Hongkongers are the world's most dissatisfied people when it comes to their air quality. Gallup pollsters surveyed 153 countries over the past five years and found 70 per cent of Hong Kong adults questioned were unhappy vs 3 per cent in Singapore - the lowest score in the poll. The results were released on April 22, to mark the 40th anniversary of Earth Day.
Among Asian countries, 73 per cent of mainland Chinese are actually satisfied with their air quality, followed by Indonesians at 76 per cent, South Koreans 78 per cent, Japanese 79 per cent, Nepalese 81 per cent, Malaysians and Indians 83 per cent, Thais 84 per cent and Filipinos 87 per cent. Some of these results are surprising, since air pollution is prevalent in many areas of these countries. Perhaps enough people were surveyed in their cleaner regions to lift the overall satisfaction levels.
Our air quality is much worse than Singapore's but better than that of many other cities in China. Although mainlanders say they are much more satisfied with their air than Hongkongers, it is not because their air quality is good. In reality, a large number of people suffer from air pollution on both sides of the border. Hongkongers are probably better informed about the air they breathe and know it is harmful. Perhaps this is still less appreciated on the mainland, where extensive air pollution data is not always available. In Hong Kong, we are blessed with scientists, academics, medical experts and civic groups who do independent work funded by a variety of sources. The local media reports frequently on environmental issues, and the international media has made Hong Kong's pollution a subject of their attention. Hong Kong's air quality is reported all over the world because this is an extremely wealthy, international city - such pollution is an anomaly. With the level of wealth Hong Kong has achieved, there are some aspects of its air emissions that are hard to understand.
For example, it makes no sense that Hong Kong still has a highly polluting fleet of diesel vehicles. The key culprits are commercial trucks and franchised and non-franchised buses, such as tourist and school buses. The government has long acknowledged this state of affairs: in 1999, the chief executive pledged to cut particulates from the vehicular fleet by 60 per cent by 2003 and 80 per cent by 2005. Nitrogen oxides, another pollutant, were to be cut by 30 per cent by 2005. The government also introduced various measures for diesel vehicles, such as replacing diesel in taxis with cleaner liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and installing particulate traps or catalytic converters in the oldest, pre-Euro-standard diesel vehicles. Stronger actions would be taken against smoky vehicles, and pedestrian zones expanded. Yet Hong Kong's roadside pollution remains in bad shape. The South China Morning Post reported on April 30 that annual average concentrations of nitrogen dioxide in roadside readings in Causeway Bay, Central and Mong Kok had all risen by 13 per cent - the worst levels in at least five years.
Who can give an account of the results of the 1999 initiatives? The government spent several billion dollars subsidising the conversion of diesel taxis to cleaner LPG, but are these taxis operating optimally? Have their emissions been measured? How about the large diesel trucks and buses with particulate traps or catalytic converters? No detailed reports have been issued on how well they are working. Legislators passed a motion on Wednesday demanding a string of government action. They should question whether data on past initiatives is available and if not, why not? Data probably exists, but perhaps transport officials prefer not to reveal it. Our roadside pollution indicates these schemes are not working well. Since then, more subsidy schemes have been put in place for trucks, and there are now talks about installing traps and converters once more. But can we see the data from past efforts first, so we know why previous schemes haven't worked?
No wonder so many people here are dissatisfied. Singapore has cleaned up its roadside pollution more effectively.