Oppose the Shek Kwu Chau Super-Incinerator

Proposal to reclaim protected land and burn 3,000 tons of waste every day

Concerns | Documents | News | Update

Public Forum 7 May 2013 (5-7pm)

Room S421 Hong Kong Convention & Exhibition Centre in Wan Chai

The public are invited to "participate, actively deliberate, understand the current status of waste management thermal technologies and the applicability of these technologies to Hong Kong." Admission is free of charge on a first come first serve basis.

'Thermal treatment technology is gaining momentum around the world in order to meet the challenges in the disposal of ever-increasing volumes of municipal solid waste (MSW) simultaneously producing energy. Despite the wide application of combustion-based treatment technologies, still the acceptance of these technologies by the public is a major factor of concern. This public forum focuses on revealing the myths & facts, pros & cons, developments in pollution abatement systems and the current status of different thermal technologies. Expert panelists will deliver short presentations and open for discussion with participants.'

Panel Participants

Mr Elvis Au, Assistant Director to HK's Environment Protection Department (supporting the mass burn incinerator on Shek Kwu Chau)

Dr Lee Potts of AECOM (wrote the technical section for the EIA approving the mass burn incinerator for Shek Kwu Chau)

Mr Peter Simoes, Technical Director for Afval Energie Bedrijf operating a large incinerator in Holland

Prof. Umberto Arena of the Second University in Naples specializing in industrial pollution control ie. how to make incinerators safer)

Prof. Nickolas Themelis of New York's Colombia University (with expertise in thermal technologies other than incineration)

The forum will be chaired by Professor Jonathan Wong of HK Baptist University and Sino Forest Research Centre, who supported the SKC incinerator proposal last April when Legco's Advisory Panel voted against it (expertise seems to be on general waste management)

Consider raising the following questions to Elvis Lau

- Why have you done nothing in the last year to take forward the offer made by Advanced Plasma Power (an offer made in March 2012 to the Legco Environment Advisory Panel as well as to EPD) to build a pilot gas plasma plant processing 400 tonnes per day of MSW at zero cost to HKG to be operational by 2015, by which to demonstrate the viability of this technology to process MSW into energy at more than twice the efficiency of mass burn incineration, with negligible emissions, and with no toxic ash or other byproduct needing to go to landfill?

- Why do you want to spend US$2billion to build (at a further US$45 million annual ongoing operational cost - EPD's own figures) on a mass burn incinerator processing only 3,000 tonnes MSW per day which takes 7 years to build when for the same amount of money Hong Kong could within 4 years (allowing for an EIA and public tender) be processing 9,000 tonnes MSW per day using gas plasma facilities located at each of the 3 existing landfill sites?

- Why has EPD still done nothing to implement waste charging to reduce the flow of MSW (which for cities such as Tokyo and Taipei has halved the annual volumes of MSW within a couple of years) after its public consultation on waste charging closed in April 2012?

- Why does the EPD not implement the requisite territory-wide infrastructure (bins, collection systems, personnel) for the separation of organic and inorganic waste (which would reduce the amount of MSW requiring thermal or other special treatment by 70%)?

Total annual MSW currently going to landfill was estimated by EPD last year at 13,500 tonnes per day. Assuming waste charging, separation of organic and inorganic waste and implementation of gas plasma facilities at each existing landfill, it needn't be more than a few years before each of HK's landfills are being reclaimed by back-mining their contents for energy (something which is already happening in Europe) while the organic waste is converted into valuable fertiliser, all of which could be run at a steady profit and without any significant health risk.

By Tom Hope

Send your comments

- Write a letter : http://tiny.cc/6dojh (sample letter)

- Contact local authorities : http://tiny.cc/v8adg (list of contacts)

- Comment : https://203.169.143.33/eiacomment/Project_Comments.aspx

It is in the interest of every Hong Kong resident, ex-resident and visitor to oppose the Shek Kwu Chau Super-incinerator

Waste management is a territory-wide issue requiring integrated management. Informed citizens say the the Shek Kwu Chau Super-incinerator makes no economic or environmental sense and they are offering viable options. This proposal uses out-dated technology and extends the urban footprint by reclaiming land on Shek Kwu Chau near Cheung Chau. We need to show our support for local citizen groups who invest their personal time and professional expertise.

