Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Thanks for this info, Tom; hadn’t known the island’s now deserted during the week.
I think there isn’t a proper “bunker”, but the former camp on western slope of the small hill – v near the police station – was made ready as shelter should there be an accident at nearby Daya Bay nuclear plant. As I recall, has iodine etc in case the island is affected by fallout (the iodine being normal, to help limit any uptake by bodies of radioactive iodine).
Martin
Hi Tom:
I think Dr Jefferson is broadly correct re the dolphins (saying LNG terminal won’t have real impact on them, or on finless porpoise): some years ago, I went out on survey boat with him in waters north of Lantau, and judged him a good-excellent scientist. (Around that time, were some over-the-top predictions re the dolphins, such as would not last beyond 1997 or thereabouts; Dr Jefferson’s more level-headed pronouncements proved more accurate.)
But, I still don’t believe the LNG terminal at the Sokos is justified: will be destructive to a still lovely area, with good marine ecology (not just dolphins, tho they are being used as flagship species).
As noted above, there are alternatives; Black Point among them – where there has already been considerable env harm, including power station already in place.
– Can’t really say Dr Jefferson is objective in this regard, ie re merits of LNG terminal itself. I rather felt that his byline should have said something like, “Dr Thomas Jefferson, who has been handsomely paid by ExxonMobil-CLP partnership, which is keen on the Sokos option”.
(If not paid handsomely, too bad: EIA work for developer of project like this should be well rewarded – which for some can mean that objectivity is lost: indeed, the EIA [not section re dolphins] reportedly has artist’s impressions showing LNG tanks looking prominent at Black Point, yet somehow fuzzier and fainter at the Sokos.
It’s a fundamental problem with EIAs, really: funded by wannabe developers, so I think can be tendency for Who Pays the Piper, Calls the Tune. At times, can be horrendously skewed in favour of developments. I write this having done a little EIA work; tried for objectivity.)Martin
Post edited by: Martin, at: 2007/01/23 21:25
Post edited by: Martin, at: 2007/01/24 16:03
I’ve just sent this to EPD:
Hong Kong boast some of the finest scenery along the coast of China. This is important for residents, and for helping attract tourists; plus Hong Kong supports rich biodiversity, including globally rare species.
Yet, especially along the coasts, we have relatively few “unspoiled” areas. The Soko Islands are among the best of these.
The planned project will have a major negative impact on the Sokos: damaging the land and marine environments and wildlife, including Chinese white dolphin, as well as scarring the scenery, even marring views from places high on Lantau, such as the Big Buddha at Ngong Ping.
Why the unseemly rush to concrete part of the Sokos?
While using LNG as power station fuel could indeed help reduce air pollution, doing so – and sourcing LNG via the Sokos – is not the only option.
For instance, it would seem entirely possible to source LNG from Sinopec, China’s largest oil refiner, which is gearing up to supply nearby places.I have heard the rush is supposedly to help improve air quality. Yet, the Chief Executive has claimed air pollution here is not a serious problem.
Further, why the rush here when the Hong Kong Government has lately been limp-wristed in seeking further controls on emissions by local power stations.?To what extent has the government explored possibilities for greatly improving coal burning by local power stations?.
Ttechnologies exist to make coal burning far cleaner; indeed, with coal gasification, power plant emissions are similar to those from plants burning natural gas (though include carbon dioxide, which will also be produced burning LNG – making even this environmentally unfriendly given contributions to global warming).Given the rush here (supposedly to boost air quality), why is the government not pressing for reduced energy consumption in Hong Kong?
Why this apparent reliance on a quick-fix involving yet more concrete?Why was the proposal for a marine park at the Sokos readily dropped, and lately ignored, by the government?
Hong Kong is currently aiming to broaden tourism, to include nature tourism.
The Sokos would make a fine site for ecotourism, attracting both residents and overseas visitors.
What ecotourism plans for the Sokos have been considered by the government?What are the projected costs for dismantling the LNG terminal once it is no longer needed (within a relatively short period) – and for restoring the Sokos?
What guarantees are there that such restoration work will actually be carried out, and we won’t simply be left with a ruined area of once lovely islands?Dr Martin Williams
Director
Hong Kong OutdoorsThis just in – was posted to the EPD site via link given above:
I represent The Conservation Agency in strongly opposing the building of a LNG terminal, or any other industrial facility, in the Soko Islands because that would be a tragic waste of a potentially wonderful and lucrative natural resource. The proper development for the Sokos should be as an ecotourist destination resort.
