DocMartin

Double Haven is among the most beautiful areas in Hong Kong, and a ferry ride to Lai Chi Wo on the west shore makes for a wonderful outing.

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 375 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: CAMPING in Hong Kong!!! #7596

    Hi Kate:

    I don’t know re legality; not even sure re ownership of beaches – tho I know the designated swimming beaches have plenty of restrictions (no dogs, no ball games, no this or that; just sit there and behave).

    Best beaches for camping would have to be those in wilder areas. Tai Wan at Sai Kung said to be great for this; Ham Tin restaurants can be a boon here (even renting tents, I believe).

    Seen beach on Double Island that I was told makes grand campsite: tough to access though, as need boat to get there.

    A small beach just south of Shui Hau, Lantau, also comes to mind (tho I’m yet to camp in HK – at Shui Hau, stayed in holiday bungalows).

    Countryside Series maps indicate main, official campsites in country parks. Sites I’ve visited and look good to me include Cheung Sheung (in hills of western Sai Kung Peninsula), Ngong Ping (below Ma On Shan), Lai Chi Chong on north coast Sai Kung Peninsula [near small ferry pier; not sure if official site, or just camping in former fields], and Man Cheung Po, in hills of southwest Lantau.

    Martin

    in reply to: Lamma Island #8004

    Hi pelayo:

    I’d take kids – assuming that they are ok walking, and you have a bit of patience when need rest stops, diversions etc.
    From Yung Shue Wan maybe easier, as I think hill climb stretches seem easier, more in bursts (both places at sea level…)
    Takes maybe a couple of hours, but add a bit more for the kids.
    No steps en route that I recall; but maybe leave the bikes as several uphills where couldn’t cycle (if 5 yr old), and main downhill maybe a bit long and steep for safe cycling by kids.

    There’s now fisherman’s village tourist place at Sok Kwu Wan, which I’m yet to add to article; worth a look I’m told.

    Martin

    in reply to: Global warming, dentists; and is Simon a Cyborg? #7953

    After another daft letter from Simon Patkin appeared in the paper, I sent another response:

    Simon Patkin has written another missive to the Post (Sunday, 5 November), this time berating Christine Loh for “pressing the global warming alarm button yet again”. He accuses global warming alarmists of picking random changes in climate out of context.

    Now, a little news for Mr Patkin: here on Planet Earth, it is not random changes that are causing alarm, but a persistent, disturbingly fast rise in global temperatures. This rise is consistent with predictions made based on the likely effects of increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. These gases are known to absorb radiation emitted from the earth’s surface after warming by the sun – resulting in a significantly higher atmospheric/surface temperature than if the gases were absent. As the gas concentrations increase, the science predicts temperatures will rise, broadly as observed.

    Further, the scientific “debate” about the reality of global warming is now over. Yes, a few scattered scientists continue to noisily cloud the issue. However, climate change is accepted as fact by major scientific bodies including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, NASA, and Britain’s Royal Society – as well as by our own Hong Kong Observatory.

    The real debate has now shifted to discuss what, if anything, should be done about global warming. In a major report for the UK government, economist Sir Nicholas Stern has recommended that strong action is essential, or the consequences could be disastrous, including for the free markets of which Mr Patkin is so fond.

    With the scientific literature bereft of papers countering arguments that global warming is real, I see Mr Patkin cites State of Fear by novelist Michael Crichton as “an excellent analysis of the environmentalists’ attempts to deceive us over global warming”. Crichton’s novel is two years old (perhaps Mr Patkin really does dwell in an alternate reality), and has already been criticised for demonstrating a lack of thorough understanding of the issue, and of selective use of data.

    The deception over global warming is not perpetrated by “environmentalists” – and by scientists including climate experts who actually work in this field. Instead, it stems from the relatively small but noisy band of “sceptics”, several of whom are funded by a hard-core group of industries that are unwilling to change their polluting ways to help ensure a decent future for our planet – including future generations, biodiversity, and self-interested free markets.

    in reply to: Camping equipment #7570

    Hi Jack:

    Many thanks for the additional info; and glad this thread helped.

    Martin

    in reply to: No more seafood from 2048 #7991

    Press release from Worldwatch:

    Low-Impact Fish Farming and Eating Lower on the Food Chain Can Provide More Jobs and Increase Seafood Quality and Safety

    Washington, D.C. — The world’s beleaguered fish populations have found an unlikely ally: seafood eaters, according to a new Worldwatch study by Brian Halweil, a senior researcher and globally recognized food expert. From Chinese universities that refuse to serve shark fin soup, to U.S. supermarkets that feature sustainably harvested shrimp, to Japanese consumers who are restoring wild oyster beds, a well-informed population of seafood eaters, distributors, restaurants, and supermarkets is playing a growing role in fostering a more sustainable, lower-impact fishing industry.

