Hong Kong's own toxic time bomb
Is Hong Kong prepared for a chemical spill similar to the one that happened in Jilin on November 13? An explosion at a chemical plant in the city left the Songhua River - the main water source for the major downstream city of Harbin - polluted with the toxic, flammable liquid, benzene.
This is no hypothetical question, because Hong Kong is situated downstream from the southern mainland's biggest petrochemical plant, which is scheduled to start operation next month. A joint-venture investment between the China National Offshore Oil Corporation and the global oil giant Shell, the petrochemical plant is located on the north coast of Daya Bay in Huizhou county, Guangdong, 80km northeast of Hong Kong.
Environmentalists had described the Huizhou plant as a 'chain' time bomb, because it is located near the Daya Bay nuclear-power plant, which is expanding to meet southern China's energy thirst. By 2020, Guangdong plans to build four more nuclear plants in the region.
The Jilin chemical blast brought back dark memories of the 1980s for many Hongkongers who were haunted by the likelihood of a nuclear accident at the Daya Bay nuclear plant, which was to be built just across the border. More than 1 million signatures were collected to register public objections to the construction, but the protest failed.
Subsequent safety incidents did not help to ease public anxieties. These included the omission of reinforcing bars from the first layer of concrete foundation, the misplacement of ignition rods, and human negligence in annual maintenance inspections.
With better technology, improved detection systems and emergency signals, the chances could have improved of getting an early warning about an accident or disaster. But the greatest threat to public safety is human error and cover-ups. The most worrying area is not the physical existence of a potential time bomb; rather, it is the failure to uphold the principles of precautionary planning and risk-avoidance.
While the Shell plant was being planned, Hong Kong was not officially consulted about the environmental impact it might have. The questions that Friends of the Earth raised in 2000 and 2002 with Shell - a foreign direct investor in the joint venture - was the wisdom and the risk of locating a petrochemical plant so close to a nuclear facility. The company's attempt to play down the risk was not convincing. And the Hong Kong government did little to defend our rights to know and to be consulted.
The government still owes the public a briefing to update us on many aspects of the plant: its early warning signals, our access to monitoring data, emissions limits, the chemical stockpile inventory, evacuation arrangements and contingency plans.
There should also be more transparency about what notification we will get of any future nuclear or chemical accidents that take place in the Pearl River Delta.
Hong Kong should insist on independent, regular monitoring of air, water and waste emissions at the petrochemical plant - similar to the standard radioactive monitoring done at the Daya Bay nuclear facility.
We should also conduct routine drills to test the early warning signals and contingency plans, to improve our preparedness to deal with chemical spills and nuclear accidents in the delta region.
Nuclear and chemical accidents are more deadly than the bird flu that the world is trying to contain. It is perhaps time for regional reflection on how big a price we are paying for unsustainable economic growth. Regional solidarity is the best defence against environmental threats.
Mei Ng Fong Siu-mei is director of Friends of the Earth (HK)
