Page 121 of 654
Page 121 of 654
1654
124
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
practical difficulties in this method of handling domestic waste. I have reservations as to the effect of this method and my reasons are stated below
In Hong Kong, our residential units are usually of several hundred square feet each. It is difficult to set aside a corner for bottles, cans and waste paper for collection by the Urban Council. As the urban area is limited in space, there are very few spacious refuse collection points and the refuse collection points may not have enough space to store these cans, bottles, paper or timber type of waste. How can this type of material which has limited economic value be re-marketed as material with value after being processed by the manufacturers so that it would be profitable, and if not profitable, be able to recover the cost? Moreover, if the Government just centres on publicity and education without providing any subsidy or actively suggesting methods to handle this type of waste, how will waste from the market and treated recycled waste be handled in the end? The Draft Paper has not touched on it. It only centres on domestic and personal waste and goes in great length into the recycling proposal. I think this is where its weak point lies.
As for construction and demolition waste, the Draft Paper has also not mentioned any concrete resources or any detailed recycling plan. I think that is most regrettable.
The Draft Paper mentions the handling of agricultural waste by biochemical methods. In fact, many years ago, the Eastern District Composting Plant under the management of the Urban Council collected organic agricultural waste. Because of its low cost effectiveness, and the fact that agriculture is on the decline, there is no value for the existence of such a way of handling agricultural waste. On the other hand, our domestic waste, particularly plastic waste, cannot be handled by the chemical decomposing method. I am therefore of the view that the part in the Draft Paper on such methods is of no real effect and at the same time, is not feasible.
Our present method of handling domestic waste by dumping it in landfills together with our $5.3 billion plan for strategic landfills were expected to last 15 years. In view of the present rate of waste increase and the fact that construction waste is also dumped there, their usable period has now been reduced to half,
I think the use of incinerators is very effective and is the most positive method to reduce waste. In this way, we would be able to reduce the volume of waste by 90%, thereby prolonging the usable period of the landfills by ten times. Some people say that incinerators cause pollution to the environment. From experience gained by overseas countries and scientific perspective, it has been widely proved that no pollution will be caused to the environment in the vicinity. The Government has mentioned two points of consideration and reservation. As for the point that the initial investment is very costly, I do not agree. In Hong Kong, it is very difficult to find suitable sites for landfills and money just cannot help. In fact, even though money is available, it is not
Page 121 of 654
Page 121 of 654
1654
124
HONG KONG URBAN COUNCIL
practical difficulties in this method of handling domestic waste. I have reservations as to the effect of this method and my reasons are stated below
In Hong Kong, our residential units are usually of several hundred square feet each. It is difficult to set aside a corner for bottles, cans and waste paper for collection by the Urban Council. As the urban area is limited in space. there are very few spacious refuse collection points and the refuse collection points may not have enough space to store these cans, bottles, paper or timber type of waste. How can this type of material which has limited economic value be re-marketed as material with value after being processed by the manufacturers so that it would be profitable, and if not profitable, be able to recover the cost? Moreover, if the Government just centres on publicity an education without providing any subsidy or actively suggesting methods to handle this type of waste, how will waste from the market and treated recycled waste be handled in the end? The Draft Paper has not touched on it. It only centres on domestic and personal waste and goes in great length into the recycling proposal. I think this is where its weak point lies.
As for construction and demolition waste, the Draft Paper has also ne mentioned any concrete resources or any detailed recycling plan. I think that è most regrettable.
The Draft Paper mentions the handling of agricultural waste by bio chemical methods. In fact, many years ago, the Eastern District Composting Plant under the management of the Urban Council collected organic chemica agricultural waste. Because of its low cost effectiveness, and the fact tha agriculture is on the decline, there is no value for the existence of such a way of handling agricultural waste. On the other hand, our domestic waste particularly plastic waste, cannot be handled by the chemical decomposing method. I am therefore of the view that the part in the Draft Paper on such methods is of no real effect and at the same time, is not feasible.
Our present method of handling domestic waste by dumping it in landfills together with our $5.3 billion plan for strategic landfills were expected to last 15 years. In view of the present rate of waste increase and the fact that construction waste is also dumped there, their usable period has now been reduced to half,
I think the use of incinerators is very effective and is the most positive method to reduce waste. In this way, we would be able to reduce the volume of waste by 10%, thereby prolonging the usable period of the landfills by ter times. Some people say that incinerators cause pollution to the environment From experience gained by overseas countries and scientific perspective, it has been widely proved that no pollution will be caused to the environment in the vicinity. The Government has mentioned two points of consideration and reservation. As for the point that the initial investment is very costly, I do no agree. In Hong Kong, it is very difficult to find suitable sites for landfills and money just cannot help. In fact, even though money is available, it is no
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.