News Stories:

Click-on these handy "jump links" to quickly access the news item
you're looking for.

1.Bid to halt bypass work

2. Air index a big lie, say greens

1. Bid to halt bypass work
Paris Lord and Dennis Chong, The Standard 25 February 2005

In a dramatic last-ditch attempt to stop the Central reclamation project, concern group Save Our Shorelines (SOS) Thursday sent a submission to the Town Planning Board it says proves the controversial Central-Wan Chai bypass can be built in a tunnel requiring a minimal amount of reclamation.

The proof, SOS says, lies in a consultant's report which the government commissioned but has not been revealed to the public. While much of Hong Kong believes the Central portion of the harbor has been lost as reclamation proceeds, the group maintains that damage to the harbor can be reversed by building the bypass in an immersed tube tunnel.

Shorelines chairman John Bowden said the government was withholding from the public a second independent consultant's report received last month that would confirm the feasibility of the tunnel proposal.

"The results of these studies ... make it clear that the [tube tunnel] in a form similar to that proposed by the SOS solution is indeed fully viable,'' the group's submission said.

``We would request that the full text of both reports be made available to the Town Planning Board for their assessment.''

One report was done by Maunsell Consultants. A source said the second report was done by Hyder Consultants.

An official with Hyder said the company had been involved in several bypass-related studies but could offer no further comment.

A government spokeswoman said Thursday she could not confirm the shorelines group's allegations, but would comment today.

The group's submission, released last August and researched with marine engineers, reduces by more than 60 percent the government's 18-hectare reclamation plan.

The smaller reclamation is also HK$1 billion cheaper, the group added.

In a reply from 11 government parties, the Civil Engineering and Development Department told SOS it engaged Maunsell Consultants to independently review the shorelines group's immersed tube tunnel proposal.

While the tube tunnel ``may deserve consideration as an alternative'' to the ongoing cut-and-cover construction method, it is ``in many respects unreasonable or even not feasible'' for several reasons, the department said.

Among them were the tunnel would hit a sea wall, and cause problems for cooling water pumping stations for office air-conditioning that could not be shut down during reclamation, as the group proposes.

In a 20-page rebuttal to the government's answers, the shorelines group said

2. Air index a big lie, say greens
Dennis Chong, The Standard 25 February 2005

Greenpeace has accused the government of lying about air quality and said Hong Kongers are breathing air that is much more polluted than they have been led to believe.

The green activists add a majority of Hong Kong people have come to disbelieve the Air Pollution Index (API) - released hourly by the government - because they find the figures incredible, the group said on Thursday, quoting a recent study.

In an unusual gesture, the group will from next week produce its own index based on World Health Organization and European Union standards, both of which it said have higher standards than the Hong Kong government.

The Environmental Protection Department (EPD), which releases pollution data, quickly responded that the index was created after the government consulted various sectors, including green groups.

The department, in a two-page written statement, said there is no universally accepted way to calculate such indices, adding that the current one is serving Hong Kong well.

``People need an accurate API so they can plan their daily activities,'' Greenpeace campaigner Chow Sze-chung said.

``But as the air pollution problem is obviously worse [than it is portrayed], people turn to their gut feeling on air quality,'' he said.

In a survey that interviewed 1,006 people this month, more than 80 percent said air pollution in Hong Kong is serious and getting worse.

About 60 percent said the air quality is worse than the EPD claims.

Eighty-eight percent felt a more accurate yardstick is necessary to measure the extent of air pollution in Hong Kong.

The survey was conducted by the Chinese University's Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific.

``People seem to be abandoning the API as the gap between the truth and the index continues to widen,'' Chow said.

For example, he said, the roadside API at Causeway Bay measured at 10am Thursday, which was given as 84, would be 287.2 if the calculation were based on European Union standards.

Under EPD guidelines, roadside API levels between 101 and 200 result in the public being advised to reduce physical exertion and outdoor activities, and avoid prolonged stays in areas with heavy traffic.

He urged the government to initiate a gradual review of the measurement and said air quality cannot be improved if the real picture is hidden. ``There is no way to jump to the EU and WHO standards from nowhere, but the government can do it in stages,'' he said.

But the department said: ``We do not need Greenpeace's survey to know that the public is already fully aware of the air pollution problem facing Hong Kong.

``We consider it unscientific and wrong to apply indiscriminately the guideline levels of the World Health Organization or the air quality standards of the European Union in working out Hong Kong's API.''

Saying Hong Kong's methodology is similar to Singapore and Taipei's, the department said the index worked well in warning the public about serious air pollution.

In 1995, the department formulated the index to measure a list of seven air pollutants identified by the Air Pollution Control Ordinance of 1987.

The pollutants are sulphur dioxide, total suspended particulates, respirable suspended particulates (RSP), nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone and lead.

Recently, green groups accused the department of accepting high actual concentration of the pollutants in its readings of the air pollution index.