Clear The Air Energy Blog Rotating Header Image

Organizations

Imports Of Nuclear Power Opposed By Green Groups

Cheung Chi-fai, SCMP – Sep 15, 2008

Environmental activists have opposed further imports of nuclear-generated electricity from across the border under a new energy agreement with the mainland, though a power supplier has hinted it might expand imports.

The activists maintain that nuclear energy is an unsustainable and unsafe option for meeting rising energy demand, though it is increasingly being revisited as an alternative to ease global warming without compromising energy security.

The remarks came after Hong Kong and the central government sealed a deal last month to extend natural gas supplies to the city and ensure a continuous import of nuclear power – at a level no less than the current flow – from the Daya Bay nuclear station.

Hong Kong has been consuming nuclear power since 1994 under a purchase agreement between CLP Power (SEHK: 0002) and Guangdong Nuclear Power Joint Venture Company, in which CLP had a 25 per cent stake through Hong Kong Nuclear Power Investment.

The agreement allows CLP to import up to 70 per cent of Daya Bay’s output.

In each of the past five years, CLP has imported between 4,700 and 5,100 gigawatt-hours at a price of about 50 cents per kilowatt.

Nuclear power and natural gas each account for about 20 per cent of Hong Kong’s total electricity supply, and 60 per cent comes from coal.

While Hong Kong imports nuclear power from Guangdong, CLP exports electricity to the province. In last year’s annual report, CLP said it wanted both to extend and expand the nuclear-import arrangement.

Edward Chan Yue-fai, a Greenpeace campaign manager, said Hong Kong would be taking the wrong approach towards clean energy by importing more nuclear power.

“We have strong reservations about expanding imports, as nuclear energy is neither safe nor sustainable,” Mr Chan said, citing nuclear plant incidents in Japan that jeopardised the safety of plant staff and nearby residents.

“It is too bad that the energy deal with the mainland did not include any renewable energy imports, like wind power. It is renewable energy we should expand, not nuclear.”

Hahn Chu Hon-keung, environmental affairs manager of Friends of the Earth, said the group was inclined not to support further imports, citing concerns about the disposal of nuclear waste and further efforts to conserve energy.

“We can’t just resolve one problem by creating another,” he said. “Instead of expanding our energy supply, we should consider managing our energy demand through conservation and efficiency.”

Besides, Mr Chu said, further imports might also be undesirable since the mainland still had a shortage of power.

A CLP spokeswoman said it was too early to tell if the company was going to increase imports of nuclear power. “We will further discuss arrangements on generation with the government and continue to explore opportunities to participate in nuclear energy in China.”

The company noted that the Daya Bay station operated in line with international safety standards, with no major incidents reported since commercial operations began in 1994.

Use Of Natural Gas Must Balance Reliance On Fossil Fuels

Green group says use of natural gas must balance reliance on fossil fuels

Ng Kang-chung – Updated on Sep 12, 2008

Green groups have urged CLP Power to continue investing in renewable energy in Hong Kong and want rules imposed that would require natural gas to account for at least half of the fuel mix for power generation.

Friends of the Earth environmental affairs officer Angus Wong Chun-yin described CLP Power’s decision to drop its plans for a liquefied natural gas terminal on South Soko Island as “natural and sensible”.

“Now the Chinese government has promised a stable supply of natural gas. There is no need for CLP to continue the Soko Islands project,” said Mr Wong, referring to a power supply deal struck last month between Hong Kong and Beijing.

He added: “Dropping the Soko Islands project should not be the end of the story. The Hong Kong government should press harder to require power companies to use more natural gas to generate power.”

At present, coal accounts for about 60 per cent of CLP Power’s fuel mix, with natural gas and nuclear power at 20 per cent each.

Coal burned by power plants has been blamed as a major source of air pollution in Hong Kong. Carbon dioxide emissions could be reduced by half and sulfur dioxide by more than 90 per cent if liquefied natural gas was used to generate power, environmental officials said.

Mr Wong said the fuel mix should be set at 50 per cent natural gas.