    “Today, most of the world’s seafood, from tuna to salmon to bay scallops, is threatened with extinction,” writes Halweil in Catch of the Day: Choosing Seafood for Healthier Oceans. Studies show that fishers have eliminated at least 90 percent of tuna, marlin, swordfish, and other large predatory fish in just the past 50 years, and United Nations surveys show that roughly two-thirds of the world’s major fish stocks, from cod to salmon to mackerel, have been pushed to the verge of collapse. “A public that better understands the state of the world’s oceans can be a driving force in helping governments pass legislation to ban destructive fishing, mandate fishing labels that indicate how fish were caught, and create marine preserves off-limits to fishing where fish can spawn.”

    But this growing movement is still fragile, Halweil notes. The commitments of many participants, from retail giant Wal-Mart to the Red Lobster restaurant chain, remain incomplete. For instance, Wal-Mart’s recent pledge to sell only certified sustainable fish in the next 3– 5 years involves no commitments with respect to farmed salmon and Asian-farmed shrimp, which constitute the bulk of its seafood sales. And endangered swordfish, Atlantic cod, and Chilean sea bass are making a comeback on some restaurant menus as chefs forget earlier campaigns to protect them.

    The rapid decline of marine life is largely a result of increased seafood consumption and the use of high-impact fishing technology, which not only raises yields, but also requires about 12.5 times as much energy to catch fish as the fish provide to those who eat them, explains Halweil. He notes that the United States, Europe, and Japan—the world’s largest seafood consumers—receive most of their seafood through large distributors, restaurants, and supermarkets, so changes in buying habits in these channels could have a profound impact on the health of today’s fish stocks.

    “In the same way the organic food movement is evolving beyond the culinary fringe, sustainable seafood can make its biggest impact when it starts appearing at popular supermarkets and restaurants,” says Halweil. “Fish is an incredibly healthful food, but we’ll need to eat less of certain kinds and more of others if we want fish in the future.” Salmon farms, for instance, consume more fish in the form of feed than they yield in seafood, and large ocean species like tuna and swordfish are most likely to be contaminated with mercury and other toxins. Eating clams, oysters, and smaller species, in contrast, puts less strain on oceans and protects consumers from contaminants.

    Recalling the success of the “dolphin-safe” tuna campaign of the 1980s, Catch of the Day draws attention to a wellspring of private initiatives that are helping to save marine life—from color-coded seafood selection guides to targeted purchasing by large seafood buyers like pioneering restaurant company Bon Appétit. These efforts are boosting the sales and reputations of participating companies, protecting jobs in developing countries where seafood is the dominant industry, and increasing the overall quality and safety of fish products worldwide.

    “Some scientists predict that if current trends continue, the oceans will be reduced to a trawler-scraped wasteland inhabited primarily by sea slime and jellyfish,” Halweil notes. “The fishing industry and fisheries regulators have spent decades trying to prevent this grim outcome, but they have largely failed. Whether it is helping a marine conservation group push through laws prohibiting deep-sea trawling or supporting more restrictive trade in endangered species, seafood shoppers can help reverse the damages humans have created and preserve the fresh catch of tomorrow.”
    Conscientious Seafood Buyers May Be Greatest Hope to Reverse Widespread Destruction of Fisheries

    in reply to: Soko Islands will be harmed by ExxonMobil-CLP LNG terminal #7846

    An email I sent in response to request for info re possible question to Legco:

    One thing that I haven’t heard: does the budget for the LNG terminal include the costs of dismantling it, and restoring the area to its original condition or better (both on land, and underwater)?
    Surely, this should be guaranteed before any work begins.

    I ask partly as have heard of (nuclear) plants, open coal mines etc, where costs for dismantling etc are so huge, they would make them economically unviable.
    But, tends to be that the things are built/done, then society at large is left to pick up the bill for repairing the environment.

