Clear The Air Energy Blog Rotating Header Image

Environment questions for Undersecretary of the ENB remain uinanswered

3d human with a red question markClear the Air says:

This week we had the dust cloud from China sending our already high pollution levels off the scale.

An EPD spokesman on 22nd March stated that they had instructed the power companies to burn gas to try and alleviate the air quality. The statement was made by Mr Mok Wai Chuen, Assistant Director of Environmental Protection.

On 23rd March 2010 Mr James Middleton from Clear the Air’s Energy Committee called the Backchat program and asked why, if the EPD can direct CLP and HKEH to use gas this week, could the EPD not dictate to the power companies to use gas all the time instead of polluting coal. ‘Well, we do not have enough gas’ was Mr Mok’s reply.

Listen to the program here:

Look at our (unanswered) query to EPD below in October 2008.

From: James Middleton []
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 10:08 AM
To: ‘'; ‘’
Cc: ‘'; ‘'; ‘Mark Hunter'; ‘’
Subject: Environment questions for Undersecretary of the ENB

Dr. POON Kit, Kitty, JP

Under Secy for the Env

2594 6703

Dear Ms Poon

It seems your predecessors did little for HKG’s environment.

We agree we need to burn more gas. The numbers below showing CLP’s decline in gas use from 1999 are horrendous as is the massive increase in coal use.

So Ms Poon, where will the gas come from ? We need 6 billion m3 to produce 50% of what is now generated. More would be better so the additional product could be sold to Guangdong power net to reduce the use of high sulphur backup generators used over the border. Having an MOU is great ; we believe CLP is currently negotiating to take 80% of Daya Bay output instead of 70% but the gas supply will leave a void until the proposed pipeline supply and LNG terminal appear. That means more coal.

Please see our queries below that unfortunately were not read out today on Backchat.

We totally agree with Professor Hedley’s letter below. To use the recommended WHO non developed entry levels adopted in the Democratic Republic of Congo are hardly appropriate for Hong Kong and a sham. It should not even be considered as a starting level.

If this morning’s program had run for 3 hours we would have still been out of time as the emotive statements showed clearly that the people have had enough and Government should act now, not have a consultation as to whether another consultation on the proposed consultation is required.

People want action not words and a non N-A-T-O administration – No Action Talk Only.

Our major environment problem is summed up simply –

– locally burning coal with the ESP in the stacks incapable of catching the PM2.5 emissions unless they fit agglomerators – for the price of 17 days’ coal CLP could add a further 15 agglomerators at Castle Peak and catch the PM2.5. HK Electric is even dirtier than CLP.  Simply – enact a new PM2.5 AQO to at least USA standard if WHO standard is deemed currently beyond reach for whatever reason.  Once you make the AQO standard the power companies will comply. The technology is there. Only now are our local  power companies fitting FGD and NOx burners to meet the 2010 standards.

– local inefficient old diesels – well taxation should get the message across that they need to scrap these vehicle and replace them with at least Euro 4 machines.

Yes we can say we get pollution blown in from PRD for half the year but a vast amount of pollution is created locally and the cure is available.


James Middleton

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>