Green Sense chairman Roy Tam Hoi-pong offered similar views.

“Dropping the Soko Islands plan means more than reducing the need to raise power fees. The government should look at it from an air quality viewpoint and ask CLP to develop renewable energy, say, wind energy.”

Using more natural gas might still push tariffs up because of higher costs, but Mr Wong and Mr Tam said social benefits could offset the costs.

Hong Kong and Beijing struck an energy agreement last month under which state-owned supplier China National Offshore Oil Corporation will continue to supply Hong Kong with natural gas for another 20 years.

Hong Kong will also receive gas from the country’s second west-east pipeline, which is being built to transport gas from Central Asia to the Pearl and Yangtze River Delta regions.

The pipeline is expected to reach Shenzhen in about five years. Hong Kong officials have estimated the city would receive about 1 billion cubic metres of gas a year from this source.

HK Gas Terminal On Hold In Green Move

Robin Kwong in Hong Kong, The Financial Times Limited – August 28 2008

The Hong Kong government has backed away from approving a controversial natural gas terminal in an ecologically sensitive area, in what is seen as its first serious attempt to tackle air pollution in the territory in recent years.

China Light and Power, Hong Kong’s biggest energy company, has long argued that it needed to build an HK$8bn ($1bn) liquid natural gas receiving terminal to ensure a stable future gas supply for the territory.

Having more natural gas was also a prerequisite for improving Hong Kong’s air quality, according to CLP, which said it now had to burn more coal to conserve its dwindling gas supplies.

However, environmental activists claim that the terminal, which CLP proposed to build on two small islands on the edge of Hong Kong’s territorial waters, will endanger marine life, particularly the rare pink dolphins and finless porpoises that are Hong Kong’s only indigenous marine mammals.

Edward Yau, environment secretary, said on Thursday that the need for the terminal was greatly reduced after Hong Kong signed a series of energy deals with Beijing that will ensure a stable supply of gas to the territory for the next 20 years.

Under the agreement, the state-controlled China National Offshore Oil Corporation will renew its supply agreement to Hong Kong for another 20 years, and Petro­china will still study the feasibility of supplying gas to Hong Kong from central Asia via pipeline as well as an LNG terminal that Petro­china is planning to build in neighbouring Shenzhen economic zone.

A senior government official, who preferred to remain anonymous, said the government expected that, with this agreement in place, CLP would increase its use of natural gas from a third of its fuel mix to half, thus improving Hong Kong’s air quality. CLP is the biggest polluter within Hong Kong, though the territory also suffers from pollution generated by factories across the border.

Andrew Brandler, chief executive of CLP, said he welcomed the agreement, but the new supply will only “partly fill the gas shortage being faced by us”.

“Imports of LNG will still be needed to meet our full requirements as our need for clean natural gas continues to grow,” Mr Brandler said.

While the new gas supply is still subject to CLP reaching a commercial agreement with CNOOC and Petrochina, the senior official said it was “an obvious choice” over CLP building its own terminal within Hong Kong.

The lack of government support for a Hong Kong terminal also calls into question a 20-year gas supply deal that CLP had initially agreed on with BG Group, the UK gas company, in June. CLP declined to comment on the impact the latest developments would have for the BG deal.

Candidates Want Tough Controls Over Power Plant Emissions

Cheung Chi-fai – Updated on Aug 28, 2008 – SCMP

A large majority of the would-be legislators who responded to a Greenpeace survey said they would seek tougher controls on power plant emissions of greenhouse gases if elected.

The poll, conducted by the environmental group this month, also showed that all candidates described the government’s performance in addressing climate change as no more than fair.

Seventy-one of the 111 candidates and slates of candidates responded to a questionnaire distributed by the group. Of these, 42 were from geographical constituencies and 29 from functional constituencies. Most candidates for the geographical constituencies were grouped into lists.

Nearly all of the respondents said they were concerned about the effect of climate change in Hong Kong, in particular in the areas of public health, ecology and weather.