- Hong Kong generates about 18,000 tonnes of waste a day

- Super-incinerator will generate 1 tonne of concentrated toxic ash every for 3 tonnes of waste

- Toxic emissions will be blown onto South Lantau by the prevailing winds on average 25% of the year

- The estimated cost of HK$13 billion is HK$10 billion higher than alternatives (HK$2,000 per Hong Kong resident)

- There has been no progress in developing local integrated waste reduction, separation, recycling and reuse systems

- The proposal will extend the industrial, urban footprint deep into areas previously reserved for recreation and conservation

QUICK LINKS : Concerns | Documents | News

Update

Judge is yet to give his ruling on Judicial Review

Judicial Review proceedings closed on 15 November and whatever the eventually decision, there is likely to be an appeal against his decision so these proceedings are unlikely to be concluded until 2014 at the earliest. While the JR is running, it seems unlikely Hong Kong’s administration will seek to re-introduce the Shek Kwu Chau incinerator proposal. However, the campaign is far from won until the executive declares an alternative policy which it has yet to do. And next week's public forum indicates that EPD has every intention to press on with the SKC incinerator project as and when it can. Even if the JR overturns (for failure to comply with essential requirements) the Environmental Impact Assessment which approved an incinerator for SKC (and therefore also overturns the Town Planning Board decision, based on the EIA, to approve the Outline Zoning Plan for SKC to include an incinerator), the government can carry out a further EIA which does comply with essential requirements and it can re-affirm the Outline Zoning Plan in ways which unambiguously show there has been a change of government policy towards the conservation status of islands offshore South Lantau. It is worth noting also that Shenzhen, which already operates 7 incinerators with capacity to process 4,875 tonnes of Municipal Solid Waste per day, plans by 2015 to have an additional 3 incinerators, processing up to 6,300 tonnes per day – bringing Shenzhen’s total incinerator capacity to 11,175 tonnes per day.

By Tom Hope

Hong Kong is the World’s Largest Manufacturer of Waste : http://tiny.cc/g64ml

EPD proposes to adopt the most expensive, time-consuming and environmentally damaging option, instead of applying its energies to educating the public and legislating for comprehensive waste reduction and recycling. Thousands of sustainable jobs and new business opportunities are created when waste-reduction practices become culturally ingrained, as has been proven in Japan, Taiwan and South Korea.

Concerns

Following are some of the points made in the many documents prepared by local citizens opposing the super-incinerator:

Alternative sites

- include pre-despoiled sites with no damage to marine life

- involve no risk of prevailing winds carrying emissions to populated areas of Hong Kong

- are reachable by land as well as sea

Cheaper Options

- Government has not disputed estimates of cost from members of LIM with professional expertise

- Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) released Friday 18 November

Impact

- Emissions will be blown onto South Lantau by the prevailing winds 25% of the year

- Proposed technology generates ash waste laden with toxins requiring careful disposal with a real risk of entering the food chain over time

- Site is in full view of South Lantau’s hills and beaches

Super-incinerator uses outmoded technology

- Government has been planning this incinerator for a decade and new technology is now available

- Incinerators with plasma arc furnaces (underway in EU and USA) can be built more quickly, more cheaply and with no toxic emissions

- The Green Island Cement proposal uses waste to fuel its cement kilns and processes more waste than proposed super-incinerator with no toxic emissions

Get Informed

EPD Photos : http://tiny.cc/ko6jr

Environmental Impact Assessment Report : http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/english/register/open/all.html

EPD Explanatory Booklet for the Proposed Integrated Waste Management Facilities : http://tiny.cc/7ju2d

GovHK Waste & Recycling in Hong Kong : http://www.gov.hk/en/residents/environment/waste/wasterecycinhk.htm

Find out what concerned citizens are saying and doing (all documents)

Coordinated Local Initiatives : http://tiny.cc/ah6ke

Living Islands Movement News Release : http://tiny.cc/66exb

Green Lantau Association : http://tiny.cc/y7eyc

Green Party Hong Kong : http://tiny.cc/vnvzt

Letter to EPD from Martin Williams : http://tiny.cc/9p7z4

Living Islands Movement : http://www.livingislands.org.hk

Facebook Group : https://www.facebook.com/NoShekKwuChauIncinerator

Green Cheung Chau Video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWueOCfCwls

Hong Kong is the World’s Largest Manufacturer of Trash

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/07/business/energy-environment/07green.html

Data compiled by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development shows that Hong Kong easily outdid the world’s most developed societies in terms of per capita garbage generation: 928 kilograms, or 78 percent more than the EU average. Two of the wealthiest societies in Asia, Japan and South Korea, produced 410 kilograms and 380 kilograms, respectively, of municipal waste per person each year. That is equivalent to just more than 900 pounds for Japan and 835 pounds for South Korea. The figure for China was 115 kilograms. The US generates an average of 760 kilograms of trash per person annually, while the average in the European Union was 520 kilograms.