393
HONG KONG LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL.
117
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-The reason for removing them was that the smoke was a nuisance in the district.
HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK-Where were they?
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-They were near the Roman Catholic Chapel and a residential hostel there. Complaints have been received about these incinerators. The scheme worked out all right for the incinerators but the smoke became a nuisance and could not be abated, and it was decided they would have to go. HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.-Was it a question of smoke, or smoke and smell?
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-It was a smoke nuisance.
HON. MR. SHENTON.-I recently sent you particulars of a new scheme for destroying refuse which has been in use in England and which has been ordered recently by Tokyo, Singapore and other places.
THE CHAIRMAN.-It was an extremely elaborate system and it would take a very long time to introduce.
HON. SIR HENRY POLLOCK.-How much did you spend on these experimental incinerators?
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-About $600 I think. HON. MR. PATERSON.-That is $300 each. They can't be very elaborate,
HON. MR. BELL.-As incinerators, they were a success, weren't they?
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-I expect so, Sir.
HON. MR. BELL. suppose it was merely a question of smoke nuisance in the neighbourhood. Could it not be removed to another district? It seems to me that incineration is a modern way of destroying refuse.
HON. MR. PATERSON.-Yes, it is, but it is intensely expensive. Shanghai is going in for it but it costs a lot of money.
If you wish to install incinerators the only place I can suggest is near the Cement works, where there is so much smoke already that you would not notice the extra.
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.-The jetty and the barges are the recommendation of the Sanitary Board.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.