The Sokos are rich in natural history, including both terrestrial and marine life, birds, animals, and flora. The existing old town/prison platform on Tai A Chau would be ideal for hotel development and resort headquarters. The beach front on the south side of Siu A Chau could be redeveloped for recreation. The waters south of Tai A Chau, extending to and including Tau Lo Chau, should become a marine park and sanctuary for snorkeling and diving. Nature trails, with interpretive signage, should extend out on both Tai A Chau and Siu A Chau from the developed sites for birding, animal observation, and plant identification. This sort of development for ecotourism and recreation in nature is very popular and very profitable in the Mediterranean and Caribbean. It is time to do this in the South China Sea.
Not only is ecotoursm lucrative and popular, but it can be wonderful – if properly managed – for wildlife and the natural environment. I have personally been in charge of developing natural history programs, including rare species restorations, nature trails, interpretive signage, and tour guiding, on a number of Caribbean islands, notably Guana and Necker (see http://www.guanascience.com, http://www.guana.com, and http://www.necker.com). A properly developed and managed ecotourist destination resort is much better for wildlife and nature than an “empty” island: That is because the people there have reason to care for the island’s natural resources.
The Conservation Agency (www.theconservationagency.org) and I personally stand ready to advise and assist in the proper development of the Soko Islands.
Sincerely, James Lazell, Ph.D., 2007.1.21.
From email recently in:
in case you haven’t expressed your views on the Soko Islands issue through the official consultation channel provided by the Environmental Protection Department, please visit the following site and click on the [Send Comment] link under EIA REPORTS: Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Receiving Terminal and Associated Facillities:
It is very important to that you should do this before 25 Jan, because utilising the Government’s own consultation channel means having your comments ‘on the record’ in the most direct way. Thank you for your kind attention.
Business comment article in UK’s Independent looks at increasingly polluted China, including Hong Kong:
Quote:For anyone who has not been to Hong Kong for a while, the smog comes as a shock. It is all- pervading. In Hong Kong, the number of days with reduced visibility has tripled in the past three years, and most business people I met were thinking of leaving the city, fearing the effect pollution was having on their children. One recent survey discovered that 40 per cent of businesses were finding it harder to recruit overseas nationals because of this factor. Many ex-pats are relocating to Singapore.Will Hong Kong, this thriving centre of capitalism, one day choke into extinction?
The problems come from the explosive growth of heavy industry upstream in the Pearl River Delta – where thousands of factories belch out smoke. The scale and speed with which this has happened is ample testimony to the “China effect”.
…A review of Hong Kong in 2006 by Deutsche Presse-Agentur (appearing on Monsters and Critics) focuses on Donald Tsang and problems with air pollution in Hong Kong.
Quote:with seven months to go before he claims the prize of leading the former British colony until 2012, the image of the bow-tied former civil servant who took over as Hong Kong leader in 2005 has been threatened by a row over pollution.
…
Tsang’s ‘crisis, what crisis?’ speech came just days after Merrill Lynch downgraded two Hong Kong property companies because of the city’s air quality and after the head of the stock exchange warned pollution is driving investment overseas.Suddenly, the 61-year-old Hong Kong leader, chosen by China to succeed the deeply unpopular Tung Chee-hwa largely because of his easygoing charm and public appeal, found himself facing an unprecedented backlash.
Business leader and government ally Allan Zeman reacted by asking which city Tsang had been living in. Anthony Hedley, an academic behind extensive research on the effects of pollution, called Tsang’s speech ‘naïve, misleading and fallacious.’
…
Liberal Party leader James Tien, a key supporter of most of the chief executive’s policies, said he was ‘gravely concerned’ over air quality but felt Tsang was not taking the problem seriously enough.‘It is all very well for Mr Tsang to quote statistics on life expectancy in our prosperous, well-fed city but as we all know, it is only in the past 10 years that pollution levels have climbed to such alarming levels,’ Mr Tien said.
‘Can he really be confident that, if pollution continues to worsen, he will be able to promise the same life expectancy for our children and for our grandchildren?’
Ominously for Tsang, leadership challenger Alan Leong has called for new World Health Authority standards on air quality monitoring to be adopted while the chief executive has so far stayed silent on the matter.
…2006 Review: Hong Kong leader’s re-election overshadowed by pollution
Post edited by: Martin, at: 2007/02/01 10:01
Email I’ve sent govt department involved in plans for Mui Wo:
I believe there is great potential for creating an excellent small wetland reserve, from the existing freshwater wetland at Mui Wo.
Some landscaping work would be required, to create and improve pools.
Short trails to simple hides (blinds) would allow visitors to see birds such as egrets (already common) and other wetland birds – ducks, shorebirds and other birds would be attracted by a well managed reserve here.
Could be small charge for visitors.This would be an additional attraction for visitors to Lantau, and would become a good place for residents to enjoy.
(Much else could be changed at Mui Wo, inc the grim, grey, soulless concrete area around the ferry pier – but various other folk inc within Living Islands Movement are coming up with plenty of ideas here I think.)
