Your Voice: Impact of waste and fast fashion on the environment (long letters)

Did you know that 233 double-decker buses full of food waste are discharged into landfills daily in Hong Kong? In 2022, the municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal rate was 11,000 tonnes per day, while the per capita MSW disposal rate was 1.5kg per person per day. However, the recovery rate was only 32 per cent, far less than the total amount produced. Food waste is a burden on the city’s three landfills, which are estimated to be exhausted by 2026.

The solid waste we generate contributes to the emission of excessive greenhouse gases, which leads to global warming. It affects not only our immediate environment but also the planet. It is one reason why the government proposed the MSW charge to combat these serious issues.

While most people would argue that it increases their living expenses, I believe that it could significantly raise public awareness.

You may wonder if the MSW charge could actually help reduce waste generation, but the statistics prove its success.

In 2008, researchers in Japan found that implementing a pay-as-you-throw programme reduced residual waste generation by 20 per cent. In 2009, Taipei’s MSW charge resulted in a remarkable 62 per cent decline in domestic waste disposal.

The struggles of Hong Kong’s cardboard collectors

From the above data, it is clear people will reduce their waste in order to pay less. Households will be more conscious when purchasing something or disposing of goods. This shows that the MSW charge creates a direct financial incentive for households to adopt waste-minimising behaviours.

In the long run, people can contribute to sustainable development and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions while lowering costs. Isn’t that a win-win situation?

However, there are some challenges to the implementation of an MSW charge. First, it creates a financial burden for low-income families, especially those that are already facing economic difficulties. This could potentially affect a lot of people in Hong Kong, where the cost of living is high, and many people live in a precarious financial state.

There may also be a rise in illegal waste disposal to avoid the fee. The government should set clear guidelines to address these issues. For example, education programmes, such as talks and simulation games, can be organised in schools. Additionally, advertising campaigns and punishment schemes should be well-regulated, and people should be aware of the consequences of illegal disposal.

Implementing an MSW charging scheme would remind us to prioritise environmental issues over economic growth. “The only way forward, if we are going to improve the quality of the environment, is to get everybody involved,” architect Richard Rogers has urged. The sooner you take action, the better our world could be.

Toby Lau, St Paul’s Secondary School

Fast fashion describes low-priced and stylish clothes designed to meet the market’s ever-changing trends. It is usually produced in large quantities using low-cost materials. China produces over 65 per cent of the world’s clothing, with a majority labelled as “fast fashion”, according to research conducted by the government.

Fast fashion is a significant contributor to the global water crisis. With the rising desire to keep up with fashion trends, fast fashion companies like Shein increase the production of clothes to fulfil demand. Most clothes include cotton, which requires a significant amount of water to produce. The fashion industry requires 700 gallons of water to make one cotton shirt, while a pair of jeans needs 2,000 gallons.

Fast fashion also intensifies plastic pollution. Due to lower costs and higher durability, manufacturers tend to increase the usage of polyester, a type of synthetic fibre frequently used in textile production.

However, it takes thousands of years for the non-biodegradable plastic to break down, releasing microplastics into the waterways and wreaking havoc in the lives of marine organisms.

We ultimately consume the fish and take in the microplastics ourselves. These contaminated fish can cause unrepairable damage to our respiratory and digestive systems. Researchers estimate that humans ingest 14,000 to 68,000 plastic microfibres every year.

Moreover, polyester production involves burning fossil fuels and emitting greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide, which may exacerbate the greenhouse effect and global warming issue. Therefore, plastic pollution will worsen under the growing trend of fast fashion, creating unfathomable damage to human bodies and the atmosphere.

To reduce the effect of fast fashion on the environment, the government should implement a scheme encouraging the public to choose second-hand clothes over new ones.

Fast fashion’s massive contribution to carbon emissions

The scheme could reward individuals who have chosen 10 pieces of second-hand clothes per year with restaurant consumption vouchers. This incentive would motivate the public to lower their demand for new clothes, reducing the number of clothes ending up in landfills.

Not only does this policy help raise awareness of excessive clothing waste and minimise the impact of fast fashion, but it also encourages consumption in other areas like dining by distributing consumption vouchers to the public.

Fast fashion is a significant contributor to water shortage and plastic pollution. As the largest fast fashion producer, China should be responsible for reducing the amount of water consumed in the production stage.

However, this is not a problem that can be solved by China alone. It requires a collective effort from the government, fast fashion producers, and customers. Only through this joint effort can we hope to wake up from the nightmare of fast fashion.