Letters | Extend support for smart food waste bins across Hong Kong

Feel strongly about these letters, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at letters@scmp.com or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words Two years ago, amid plans for a citywide waste-charging scheme, the Hong Kong government rolled out smart food waste recycling bins on private housing estates with two years of free maintenance and collection services. This practical step reduced the city’s food waste, which still accounts for around 30 per cent of municipal solid waste. Now, with the waste-charging scheme postponed, the free maintenance is expiring and some estates are considering returning the bins. This risks undoing the progress made. In 2024, Hong Kong recovered 104,800 tonnes of food waste, 33 per cent up from the previous year, as more estates were provided with smart bins. We urge the government to extend support for these bins and signal its commitment to sustainability, instead of coming across as sending mixed messages and discouraging green participation. Maintenance for the existing bins serving more than 350,000 households – one in eight in Hong Kong – comes to HK$1 to HK$2 monthly per household. This is small potatoes compared to the billions spent on an incinerator, and would be money well spent. Scrapping support for the bins is penny-wise but pound-foolish, given that food waste continues to dominate the waste sent to landfills. The government should explore cost-trimming that would not impact users, such as setting up more pre-treatment systems to turn waste into slurry, thereby cutting waste volume as well as the costs and emissions associated with transporting waste. Furthermore, while recycling is important, waste prevention at source is cheaper and more effective. In Hong Kong, food loss owing to overproduction or confusing labels may cost dearly. Yet Environmental Protection Department data is not sufficiently broken down into source or type to guide the community in coming up with targeted solutions. The department should analyse patterns: is disposed food near expiry, and do portions go untouched? Precise data would enable targeted fixes, such as incentives for donations, apps for portions and reforms to food labelling. The government ought to lead by extending support for food waste bins and prioritising analysis to cut food loss at the root. Steven Chan, assistant environmental affairs manager, The Green Earth Public hospitals should accept referrals from optometrists A recently reported case of a retina detachment patient with a private optometrist’s referral being declined prompts me to recall a survey conducted by the School of Optometry at Polytechnic University a few years ago. This survey was conducted on patients who were diagnosed at our clinic with ocular conditions that necessitated referral to the ophthalmology departments of the Hospital Authority (HA). In eight months, 721 letters were issued to patients; some of them were ocular emergencies including retinal tears and retinal detachment. Ultimately, 111 cases were accepted directly. Other patients sought treatment from private ophthalmologists, sought referral letters from their family doctors or visited HA accident and emergency departments. It was a pity that 11 patients decided not to take further action because of the trouble they had with HA. It was surprising that a few HA hospitals accepted our referrals directly in some cases. We did not disclose our findings because certain patients were directly accepted by HA. Informing HA about the acceptance of patients referred by optometrists may not be beneficial to patients. To be honest, whether our patients are accepted by HA should not depend on luck. Optometrists and government ophthalmologists collaborate very well in some developed countries. Optometrists in Australia have the authority to refer patients directly to government ophthalmologists. Government ophthalmologists in Canada take referrals from optometrists. I would recommend that HA re-evaluate their administrative procedures for optometrists’ referrals to their system. They should incorporate optometrists as primary eye care professionals into the Primary Care Directory as quickly as possible to facilitate a more thorough review. All in all, this would be to the benefit of people in Hong Kong. Professor Andrew K.C. Lam, School of Optometry, Hong Kong Polytechnic University Remember those we lost in the Tai Po fire More than two months after the tragic Tai Po fire, talk has rightly centred around the question of resettling the survivors. However, there has not been much mention, especially in official discussions, of those who perished and what will be done to ensure they will not be forgotten. They must be remembered for why and how they died. The “why” signifies acts that caused the fire and omissions that exacerbated the situation. The “how” signifies whether they died in executing duty or acting above and beyond the call of duty. Particular attention needs to be given to those domestic helpers who perished. As the intention does not seem to be to rebuild housing upon the site, a memorial garden featuring a pillar of honour could be built instead as a reminder of Hong Kong’s own everyday heroes and heroines. James A. Elms, Wan Chai

.css-sioo19{color:#c79a00;}Letters | Extend support for smart food waste bins across Hong Kong

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}Readers discuss the city’s food waste problem, optometrists’ referrals, and a memorial garden for those who died in the Tai Po fire

Letters | Extend support for smart food waste bins across Hong Kong

Readers discuss the city’s food waste problem, optometrists’ referrals, and a memorial garden for those who died in the Tai Po fire