However, Kwok Ka-ki, incumbent lawmaker for the medical constituency, and the candidates on the Kowloon West list led by Lau Yuk-shing said it was not urgent that the government address climate change.

Fifty-nine of the 71 respondents pointed out that the biggest source of greenhouse gases was the electricity-generating sector, and the same number demanded that the government regulate power plants’ carbon emissions. They said they saw the task as a top priority.

Last month, legislators failed to press environment officials to include carbon dioxide as one of the statutory regulated air pollutants in an amended law to tighten control of emissions affecting air quality.

Half the respondents pledged to seek legally binding targets for reducing emissions of greenhouse gases.

Prentice Koo Wai-muk, a Greenpeace campaigner, said the poll results showed there was a strong consensus among the candidates on climate-change issues regardless of what type of constituency they were contesting.

He said it was the responsibility of the voters to understand what their choice of candidate meant in terms of addressing climate change.

“Different candidates might have different areas of priority concerns. So we will not sanction any candidates,” he said.

Choy So-yuk, incumbent Hong Kong Island candidate for the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong, said her party had decided not to answer Greenpeace’s poll because members had replied to another green group’s call for pledges on environmental protection, including climate change. She said the DAB supported regulating power plants’ carbon emissions.

China Passes U.S., Leads World in Power Sector Carbon Emissions – CGD

August 27, 2008 – the Carbon Monitoring for Action (CARMA) database

For press inquiries please contact Ben Edwards

WASHINGTON: China set a new world record this year, surpassing the United States as the world’s biggest emitter of CO2 from power generation, according to new data from the Center for Global Development (CGD). But on a per capita basis, U.S. power-sector emissions are still nearly four times those of China.

The data, from the first annual update of CGD’s Carbon Monitoring for Action (CARMA) database, show that China accounts for more than half of the increase in global CO2 emissions due to power generation over the past year, mostly due to a surge in construction of new coal-fired plants (*This number was revised on 8/28/08*).

According to the new CARMA data released today, Chinese power plants will produce about 3.1 billion tons of CO2 this year, up from about 2.7 billion tons in 2007(*This number was revised on 8/28/08*). Power plants in the U.S will produce about 2.8 billion tons of CO2 this year, about the same as last year. If all power plants currently planned in China and the U.S. are eventually built, China’s power-related emissions will exceed those of the U.S. by 40 percent, although on a per capita basis the U.S. would still be the far-and-away the larger polluter from power production. The U.S. emits much more than China from transportation, in both absolute and per capita terms, because of the heavy reliance on cars.

Globally power generation accounts for more than a quarter of all emissions of CO2, the main greenhouse gas causing climate change, and the proportion is rising quickly.

CARMA data show that global emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) from power generation have grown more than 34 percent in the past eight years, to 11.4 billion tons per year from 8.5 billion tons in 2000, notwithstanding some improvements in efficiency and slowly growing reliance on renewable energy. Two-thirds of the increase since 2000 is attributable to a surge in emissions from China.

“The new data show that emissions from power generation are racing in the wrong direction,” says CGD Senior Fellow David Wheeler. “We urgently need to cut power-related CO2 emissions and to very rapidly bring down the price of proven, zero-carbon renewable power sources, such as wind and solar.”

The new data are cause for serious concern, including for China itself and for other developing countries. Climate scientists warn that the amount of CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere must be quickly stabilized to avert climate catastrophe, which will hit first and worst in the developing world, with declining agricultural productivity, droughts, floods, and rapid sea level rise hitting densely populated, low-lying regions.

The additional 2.9 billion tons of power-related CO2 emissions per year since 2000 is equivalent to the annual carbon emissions of Australia, France, Germany, Italy, and Spain combined.

The world’s top-ten power sector emitters in absolute terms are China, the United States, India, Russia, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, Australia, South Africa, and South Korea. If the 27 member states of the European Union are counted as a single country, the E.U. would rank as the third biggest CO2 polluter, after China and the United States.