    Perhaps of some interest: an article on the costs, including hidden costs, of coal mining in the US:
    The Costs of Coal in Pennsylvania
    Effects of Longwall Mining

    Includes:
    The Department of Environmental Protection acts more like a Department of Energy Production when it ignores existing laws and regulations and provides the mining industry a de facto exemption from the same environmental protection requirements that other industries must comply with. The costs to extract coal are passed along to the coalfield residents, to the environment, and to the taxpayers, thereby inflating the private profits of mine operators and distorting coal’s market advantage over competing energy resources.

    in reply to: Hong Kong to become China “Green City”? #7998

    Here’s main text from an email I sent back in January, after first hearing of the idea that Hong Kong become China’s green city: just had google for "green city" China; and not new idea. – seems, though, it tends to mean a city doing some env stuff, rather than one in natural setting with lots of greenery. But Dalian and Nanjing local govts (see below) maybe have some grasp of the idea; more, by the looks of things, than Donald and Henry. Give us something to compete with. Maybe UNEP to aim for, but think this is for govts to attempt. (see interview from Nanjing – try to imagine someone high in HK govt giving equivalent responses ) Spiel below. But just occurring to me, too – Hong Kong has bauhinia as symbol; also dolphin for handover. Nanning, Guizhou, aiming to be green city:  [I’ve been; not struck by greenery]

    Henan capital, Zhengzhou is China’s model for the planting of trees in urban areas and is therefore called the "green city."

    Green (here, meaning eco-friendly) cities to be built from scratch: British design consultancy Aruphas announced that it has been tapped by the Chinese government to lead the construction of an "eco-city" expansion to Shanghai. Dongtan, the expanded development near Shanghai’s airport, will eventually cover about 8,800 hectares — roughly the size of Manhattan island. Shanghai claimsthat the Dongtan project will be "the world’s first genuinely eco-friendly city," using recycled water, cogeneration and biomass for energy, and striving to be as carbon-neutral as possible. The first phase, a 630 hectare development including a mix of transport facilities, schools, housing and high-tech industrial spaces, will begin construction late next year, and is expected to be completed by 2010.

    So what does it mean to be a "genuinely eco-friendly city?" Arup gives this overview:

    Quote:
    Priority projects include the process of capturing and purifying water in the landscape to support life in the city. Community waste management recycling will generate clean energy from organic waste, reducing landfills that damage the environment. Combined heat and power systems will provide the technology to source clean and reliable energy. Dongtan will be a model ecological city, and its buildings will help to reduce energy use, making efficient use of energy sources and generating energy from renewable sources.

    The express goal for the Chinese government is to use the Dongtan development as a template for future urban design. This isn’t the only green city project in China. In July, we noted that William McDonough had drafted a master plan for building the city of Huangbaiyu as a "cradle-to-cradle" model city. Phase 1 construction, with forty new homes built using advanced construction materials, should be completed by October. As McDonough’s plan is arguably at leastas "eco-friendly" as the Dongtan project is supposed to be — and is already well underway — Shanghai’s claim that Dongtan will be the first one is a bit dubious.

    I’ve had slight involvement in project to build env friendly city south of Shanghai; some ideas in plan dodgy. Milton Keynes type place hardly real "green" to me Beijing, China’s capital city, has drawn up an ambitious plan to have its green land coverage increased to 40 percent by 2005 and 45 percent by 2010. Beijing Mayor Liu Qi announced the plan to build the capital into a "green metropolis" at a teleconference on afforestation Thursday. we already better that for greenery

    I mentioned Dalian: Located on the picturesque Liaodong Peninsula, in the center of Northeast Asia economic zone, strategically within short distance from Japan, South Korea and the Far East regions of Russia, Dalian is, and has been, the most dynamic seaport city of Northern China. International trade has developed from these strategic areas to that of international proportions molding Dalian into a greater international center covering everything from finance to tourism now with new ever expanding parameters. After effectively transforming itself from that of a city of heavy industry in 1995 to that of a "Green City", Dalian is the first city in China to receive the "Global 500" award for human habitation and excellent living environment by UNEP – United Nations Environment Program.

    in reply to: Hong Kong suffers Chronic Air Pollution #7677

    Last month set the record for Hong Kong Observatory’s tally of number of hours in a month with “reduced visibility” – ie “visibility below 8 kilometres when there is no fog, mist, or precipitation”: a whopping 546 hours – almost 18 hours per day, recorded at HK International Airport.

    Records from the HK Observatory (since 1968) and Hong Kong International Airport (since 1997) show highest record monthly totals for hours with reduced visibility are all from 2002: indeed, only one monthly record dates from 2002.

    At HK Obs, the numbers of hours with reduced visibillity have increased markedly in recent years. Until 1980, the highest annual total was 388 hours. It wasn’t till 1994 (503 hours) that an annual total exceeded 500 hours; yet since then, the annual total has climbed sharply, first passing 1000 in 2003 (1117 hours), then reaching 1570 hours in 2004 and 1503 hours last year.

    At the airport, the annual total for hours with reduced visibility reached 2438 hours last year.

    As you might expect, totals are markedly lower in summer, when cleaner southerly breezes tend to blow.

