Q Are landfills the best way to dispose of Hong Kong's waste? I have often wondered why a territory with a standard of living comparable to that of many developed countries is still depending on landfill for disposal of most of its household waste. The key to successful recycling is separation at the source. Newspapers and magazines, cans, plastic, glass and organic waste are all easily recycled if they can be collected separately. Are Hong Kong's housewives (or husbands) so lacking in civic consciousness or environmental awareness that they would refuse to separate their garbage if suitable and convenient facilities were provided? I think not - especially if an education campaign was backed up by fines for non-compliance. Recycling in Hong Kong may not be a viable activity due to high land, labour and transportation costs - unless the government is willing to support the industry when market prices are depressed, which would certainly be better than investing in landfill sites. However, across the border, there are hundreds of factories engaged in recycling paper, plastic and metal that pay good money to import waste materials from Europe, America, Japan etc (mostly via Hong Kong) because the collection system in China itself is under-developed and cannot meet the demand for these materials. I would be interested to hear the Environmental Protection Department explain why it is so difficult to organise a waste separation system in Hong Kong, not just here and there on a trial basis, but for every building and every household in the territory. Surely, this is preferable to landfill? M. Parker, Yuen Long According to the hierarchy of waste management, landfills are definitely not the best way to dispose of Hong Kong's waste. In the waste hierarchy, first preference shall be given to waste prevention, then to waste recovery (including recycling, as well as energy recovery), and lastly, to waste disposal (including landfill). Landfill is solely a means of waste disposal, which is less efficient if compared with other options that could achieve waste recovery, such as waste-to-energy incineration and waste-to-material composting. Environmentally, landfill is also less friendly when compared with other waste management options. According to research by the National Society for Clean Air and Environmental Protection in June last year, emissions of methane, a pollutant with the greatest potential to cause the greenhouse effect, are highest from landfill among other waste disposal methods. Emissions of dioxin, a rising concern among the public, derived from landfills also showed a higher level than for other waste disposal options, including incineration. In Europe, the EU Landfill Directive has imposed a total ban on disposing materials with a content of total organic carbon of more than 5 per cent at landfill sites from 2005. It is obvious that landfill is not a sustainable option for waste management if we solely count on this. On one hand, no city - even those in Europe with large areas of land at their disposal - can endlessly provide land space to accommodate increasing amounts of municipal solid waste, which is exactly the problem facing Hong Kong. On the other hand, landfill disposal fails to realise the mission of maximising resource utilisation by material and energy recovery. Therefore, the Hong Kong government should think carefully on its strategy of waste management in terms of sustainable development. We need an integrated solution, including recycling, reduction, sorting at source, landfill, incineration and any other methods. We have to keep an open mind to new waste management technology rather than solely depending on the conventional practice of landfill. Vivian Kwok, Tuen Mun Landfills are only a temporary, short-term and short-sighted method of waste disposal. What if one day all waste-dumping sites become full and there is no space for further landfills? The best and most effective way to dispose of Hong Kong's waste is undoubtedly education. Reducing the demand for waste-dumping sites would not only save billions for taxpayers, but would also be environmentally friendly. Using both sides of paper and bringing our own bags when shopping are simple things that we all know we can do to help the situation, but seldom carry out. Recycling is a proven effective way to reduce waste. Separation of recyclable waste is already being practised in some housing estates and the result is quite satisfactory. However, the government is not doing its job properly - that is, promotion. Its responsibility is not simply to spend money doing stupid studies and find that there is still space to fill with waste. To conclude, the government should no longer hide the drawbacks of waste-dumping sites. Please be more environmentally friendly and more far-sighted. Joyce Chan Chung-yan, Tsuen Wan On other matters... When are the two local terrestrial TV stations going to realise they will never make money or increase their audiences until they provide a decent product. In the rest of the world, the lead up to Christmas and New Year is when TV stations pack schedules with specials and new films. Well, not here. We were treated to a series of re-runs and rubbish. If my family wanted to watch endless repeats of animal, cooking or fashion programmes, I would subscribe to Cable. However, the two terrestrial stations have taken it upon themselves to bore us to tears with programmes for the minority. We want to be entertained rather than bored. Name and address supplied