In per capita terms, emissions from the U.S. power sector are the second highest in the world. Americans’ electricity usage produces about 9.5 tons of CO2 per person per year, compared to 2.4 tons per person per year in China, 0.6 in India, and 0.1 in Brazil. Average per capita emissions from electricity and heat production in the EU is 3.3 tons per year. Only Australia, at greater than 10 tons per year, emits more power-related emissions per person than the U.S. In many developing countries, per capita power consumption is extremely low, and millions of people lack access to electricity at all.

In one of the few encouraging findings, the CARMA data reveal that carbon intensity—the amount of carbon emitted per unit of power produced—shows signs of declining in some major countries, including China, India, Russia, and South Africa. But the decline is not nearly fast enough to offset the rapid growth in power consumption.

“Higher fuel prices lead power companies to improve the efficiency of fossil-fueled plants whenever possible. But those measures are inherently modest and total global emissions continue to grow rapidly,” said CGD researcher Kevin Ummel, who manages the CARMA database. “The needed shift to renewable and low-carbon alternatives is happening far too slowly to avert dangerous climate change.”

Carbon intensity has declined in Europe since 2000—from 965 to 941 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour of electricity—but is actually projected to rise in the future to 983. The U.S. shows a similar pattern, with carbon intensity declining slightly early in this decade and now beginning to rise again. “Europe’s projected increase in carbon intensity is disconcerting and reflects a growing reliance on coal as oil and natural gas prices rise,” said Wheeler. “Given Europe’s past leadership in renewable technologies, this move back to coal is a serious blemish on an otherwise encouraging record.”

CARMA provides the estimated CO2 emissions of more than 50,000 power plants worldwide, based on publically disclosed emissions data and a model utilizing plant-specific fuel types and technologies. The CARMA website shows ranked lists of plant-level emissions globally as well as for countries, states, provinces, and cities. For the U.S., CARMA includes additional data for counties, metro-areas, and congressional districts. The database also includes information on the corporate ownership of plants. Since the data-intensive site was launched last November more than 300,000 visitors have explored and downloaded the data at www.CARMA.org.

The company data is important to investors, because power companies that utilize low-carbon technologies—like hydropower, nuclear, wind, and solar—face fewer potential climate-related liabilities, such as carbon charges under future regulation. CARMA makes it easy to find these companies: large power producers with low-carbon intensity earn a large Green icon, while large power producers with high CO2 intensity earn a large Red icon.

The Dirty Get Bigger
The top-ten power companies in the world in terms of power sector emissions include five in China, two in the U.S., one in India, one in South Africa, and one in Germany. The world’s biggest corporate carbon emitter is China’s Huaneng Power International, whose plants pump out about 285 million tons of CO2 per year, far more than the 227 million tons produced by all of the power plants in the United Kingdom combined and almost as much as the entire continent of Africa (335 million tons).

The United States’ biggest CO2 emitter is Southern Co. with annual emissions over 200 million tons, followed by American Electric Power Company Inc. at 175 million tons, and Duke Energy Corp. at 112 million tons.

According to Ummel, “A number of power companies have expressed desire for national policies to limit emissions and promote alternative energy,” he said. “But without financial incentives for big emitters to change their behavior, they continue operating and building carbon-intensive plants – and Earth’s climate moves closer to the breaking point.”

CGD president Nancy Birdsall says that the new CARMA data highlights the urgency and importance of reaching an international agreement that provides resources and technical support for poor countries to grow economically and reduce poverty, while also stabilizing and eventually reducing emissions.

“The rich countries created this problem and will have to take the lead in solving it. But the rapid growth in developing country power sector emissions reminds us that we won’t be able to avert rapid climate change, and the harm it will cause to the world’s poorest people, without also finding a way to enable poor countries to both grow and cut emissions,” Birdsall said. “Like it or not, we are all in this together and currently we are headed in the wrong direction.”

Shedding Light On A Hot Topic

A night tour of Nathan Road discovers the array of flashing neon is not as cool as it might appear.

Yau Chui-yan – Updated on Jul 20, 2008 – SCMP

Twenty people gather in Nathan Road and look up at the same flashing advertising sign for a minute.

