Island of fear: massive reclamation off Lantau would be a disaster in age of climate change and sea-level rises
Lam Chiu Ying says even without considering the flooding risks of this proposition, the questionable population projection and mind-boggling costs of the construction alone should deter Hong Kong from making this unnecessary mistake
More importantly, two other questions must be answered. First, is an artificial island really the answer to Hong Kong’s housing woes?
The government has a duty to protect both lives and property. As a matter of due diligence, it must look far ahead into the future and thoroughly examine all possible scenarios that are potentially hazardous to life and detrimental to the asset value of properties. Any decision must not be rushed.
The idea of an artificial island between Hong Kong Island and Lantau has been floated for decades. It has been the pet subject of generations of engineers. Yet, nothing has happened so far for two simple reasons: there is no real need for it, and the government does not have the money for it.
Is there now a need for it? No.
The government’s proposal for such massive reclamation was premised on an unlikely population projection figure published in its Hong Kong 2030 Plus development blueprint. According to the government, Hong Kong, now a city of 7.3 million, should make itself ready for a population target of 9 million.
But where will these 9 million come from? Young couples today are not having as many babies as before. In fact, the latest official projection by the Census and Statistics Department is that the population will peak at 8.22 million in 2043, which is some 800,000 fewer than the 9 million cited in 2030 Plus blueprint.
As the proposed 1,000-hectare island is expected to house up to 700,000, straightforward logic dictates that even without the artificial island, there is still spare capacity for housing on land. Thus, the 1,000-hectare island is superfluous land supply. What more a 2,200-hectare island? Only faulty logic could justify this mammoth artificial island.
Some have argued that Hong Kong needs a land reserve, but this does not stand up to scrutiny since the population is projected to decline after 2043.
As significant cost overruns are now routine in Hong Kong, we are effectively looking at a likely price tag of HK$1 trillion for the artificial island proposed by Our Hong Kong Foundation. Hong Kong’s fiscal reserves stood at HK$1.1 trillion at the end of the 2017/18 financial year. If we go ahead with the project, we should be worried that all our reserves will be channelled into a single engineering project. At the least, we should be worried that resources that should be spent on education, health and social welfare would instead be used on building on an unneeded island.
I am meteorologist by training, so an issue close to my heart is the plight of island-states facing the prospect of sea-level rise driven by global warming. Some of these islands are even considering abandoning their homeland. Building an artificial island now to house a big population is to ignore the inevitable and deleterious threats posed by climate change.
A comprehensive assessment of the climate risk must precede any detailed planning for the proposed artificial island. Otherwise, we would be putting a million people in harm’s way. We would also be risking the asset value in people’s properties should sea flooding occur so frequently that the island becomes uninhabitable.
To go for a gigantic artificial island facing the open sea in a warming world is an unequivocally disastrous move.
Lam Chiu Ying is an adjunct professor in the Geography and Resource Management Department at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, and an honorary fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society