Another email circular from Christine Loh:
Medical students protested yesterday about Hong Kong’s bad air. They demanded tightening of Hong Kong’s lax air quality objectives in order to protect public health.
Since May 2006, Chief Executive Donald Tsang (DT) has made a series of comments about Hong Kong’s air quality that have raised doubts about his competence as a political leader. He got facts wrong, he was incoherent when not scripted, he taunted experts, he astonished people, he single-handedly generated considerable negative media attention, and he has made the HKSAR Government appear stupid.
Who dares tell Donald Tsang he is wrong? Is his hearing ability affected by the Emperor syndrome?
A. Background of arguments
The key issues are:
(a) Hong Kong’s air quality in absolute and comparative terms.
(b) Hong Kong’s air quality objectives and their sufficiency to protect public health.B. String of major gaffes
1. HK Journal (May 2006):
(a) “In fact the air is not all that bad … The air quality today is not inferior to Washington DC … By Asian standards, we are not bad at all. We are better than Seoul, better than any of the mainland [China] cities. I am better than Taipei, I’m slightly behind Singapore. I’m behind Tokyo”.
(b) Re the WHO guidelines, “I am sure we are going to meet whatever standard they put up”.
2. RTHK Interview (13 October 2006)
“It is a question of visibility. Is the air right, not so so the road side air quality but what we see into the air that is a small particle, that is small particulates which is coming from the mainland that may not effect us or the thing we breath but it effects our feeling that the air is not as good as before”.
3. Business for Clean Air Joint Conference (27 November 2006)
(a) “We are at a level comparable with such cities as Tokyo, Seoul, Barcelona and Los Angeles … We know that air quality in Hong Kong is not pristine pure as in some Scandinavian cities or in the North and South Poles”.
(b) ”In the final analysis, the health of the people is measured by how long they live, and this is where it counts. The life expectancy in Hong Kong is among the highest in the world … At the end of the day, looking at what we have achieved for the health of our people, you can come to only one conclusion – we have the most environmentally friendly place for people, for executives, for Hong Kong people, to live”.C. Expert and public riposte
(a) Comparisons 2005
Hong Kong – NO2: 0.061 SO2: 0.022 PM10: 0.059
Tokyo – NO2: 0.047 SO2: 0.005 PM10: 0.029
Seoul – NO2: 0.064 SO2: 0.013 PM10: 0.058
Los Angeles – NO2: 0.047 SO2: 0.005 PM10: 0.032
(b) Hong Kong’s AQOs
(a) The AQOs are outdated and very lax when compared to standards in developed economies, and are a long way from the WHO’s global air quality guidelines.
(b) The AQOs have become a licence to pollute rather than serving to protect public health. Moreover, Hong Kong is not meeting all of the AQOs in any event.
(c) Air quality is better in Hong Kong than many mainland cities but that is not saying much considering public health implications.
(c) Basic public health misunderstanding [Professor Anthony Hedley]
“As a public health physician I am totally dismayed to hear such a naïve, misleading and fallacious statement from our Chief Executive. It is clear that [he] has been very badly advised on our current population health issues. It appears to show a serious misunderstanding of the complex determinants of health and survival …Overall population high life expectancy is driven by employment, and income and reflected in high GDP per capita, whereas poverty would have a negative effect. Whereas air pollution would be unlikely to reverse our overall life expectancy it would certainly slow the progression of gains in longevity. For a reversal of life expectancy trends there would have to be a complete breakdown of social structures, or war, famine and widespread fatal infectious disease; examples would include the turmoil and massive increase in alcohol consumption which followed the breakup of the Soviet Union, or the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa. Our high life expectancy in Hong Kong is also attributable to very low infant mortality rate; high quality maternal and child health services; and the healthy migrant …The Chief Executive should not confuse contemporary effects with cohort effects”.D. Problem of being ‘Emperor’
1. Emperor syndrome: Few within the system dare to tell the boss he is wrong. The system also protects the Emperor from hearing unpleasant things from those outside the system.
2. Emperor complex: The Emperor seldom hears direct criticisms, favours those who support his thinking, thinks he is right, and concludes those outside the system who raise criticism are his enemies.
3. Emperor defense mechanism: The Emperor does not want to accept and therefore rejects by insisting something is not true despite overwhelming evidence. The Emperor may deny the reality of the unhappy fact altogether, admit the fact but minimize its seriousness, or admit both the fact and seriousness but deny responsibility.
4. State of Hong Kong air quality: DT denial-defensive mechanism is in full throttle. He does not deny air quality is bad but he minimises its seriousness by claiming it is not too bad. He also shifts responsibility onto (a) the public for wasting energy; and (b) businesses across the border for not doing more to reduce pollution. While both are true, he is not yet applying himself to resolving the problem i.e. to fully accept responsibility that the government can do much more.CHRISTINE LOH
Civic Exchange – HK’s Independent Think Tank
http://www.civic-exchange.orgIt was indeed a remarkably warm November – the hottest on record.
