• Fri
  • Oct 31, 2014
  • Updated: 11:34pm
NewsHong Kong

Pay-as-you-throw rubbish scheme could cost Hong Kong households HK$44 a month

Committee considering pay-as-you-throw charging scheme favours price of 15 to 39 cents per kg. Green groups believe it should be more

PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 05 August, 2014, 4:29am
UPDATED : Tuesday, 05 August, 2014, 4:51pm

A typical household should pay a maximum of HK$44 per month to dispose of waste when pay-as-you-throw charging is introduced, a Council for Sustainable Development subcommittee has recommended.

The subcommittee also favoured introducing solid waste charges on a blanket basis for both residents and businesses, but wanted charges to be "consistent". And there should be no exemptions to the charge, even for the needy.

The government-appointed council was tasked with gauging public views and coming up with a model for waste charging, which green activists see as the best way to encourage recycling and cut the level of waste going to the city's bursting landfills. Charging is to be introduced by 2016 at the earliest.

The recommendations were made after a behind-closed-doors meeting of the council's strategy group and its support group on charging yesterday. The views must be endorsed by the full council before it reports to the Environment Bureau.

Members in attendance said the general view was that charges should be between HK$30 and HK$44 per month for a three-person household. Based on an average of 1.27kg of waste produced per person, as established in a 2011 study, that would mean charging 25 to 39 cents per kg.

The range was supported by more than half of the 5,000 people who filled in questionnaires during a recent consultation.

About 19 per cent wanted charges of between HK$45 and HK$59 per month. Eight per cent chose HK$60 to HK$74 while 4.6 per cent favoured a figure between 10 cents and HK$29.

Green activists say a charge too low will be ineffective. But council chairman Bernard Chan has previously expressed concern that too high a charge will lead to fly-tipping.

Members rejected the idea of exemptions for underprivileged groups, saying charities and NGOs could help them.

For businesses, a level of HK$500 per 1,000kg was supported by most members.

Support group member Hahn Chu Hon-keung, an environmentalist, questioned whether the suggested level was enough.

"Is it really enough for us to realise the 2022 waste reduction target?" Chu said, referring to the government's goal of reducing per capita waste generation by 40 per cent in the next eight years.

He said the as-yet unanswered question of how charging would operate would also have an effect. The council has been accused of favouring charging by weight based on buildings, rather than individual households, though council chiefs insist no decision been taken.

Fellow member Simon Wong Ka-wo, of the Federation of Restaurants and Related Trades, favoured a charge closer to the lower end of the range. "A bump-free introduction is very important for the charging to succeed, and a lower level could make this happen," he said.

Chan has argued that the most appropriate approach would be to have stiff penalties for fly-tipping but a reasonable waste charge.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

see what can happen when the EU Environment Commissioner actually does something positive, unlike here
"commitment of the Commission to phase out landfilling and burning of recyclable waste by 2020"
"Jumping from recycling rates of 20% to 80% in a short period of time is perfectly possible when there is the political will and the implication of the citizens. This is what the experience from Capannori, first Zero Waste town in Europe, and the province of Gipuzkoa proved with concrete practical zero waste experiences"
Must be a way to streamline waste disposal. I thought Ecopark was in existence for some time. Still don't feel like it exists. If you don't know about it, theres a dump in Tuen Mun where they're trying to attract recycling industries. Ideally suited at the mouth of the pearl river delta. Maybe they could fish out all the trash they dump on that river.
Collecting cost is still considered high when no one in the city has the urge or incentive to separate the 'valuables' out from the trash. Now, by 2016 when the charging scheme starts rolling out, the recycle industry may find collecting already sorted or separated valuable materials much more abundant than in the past. Business becomes more viable and it will start attracting more investment.
P.S. proper waste separation and recycling would eliminate the need for the toxic incinerator which is yet another crooked, pork barrel sceme.
More proof, if any were needed, of the total lack of imagination and incompetence of Environment Bureau. This puts the cart before the horse. The public will not support a punitive scheme which will only encourage widespread cheating and increased fly tipping.
Far better solutions would follow the example of progressive municipalities abroad which impose separation at source for food waste and recyclables, i.e. a Govt collection scheme for recyclables and a Green Bin system for food waste.
The recycle bins we have have now are a joke and a con. The contents are not recycled at all, but all are tipped into landfills.
Who will the waste charge benefit? Wait for the Govt. to name crony business interests who are lining up for the bonanza while the public get s c r e w e d over - again.
Agree to your observation that the recycling bins installed on the streets or even those placed within the private estates are sort of decoration feel (personal impression).
Brilliant idea to reduce waste. People need to re-conceptualize waste and recycling as being activities with define, measurable, and immediate financial incentives and disincentives.
The emissions coupon system in Europe has already made it clear that the path forward in clean is through these types of payment schemes.
Stiff penalties are indeed needed but enforcement has to be proved actually in place.
Unacceptable, lest there's a corresponding cut from the Rates. With $3T in foreign reserve HKSAR wants to charge for trash, no way.
In addition to a corresponding cut from the Rates, credit should be given to the amount of recyclables collected to encourage recycling.




SCMP.com Account