*********************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Audrey Eu and an oral reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Transport and Works, Dr Sarah Liao, in the Legislative Council meeting today (November 10):
Question:
The Government established the Air Quality Objectives ("AQOs") in 1987 to regulate the acceptable concentration levels of seven types of air pollutants. Since then, AQOs have become the yardsticks for computing the air pollution index in Hong Kong. However, as air pollution is worsening, the World Health Organisation, European Union and our neighbour, Singapore, have reviewed their AQOs established in the 1980s, so as to avoid any under-estimation of the actual pollution situation due to obsolete AQOs. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it will review the AQOs established in 1987 so that the air pollution index can better reflect the actual situation and that public health will be safeguarded; if not, the reasons for that; and
(b) as the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government and the Guangdong Provincial Government have reached a consensus to reduce by 2010, on a best endeavour basis, the regional emission of pollutants such as suspended particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide to specific targets, and that the Secretary for the Environment, Transport and Works had stated, in her reply to a Member's question at a Council meeting of last session on measures to restrict or reduce the amount of pollutants emitted from power plants, that the Government would start with increasing the supply of natural gas and reducing emission, whether the authorities have now worked out concrete details on the measures to reduce emission by power plants and set a timetable for implementing such measures?
Reply:
Madam President,
(a) Ideally, the lower the concentration of air pollutants, the better. However, as pointed out in the Air Quality Guidelines for Europe published by the World Health Organisation (WHO), considerations such as the prevailing exposure levels, technical feasibility, source control measures, abatement strategies, and social, economic and cultural conditions should be taken into account when setting air quality standards for a particular place. Most importantly, such standards should be realistic and achievable by the government concerned by means of pollution control measures. As such, different countries and areas in the world adopt different air quality standards and objectives. Moreover, there is no international standard as such for the calculation of air pollution indices (APIs).
In fact, the WHO has not laid down any guidelines on how to calculate APIs. Nor has it set any guideline level for respirable suspended particulates (RSP). Therefore, there is no WHO "guidelines" to follow in computing a comprehensive API.
Similarly, the European Union (EU) has not set a standard for computing APIs. In addition, the EU's air quality objectives (AQOs) allow for a larger number of exceedances. For example, the EU allows the hourly average sulphur dioxide (SO2) standard to be exceeded 24 times a year, whereas only three times a year are allowed in Hong Kong. For RSP, the EU allows the daily average RSP standard to be exceeded 35 days in a year, whereas the relevant AQO of Hong Kong does not allow a single day of exceedance at all. It is therefore impracticable to make a direct comparison between the AQOs of the EU and those of Hong Kong or to adopt the EU standards in computing our daily APIs.
The AQOs adopted by Hong Kong have been developed with reference to researches in the United States (US) and the situation in Hong Kong. Therefore, they are generally similar to those of the US. The Government has all along been closely monitoring the researches and reviews on air quality standards conducted by different places. We will make reference to the results of the US and EU reviews, as well as the on-going local studies and monitoring works by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD), when considering the need for revising Hong Kong's AQOs from a scientific perspective and the local applicability of the revised AQOs.
(b) Power plants are major sources of pollution in the territory. According to the data collected by the EPD in 2002, power plants accounted for 89%, 45% and 37 % of the total emissions of SO2, nitrogen oxides (NOx) and RSP respectively in Hong Kong. With reduced consumption of natural gas, emissions from power plants may further soar in 2003 and the next few years. Besides continuing to implement programmes to reduce vehicle emissions, therefore, we also need to put in place measures to reduce emissions from power plants.
The new financial plans submitted to the Economic Development and Labour Bureau (EDLB) by the two local power companies in mid 2004 under the Scheme of Control Agreements include proposals for the installation of desulphurisation and denitrification facilities in the existing power plants to further reduce emissions. The EDLB, our bureau and other relevant departments are now studying the proposals and the Legislative Council will be informed of the Government's decision as soon as practicable. In light of the outcome, we will work out concrete measures for power plants and the implementation timetable of such measures as required under the emission reduction targets for 2010 as agreed by Guangdong and Hong Kong. At the same time, we will also request the two power companies to start conducting trials on wind power generation, use renewable energy more effectively and introduce demand-side management.
I would like to point out that the emission reduction measures of power plants involve substantial investments. The Government will carefully look at the pros and cons, technical feasibility, economic benefits and impacts on Hong Kong's overall economic development of various options before making a decision. We also have to assess the affordability by the general public and decide in accordance with statutory requirements.
Everyone of us can chip in to help reduce air pollution, and reduce power plant pollution directly. We can help by saving electricity. We can readily reduce power plant emissions by 5%, without compromising our daily needs. Air-conditioning accounts for one-third of our yearly electricity consumption. By raising the air-conditioned room temperate from 22.5 C to 25.5 C, the electricity consumed can be reduced by 10%. By using appliances with Energy Efficiency Labels Grade 1 or 2, electricity consumption can be reduced by 20-30%. If all homes and offices adopt these simple energy conservation measures, we can save 400 million units of electricity. These measures to save electricity can instantly reduce the amount of electricity required to be generated and, in turn, the power plant emissions. The Government will continue to actively publicise the importance of saving electricity.
Ends/Wednesday, November 10, 2004
NNNN