The 20, all from different professions, none of whom know each other, have joined a “Nathan Road tour” with the same purpose – to see the world famous thoroughfare’s dazzling array of neon signs.

They are trying to count the flickering frequency of a four-storey advertising sign. Some estimate that the sign is flickering 10 times a minute, others 20 times, but most give up early because the sign is too bright to look at for a whole 60 seconds.

When told that the flickering frequency is 40 times a minute, the group is amazed. “How do you live next to a flickering light like this?” is the common response.

The first stop on the tour is St Andrew’s church on Nathan Road in Tsim Sha Tsui. The group stands next to the church, which is dimly lit. They are told that there are regulations governing the lighting used on important buildings in countries like Britain.

“There are stars, in Tsim Sha tsui,” one group member says in amazement pointing at the sky. “The weather is much cooler than we expect,” another says.

But after leaving the church area, there are no more stars to be seen, just the flashing advertising signs.

The first blow is a big advertising box located at the intersection of Nathan and Austin roads.

“The lighting of the advertising box made me feel so hot,” says Leung Pak-wai, a social work student. His friend Cheung Siu-shan, a geography student, agrees.

According to Elsie Yuen Oi-chi, the group’s escort from Friends of the Earth, the difference in temperature between the city and rural areas is 10 to 12 degrees Celsius. “These advertisements contribute to the temperature,” Ms Yuen says. “When 1 watt of electricity is consumed, 1.3 watts will be consumed to use an air conditioner to lower the temperature.”

Light pollution and energy wastage from flashing advertising signs is not a new topic in Hong Kong. The situation has become serious since Kai Tak airport closed in 1998 and restrictions on blinking lights were relaxed.

From January last year to June this year, the Environmental Protection Department received 67 complaints about external lighting. The department’s response is to advise the management firm or owners of the lighting to reduce the intensity or adjust the angle of spot lamps to minimise the impact on nearby residents.

The government also issued letters last September to chambers of commerce and trade associations appealing for their support in reducing unnecessary lighting and using more energy-efficient lights.

However, what is still missing is legislation directed at light pollution.

Friends of the Earth tried to highlight the problem last month with its “dim light” campaign, in which some building owners agreed to turn off their lights for one night.

James To Kun-sun, a Democrat lawmaker representing Kowloon West, has had complaints from people living in the district.

“There is no such legislation and affected people have no way to ask for help,” Mr To says.

“Also, in some cases, the main tenant, who owns the rights to the outer area of the building, will pay some of the affected residents as compensation. This also complicates the issue.”

He has tabled questions in the Legislative Council a few times, but his request for legislation on light pollution has not received a positive response from the government.

“I don’t understand,” he says. “The government didn’t even want to research this topic. Maybe the government thinks this is business operation and the number of people affected is small.”

Mr To may be right. To most people in the city, flashing lights are advertising and nothing more.

Cathy Yu Sin-ping used to be one of those people, but she changed her mind after inspecting the flashing light boxes close up.

“At first I felt this was remote and nothing to do with me,” says Ms Yu, who spends her daylight hours working as a clerk

“After this tour, I now understand the meaning of `those who have more power create more destruction’.”

Walking along Nathan Road, Ms Yu found it was most comfortable in Yau Ma Tei, because that is the section with the fewest advertising signs.

“It is much cooler,” she said.

The group agrees that the neon signs have a powerful advertising impact. However, they started to wonder at the wastage while looking at a blank advertising sign shining brightly.

“It is understandable that businessmen want to have better exposure by having an advertisement. But is there a need to switch on all the lights?” Ms Yu asks, while looking at a building in Mong Kok, which has about 70 lights shining brightly. When the tour gets moving again, there is discussion about Hong Kong’s well-worn image as the sparkling, brightly-lit Pearl of the Orient.

“I think that image is a construction, because there are lots of lights shining across the harbour,” says Mr Leung, the social work student, who plans to bring a friend on a Nathan Road tour.

“But I believe it is not necessary for this to be the image of Hong Kong. It can be something else. We have to think about it,” he adds, to general agreement.