    So, Donald Tsang – the government has a few challenges if to make progress with the Action Blue Sky campaign.

    Number of hours of Reduced Visibility observed at the Hong Kong Observatory since 1968
    Number of hours of Reduced Visibility observed at the Hong Kong International Airport since 1997

    in reply to: Global warming, dentists; and is Simon a Cyborg? #7952

    Simon Patkin (at least I get the fellow’s name right!) responded to my letter to the SCMP, adding some other info; there was a good, prompt response, and I then sent my own letter (not published), which I hope makes sense without also reproducing SP’s:

    Good to see Dave Dearman (letters, 4 October) lambast Simon Patkin for using selective evidence to support his notions there is “Shrill alarmism” regarding climate change. Indeed, use of selective evidence – some of it dubious or downright wrong – is commonplace amongst climate change sceptics.

    There is a hard core of such sceptics, who like Senator Inhofe receive significant funding from the energy industry, including ExxonMobil – which was recently criticised by Britain’s Royal Society for supporting organisations that provide “inaccurate and misleading information to the public”. Several of these sceptics were among the 60 signatories of the letter Mr Patkin cited, which was recently sent to the Canadian government, denying the reality of climate change.

    Mr Patkin is correct to note that “Ginger Spice” was not among the signatories [of the letter]. However, he neglected to note they included a mathematician who had been tricked into signing, and just 19 of the 60 were Canadian. And it surely slipped Mr Patkin’s notice that the letter was followed by another from 90 scientists who were all Canadian, all climate-change specialists, saying climate change is indeed real, and urging action.

    – for sources, see for instance:
    Royal Society tells Exxon: stop funding climate change denial
    Signatory Bails on Anti-Climate Science Petition
    Scientists urge PM to fund national climate strategy

    in reply to: Typhoon for early November??? #7976

    Cimaron moving south, forecast to head southwest; soon, T1 likely to be cancelled.

    A quirky storm; at one point, JTWC had it set to come v close, even passing right over HK as a tropical storm. But, barely caused a ripple of impact here – and certainly didn’t bring rain to clear the air (just about to go outside into the hideous murk! – 50% humidity, yet major “haze”).

    in reply to: Typhoon for early November??? #7975

    Cimaron barely moving now (“quasistationary” say HK Obs and JTWC).

    Again, models conflicting re where it will head – perhaps moving a little, then going southwest suggests JTWC; HK Obs has it moving a little west; a couple of forecasts on MIT Storms page even show it heading northeast.
    But, does seem they now mostly agree Cimaron is set to soon weaken rapidly – so no Number 8, or even No 3, excitement for us; nor even rain that could clear the air.

    in reply to: Typhoon for early November??? #7974

    Here’s recent satellite image showing Cimaron – much as forecast by ECMWF a week ago (see first post in this thread).

    in reply to: Typhoon for early November??? #7973

    Cimaron seems to have nearly stalled, merely moving at a snail’s pace towards Hong Kong. JTWC and HK Obs still have it forecast to move nearer to HK, and turn towards west. If JTWC is correct with latest track, it could be close enough for at least storm force winds here. On MIT storms page, there’s still a forecast for abrupt shift towards the south. One forecast even has it turning east, to the northern tip of Luzon. Meanwhile, here in Hong Kong, a fine, rather windy day, albeit still with much smog (oops, I mean haze). Shot here from Cheung Chau early this aft – good for windsurfing, but not for enjoying pounding surf.

    in reply to: Airborne particulates in Hong Kong – health risks #7984

    Only Sharp – three models – and one by Whirlpool, in the Fortress store I tried (Central). Got a Sharp FU-P60S – after first having a look in the store, then heading home and doing a bit of reading around on Internet. Reviews for this and/or related models looked good, with a few people reporting decreases in allergies etc (in US; maybe from some household stuff like dust mites?).

    Info on Sharp site: FU-P60S – says it’s 99.97% efficient vs particles of 0.3 microns, which may mean fair numbers of even tinier particles get through. Cost HK$2500, using HSBC card (bit of discount): so I hope it works! (Does tend to have orange lamp – for dirty air – on as start operating; but goes to green, for clean, after a few minutes.) Heard of a purifier costing HK$9600 (ouch!) in Bumps to Babes, down from over HK$12,000. For dough like that, gotta hope it also does the vacuuming and ironing…

    in reply to: Airborne particulates in Hong Kong – health risks #7982

    I’ve done an article on the site, On smoggy days, can we clean the air indoors? – seems that using air purifier with a HEPA (high efficiency particulate air) filter could be worthwhile.

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 375 total)