customContents

entityId

entityUuid

articlePageQuery

filter

article

articleBaseAdvertisingInfoArticle

articleListArticle

articleSeoArticle

helpersCheckIsPostiesArticle

hooksArticleAcknowledgementGateOverlayArticle

hooksTrackPageViewArticle

hooksContentInterestArticle

articleLinkingDataContent

articleSchemaContent

liveArticle

advertZone

sentiment

contentLock

topics

types

sections

moreOnThisArticles

urlAlias

commentCount

sponsorType

authorLocations

authors

paywallTypes

corrections

displaySlideShow

multimediaEmbed

printHeadline

seriesContainer

socialHeadline

headline

flag

firstTopic

glossary

flattenTypeIds

publishedDate

additionalInfoBoxes

images

image

relatedLinks

relatedNewsletters

__typename

createdDate

sponsor

factSheets

series

knowledgeQuestion

disableOffPlatformContent

published

updatedDate

summary

subHeadline

body

keywords

copyrighted

customTimezone

liveContents

Letters

The protests over the proposed landfill expansions have further highlighted the need for an independent review of Hong Kong's waste management plan.
The government has recognised the problem, but is not able to present a convincing solution. Its solution, proposed by the last administration, and simply regurgitated by the current one, lacks any credibility and that is why an independent review is necessary.
The waste problem is for everybody in Hong Kong to solve. Any solution that seeks to dump the problem on one sector of the community or in one area is flawed.
Why should Tseung Kwan O residents accept one-third of Hong Kong's total refuse? Why should South Lantau became the new dumping ground just because officials believe the small population will protest less than Tseung Kwan O or Tuen Mun residents?
A waste management policy should not be driven by short- term thinking or by adopting the line of least resistance.
The long-term goal must be to remove the existing landfill nuisance. This is possible over time as landfill waste can be used as fuel for modern waste-to-energy facilities. An independent review and an honest public debate will determine whether modern waste-to-energy incinerators are a health hazard. Technology has progressed a long way in recent years but the failure of government to convince Hong Kong people on this issue has resulted in stalemate - who should we believe?
In parallel with much greater efforts to recycle, and assuming there is a convincing case on the health issue, the government should proceed now with a waste-to-energy incinerator on, or adjacent to, each of the three existing landfills.
In addition, smaller waste-to-energy facilities should be located in other areas, including one for Lantau and the outlying islands, to reduce the transportation of waste and to send the right message that everybody in Hong Kong must be part of the solution.
To mitigate the nuisance, residents close to these facilities should benefit from a 50 per cent reduction in electricity bills. The government has enough money and should use it to encourage solutions, not ever more protests. Waste management is everybody's responsibility. No more nimby (not in my backyard) thinking - it is time for concerted action by all.
It is time for the government, our legislators and district councils to face the problem and show true leadership in agreeing a solution acceptable to Hong Kong people.
G. Chan, Sai Wan Ho


No room for Nimbyism as Hong Kong seeks space for its dead and daily waste

Let Christmas not be peak waste season in Hong Kong

Hong Kong sixth out of 13 in Asia-Pacific green rankings but the city could do better, particularly in cutting waste

Frustrated with the government’s recycling services, Hongkongers are taking matters into their own hands

Tuen Mun landfill

Look at waste-to-energy option

Protesters against Tuen Mun landfill proposal.

Opinion

The protests over the proposed landfill expansions have further highlighted the need for an independent review of Hong Kong's waste management plan.