Government Should Raise Energy-Saving Awareness

Updated on Jul 20, 2008 – SCMP

Neon lights and bright advertising signs are what give tourist districts such as Tsim Sha Tsui their distinct character. Visitors are dazzled by the lights. But understandably, many people who live in these places feel differently about the heat they generate and the light that shines into their homes at night. Light pollution is not comparable to air pollution in terms of the direct health risks it poses to the public. Nevertheless, it is increasingly commanding attention because of the serious nuisance it causes to residents.

It also has a direct link to air pollution and energy wastage. Government figures from last year show that between 1997 and 2004, total energy consumption jumped by 25 per cent even though our population only increased by 4.3 per cent during the period. Now, the government is handing out HK$3,600 to 2.4 million households to subsidise electricity bills. While this provides help to the needy, many families that will benefit are affluent and do not need the money. Furthermore, the exercise will spur people to use more electricity. People will feel freer to turn on lights and keep them on for longer – in short, more energy consumption, more burning of coal from our two power companies and, therefore, more pollution.

Green group Friends of the Earth has been calling attention to the problem of light pollution. This includes taking people on tours along Nathan Road to see for themselves the extent of the problem. This is a valuable public service because there is a need to educate people and raise awareness. With such efforts, there have also been calls for legislation. But the legislative route should only be pursued when there is an overwhelming public interest at stake. It is not clear this is the case. Businesses require signs to attract customers at night, and whether a sign is too bright is usually a subjective judgment. Nathan Road, in any case, would not be what it is without the cacophony of noise and light. The way forward should be for the government to step up campaigns to tell people and businesses not to be wasteful with excessive lights. It certainly has an educational responsibility to encourage the public to conserve energy after deciding to dole out its ill-advised electricity subsidy.

Hong Kong’s Nightly Neon Blaze

City needs more enlightened approach to nightly neon blaze

Updated on Jun 21, 2008 – SCMP

The brighter the lights in our city and the longer they shine, the hotter and dirtier it will become. Excessive use of lighting for shops, advertising billboards and building decorations is fast becoming the norm, creating a new kind of pollution, known as light pollution. This affects the view of the night sky; it wastes energy; adds more pollution to our atmosphere; and creates a light nuisance that affects the daily life of some residents.

According to government figures, our per capita average consumption of electricity on lighting alone increased by 10 per cent between 1997 and 2005, while the population increase for the same period was only 4.9 per cent. This points to the wasteful and exaggerated manner we now light the so-called Pearl of the Orient and, as a direct result, we are covering it with a layer of smog for most of the time.

Any evening stroll along either Nathan Road or in Causeway Bay, the busiest nighttime shopping areas in Hong Kong, will demonstrate this: extreme brightness of lighting for billboards, shops and building decorations – to the extent that some of them even shine throughout the entire night when most of us are sleeping. Readings at street level under some illuminated billboards are equivalent to a fine day, or three times as bright as Sha Tin Racecourse during evening races.

Currently with no legislation to prevent light pollution and light nuisance, if your bedroom is lit at night by an outdoor advertising spotlight, any complaint to the government will get you nothing but frustration.

Friends of the Earth (HK) recently launched the Dim it 6.21 Lights Out campaign, which aims to persuade each of us to conserve energy by taking small steps in the home or workplace. Switching off the lights in the city for an hour won’t achieve great savings, even with support involving 100 buildings and billboards. However, we want to spread a clear message to all sectors of the community that this city has been wasting a lot of energy.

There will be a Lights Out evening show at Chater Garden, Central, tonight, from 8pm, with various kinds of performance to promote the Lights Out theme. All are welcome.

Edwin Lau, director, Friends of the Earth

Nathan Road Tours To Expose Lighting Abuses

Green group says it will show visitors the wasteful use of garish signs by businesses

Cheung Chi-fai – SCMP – Updated on May 13, 2008

A green group is organising tours along bustling Nathan Road to expose what it says is the city’s abuse of, and obsession with, lighting.