Quote:November 2006 was unseasonably warm. The monthly mean temperature of 23.3 degrees reached an all-time high.says the Hong Kong Observatory.
The mean air temperature of 23.3C was 1.9C above normal.Rainfall was high too, at 99.6mm – 64.5mm above normal. Much of this was on one day:
Quote:A broad band of rain and thunderstorms affected southern China on 21 November. Locally, the weather was overcast with heavy rain and squally thunderstorms. More than 100 millimetres of rainfall was recorded at Wu Kau Tang and Ma On Shan on that day.(isn’t a note re whether this was a remarkably rainy day for November)
Well, still no answer to the above. But had a recent email:
Quote:Hi. im competing in the action asia race on dec 10 and im coming from the philippines. we plan to rent bikes in HK for the race. i was wondering if you could recommend a bike shop that rents out mountain bikes for a day. thanks!Charles Frew replied:
Quote:Try the Friendly Bike Shop on Lantau/Mui Wo..who also sponsor some of the Action Asia Series. Their link is on the AA website.At meeting re pollution on Monday, Donald Tsang gave a speech indicating he doesn't see Hong Kong air pollution is an issue.
Quote:Tsang pointed out that investment was continuing to pour into the city and said it had one of the world’s highest life expectancies. The Hong Kong chief executive told an audience at an environmental forum that Hong Kong’s air quality was “not pristine pure as in some Scandinavian cities or in the North and South Poles.”But he added: “We have to keep the problem in perspective. Interms of the quantity of air pollutants, Hong Kong ranks as neitherthe top nor the bottom of the world table. “Rather, we are at a level comparable with such cities as Tokyo,Seoul, Barcelona and Los Angeles.”
“In the final analysis, the health of the people is measured by how long they live, and this is where it counts,” Tsang insisted. “The life expectancy in Hong Kong is among the highest in the world.”
hmm… his comments didn't stem from science
Quote:His remarks were fiercely criticized in yesterday’s newspapers by environmentalists and health experts, including the University of Hong Kong’s Anthony Hedley, who described the speech as “naive, misleading and fallacious”. Hedley, who led a survey that estimated four people a day die in Hong Kong because of pollution-related issues, was quoted in the Hong Kong Standard as saying Tsang was “badly advised on current public health issues”. … Hedley said pollution affects the lungs, blood vessels and heart while high life expectancy was determined by factors such as employment, income and a high gross domestic product. Wong Tze-wai of the Chinese University in Hong Kong said Tsang’s speech showed he “doesn’t even know how average life expectancy is calculated.”HK leader’s clean air claims blasted
Quote:Merrill Lynch is advising clients to sell Hong Kong office landlords in favour of Singapore’s, saying the city’s air pollution will prompt skilled talent to move further south. "Buy Singapore office landlords, sell Hong Kong office landlords," the US investment bank said in a report. "The government in HK is relatively powerless to address the true causes until Beijing gets tough. It could be a long and choking wait that many could choose not to endure." The long-term competitiveness of Hong Kong is in "some doubt" due to the poor air quality and potential exodus of highly skilled talent, especially from the financial service sector, who would chose to live elsewhere, the report said. "Official policy fails to recognise, and ultimately respond, to the competitive threat from Singapore," Merrill Lynch said. …Merrill downgrades HK office sector, cites pollution
I’ve been here nigh on 20 years. Remember when I first arrived, a friend criticised a tv drama (Noble House), which had dowpours leading to apartment block collapse – in November. He said that don’t get such rains in November. Well, today we’ve had rains like early summer: over 100mm in some places; still warm (close to midnight; windows open, yet still in shorts and t-shirts: I’m yet to wear a jumper this autumn). Still thunderstorms around, more rain forecast for tomorrow. Not a tropical storm – I’ve known one such storm bring much rain early one November. And, quite unlike regular November cold fronts, which move through fast, with somewhat chilly, dry air soon following. Just checking Weather Underground forum, and the weather buffs there having some discussion about the storms today – inc noting that we’ve jsut had the first ever amber rainstorm in November.
Quote:HONG KONG (XFN-ASIA) – The chairman of Hong Kongs stock exchange has warned that worsening air quality here is a threat to the territorys competitiveness, the Financial Times reported on its website.You hear pretty often that young people with young families are reluctant to come to Hong Kong because of the quality of the air, Ronald Arculli said in an interview with the FT. We need to have quality people servicing the market from all walks of life.
He said doctors advised sending his two young grandsons to live abroad on pollution-related medical grounds and they are now living in the Philippines.
Hong Kong stock exchange chairman warns of worsening pollution – report
