for electricity companies) expires in 2008 and what happens after this is unknown.  It may be possible for the IWMF operator to enter a partnership with the electricity companies and allow them to install and operate generating facilities within the IWMF – this would certainly make it easier for electricity to reach the grid.  The other issues relate to Government specifications and these may need to be changed to allow greater use of recycled/recovered material in non-critical areas (e.g. road sub-base).

 

West Kowloon Cultural District

Love it or hate it, the West Kowloon Cultural District (WKCD) has been a media favourite over the last few weeks, and finally the government's consultation (or beauty contest) opening last week in the Hong Kong Science Museum, Tsim sha Tsui - where only three out of five proposals are exhibited.

Whether the proposed WKCD is the right choice for Hong Kong is a subjective matter, however HKSDF is gravely concerned that Sustainability principles are being violated, once again, to avoid the scrutiny of LEGCO representatives and the proposed single developer model proposed is certainly the best model for anti-sustainability.

In theory Government is not actually funding the project and therefore has decided to use this advantage to leapfrog public examination, LEGCO and sustainability issues. The Government has managed this slight of hand by "only" providing the land, which incidentally has an estimated value of between $100-$165 billion dollars!  Therefore, the Government feels it can give away, lets be conservative and assume $100 billion dollars, without fear of scrutiny. Mr Donald Tsang has repeated stated that the project will proceed, and will proceed with one single developer. However, Real estate experts had stated in public and private, that it will a sweet deal for the successful developer, effectively handing over control of the Kowloon property market to the private sector for the next fifty years - is that sustainable?

From the Sustainability view there are several important and critical questions that remain un-answered, as the government marches onwards without regard. One particularly troubling question is Government's instance that, against prevailing public opinion, one single developer for the complete site should be appointed. Remember that the site covers some 40 hectares! 

It is puzzling don't you think, in a town where 98% of organisations are classified as SME's, the government chooses the only procurement route that excludes just everyone except the largest property corporations.

If you want to write or need material for an essay entitled "How to avoid SD in Hong Kong" - the Government WKCD is a perfect example. Furthermore, it is curious, after sweeping aside past assurances, stakeholders are now being asked to accept new assurances, presumably more reliable. The "Trust Us" attitude just doesn't wash anymore, the general public have become increasingly skeptical of Government motives. For example, back in 1994, the Government assured stakeholders that a large public park would be a prominent feature for the public - shame nobody told the developers in the IFP (Invitation For Proposal) - no large public park included.

Equally troubling is that all the three proposals under consideration violate the Government's own IFP, where a plot ratio of 1.8 is clearly stated. The three proposals all exceed the IFP mandate, one with a plot-ratio of 4.2. That is three times more than the allocation, equal to 168 hectares of space. Government officials have defended the developers, and responded to the critique citing stated that developers will have to justify their deviance - indeed.

Read more about the Government's WKCD proposal and the invitation documents click here.

With a HKSDF response paper under preparation, What are your views? Lets us know your thoughts and views - hksdf@netvigator.com

 

Hunghom Peninsular Fiasco

Let us hope that commonsense has finally prevailed. The developer consortium, and owners of the Hunghom Peninsular PSPS development have decided that they will NOT demolish the entire 2700 unused brand new apartments!

However, the parallels with the WKCD are striking, with the government handing over control of both the land and property to consortium - that is exactly what is planned for WKCD, except WKCD has no masterplan to reign the developers profit motive. It seems that Government have not learnt the lesson yet.

 

 

Central Police Station

Built Heritage

 

Yet another target for re-development is the Central Police Station complex, dating from 1864. Government officials state that the site will be offered for re-development. It is particularly concerning that government is glossing over the heritage value of Hong Kong's history, considering only the potential land value and associated income.

The site comprises a collection of several colonial buildings, that once provided a one-stop-experience for the guilty criminals, arrest, detention, trial and jail - all located on a prime piece of real estate in the heart of central.

More on this important issue in the new year.

Heritage Link http://www.discoverhongkong.com/eng/heritage/monuments/mo_hk_0012.jhtml

Photograph by John Herbert, 2004  Central Police Station
10 Hollywood Road, Central, Hong Kong

 

 

Feedback

Your feedback is very important, and will help us to work towards making Hong Kong a better place for all. Want more events? Want more social or networking opportunities? Let us know. Your commentary or critique is sought, and encouraged. Removal instructions can be found at the end of this message.

Hong Kong Sustainable Development Forum is a non-profit NGO based in Hong Kong. Membership is FREE. To find out more visit http://www.hksdf.org.hk

Unsubscribe

If you no longer wish to receive HKSDF, click on the link below, and send us an email message. All removal requests will be honored. remove me

top

published online: 20 December 2004