The tours aim to challenge the common perception that the colourful neon signs and commercial lights are a sign of prosperity and affluence.

It is part of the group’s campaign against light pollution in Hong Kong.

A lights-out event will be held on June 21 and so far, 38 buildings, including iconic ones in Central, have agreed to join.

Organiser Friends of the Earth said the tours, starting on June 6, would target locals and visitors from the mainland and Taiwan. The group has written to the Travel Industry Council asking for co-operation.

Tour participants will be led to 10 spots along Nathan Road that the group says represent the city’s distorted lighting culture, which wastes energy and disturbs residents’ lives.

A survey by the group found 1,693 neon signs hanging from exterior walls and commercial displays using spotlighting along the 3.6km road from Tsim Sha Tsui to Boundary Street. Eleven sites had at least 20 spotlights, with one in Cheong Hing Plaza, Prince Edward, having 76. Some were near residences but remained switched on at 4am.

Some outlets selling luxury goods were lit up well after closing for the day, when there were no shoppers around.

The group said people on the free tours would see a jewellery retailer’s neon sign in Jordan that changed and flashed 21 times a minute, some blank advertisement boards lit by rows of spotlights, and overlapping neon signs fighting for shoppers’ attention in Mong Kok.

The green group’s environmental affairs manager, Hahn Chu Hon-keung, said Friends of the Earth was not totally against neon signs and commercial lighting, but there was room to minimise their impact on residents and the environment.

“These spotlights and flashing neon signs are proliferating, but there is a vacuum of rules governing them. This is a problem we cannot afford to ignore,” he said.

Edward Ng Yan-yung, a professor of architecture at Chinese University, said Hong Kong should consider enacting a master plan tailored to various land uses and limit the brightness of individual neon signs and commercial lighting.

He said overseas countries allowed only important landmarks such as government buildings or historic architecture to be lit with spotlights.

“We are definitely not against lighting,” Professor Ng said. “But it seems that we are about to enter a vicious cycle where people are competing against each other on the brightness level and the public is being forced to adapt to brighter and brighter lights.”

He said lights could still have a visual impact even if they were dimmed, as long as there was a contrast between light and dark.

Professor Ng warned that if the trend continued, Hong Kong would not just be over-lit, it would aggravate the urban heat-island effect.

Ad Signs Which Cause Light Pollution

Get tough on firms’ ad signs which cause light pollution

Updated on May 01, 2008 – SCMP

Friends of the Earth wants people to report light pollution (“Public urged to report cases of light pollution”, April 21).

Colleagues have complained for years about light pollution affecting their homes and their children’s studies. They resent having to pay high energy bills because they must keep their curtains drawn and cannot open their windows to natural ventilation.

They have not complained as this is futile. The response from the Environmental Protection Department is that there is no legislation controlling light pollution. This is why only 40 complaints about such pollution were lodged last year. If there was any chance of action being taken the complaints would be in their thousands.

Often the large advertising signs, which block rows of windows and beam bright lights into flats, are erected without authorisation; many exceed the maximum recommended footage. The Buildings Department only checks if the sign complies with its regulations and poses no danger to the public. It admits it does not have the manpower to check all signs. Large and intrusive advertising signs have taken over many neighbourhoods as companies are aware of the lack of regulation and know that they can brush off complaints.

The Hong Kong citizen’s right to quiet enjoyment of his own home is not being upheld and advertising signage should be subject to an environmental impact evaluation. Large signs close to residential blocks should be banned. Windows are an essential feature of most buildings to provide natural light and ventilation. Building regulations, I believe, prohibit the construction of rooms without windows except in particular cases. Large signs that cover windows should therefore be banned. Approved signage should be re-evaluated every five years or so as new residential blocks may have been recently erected nearby.

That Hong Kong people are forced to leave the homes they have slaved to purchase is a situation that should no longer be tolerated. Voters in the upcoming Legco elections should ensure that a promise to combat light and other forms of pollution is included in their candidates’ manifestos.

Martin Brinkley, Ma Wan