The debate over a third runway at Hong Kong's airport is heating up again, but it is a debate in name only. In reality, the outcome is a foregone conclusion with only minor tweaks, such as the date to begin construction, yet to be worked out. The "debate" has mostly been between the pro-business forces and the dolphin lovers. While experts argue about whether local dolphins can withstand yet another encroachment on their habitat, somehow the affordability of a third runway, said to cost HK$136 billion, has been shuffled aside. Nevertheless, when figures in the hundreds of billions are thrown around, it will take more than a few dozen dolphins to stop the new runway juggernaut. Lost in this debate, however, is another environmental matter that gets little attention, namely, the assumption that unbridled economic growth is unassailable. A few numbers will help in understanding the broader implications. At the present rate of growth - about 20,000 more take-offs and landings with each passing year - current projections show the airport under its two-runway system reaching capacity in about five years. Assuming it takes about 10 years to build the third runway, full operations will not start much before 2025. However, at that stage, given the present rate of growth, plans for a fourth runway would need to be quickly put in place because public discussion coupled with construction need about 15 years. That would take us well into the 2030s, by which time the major debate would not be about dolphins - which, by this time, will be long gone - but about the lack of sea space for landfill, and noise levels in Tuen Mun. In essence, it is not unrealistic to foresee the waters between Chek Lap Kok and Tuen Mun being fully converted to runways half a century from now. The absurdity of this projection should be clear. Unrestrained growth is not sustainable. Yet society as a whole blindly adheres to a belief that economic growth is not only good, but essential for our well-being. This mindset misses the forest for the trees. The "trees" here are the dolphins, and the "forest" is our precious earth. The dolphins, in this case, are actually red herrings. I ask for forgiveness from the dolphin lovers here when I say they are playing into the hands of the larger forces that sidetrack us from the real environmental issue. Once assurances are found from marine experts that the dolphins will be safe, the public will be told that the environmental issue has been settled. The big-picture environmental costs that airport expansion contributes towards - that is, climate change - will scarcely be mentioned. Alternatives to the third runway do exist. The low-hanging fruit, such as reducing time between aircraft movements and collaborating with regional airports, would buy some time. The high-hanging fruit - to rethink our whole model based on economic growth - is never even considered. In the end, this short-term thinking is a reflection of the lamentably short time we all spend on this planet. While we have the cognitive capacity to envision the difficulties we are now creating for our descendants, we still mindlessly ignore the long-term view. Economic growth is like a fix for the addict and we are all complicit junkies. Paul Stapleton is an associate professor at the Hong Kong Institute of Education
