Mid-year review shows pollution is getting worse in Hong Kong


A study published by Clean Air Network (CAN) this month shows Hong Kong's air quallity keeps getting worse. The Hedley Environmental Index estimates that, from January to June 2013, air pollution led to 1,606 premature deaths, 18,683 million in dollars lost, 76,361 hospitalizations, and 3.61 million doctor visits. The death toll due to air pollution for the first six months in 2013 is five times higher than the total number of deaths caused by SARS in Hong Kong in 2003. For comparison, from January to June 2012, air pollution led to 1,459 premature deaths, 18,517 million in dollars lost, 71,955 hospitalizations, and 3.41 million doctor visits.

From January to June of this year, CAN found that, other than nitrogen dioxide levels in Tap Mun, all pollutants measured by the Environmental Protection Department (EPD) – nitrogen dioxide, suspended particulate, fine particulates, sulphur dioxide and ozone (NO2, PM10, PM2.5, SO2, and O3) – at all of Hong Kong’s fourteen air quality monitoring stations exceeded the WHO’s annual average air quality guidelines; a situation that is very worrying.

In order to ensure that Hong Kong’s air quality begins to improve, CAN believes that traffic management and implementation of on-shore power facilities at cruise terminals must take place. These areas are the responsibility of the Transport and Housing Bureau and the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau and CAN urges them to work together to implement the policies necessary to safeguard public health.

Roadside and marine emission on the rise

An important indicator of roadside air pollution, levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) increased significantly, compared to the first 6 months of 2012.

With the exception of Causeway Bay and Mong Kok’s roadside monitoring stations’ increase of one per cent and two per cent, respectively, other stations recorded an increase ranging from eight per cent to twenty two per cent. The highest increases were recorded in Central and Western (twenty two per cent), Shatin (nineteen per cent) and Yuen Long (eighteen per cent). Furthermore, NO2 levels at all stations, except Tap Mun, exceeded the WHO’s annual average air quality guideline and Hong Kong’s annual standard.

As for levels of sulphur dioxide (SO2), a marker of marine emissions, levels at all stations exceeded the WHO annual guideline (5 µg/m3).

As in 2012, Kwai Chung and Tsuen Wan had the highest SO2 levels out of all stations, while Kwai Chung recorded a drastic increase of sixty four per cent, indicating marine emissions from container terminals has reached an alarming level.

Hong Kong’s new Air Quality Objectives will be ineffective in improving air quality

The rising levels of sulphur dioxide are effectively proving that the new Hong Kong Air Quality Objectives (AQO) are too lax to protect public health.

Under the current AQO and the new AQO for 24-hour sulphur dioxide, all monitoring stations recorded zero exceedances. However, according to the WHO guideline, the number of exceedances is much higher. For example, Kwai Chung recorded 74 exceedances and Tsuen Wan, 53 exceedances, under the WHO guideline, compared to zero exceedances under the current AQO and the new AQO.

The standards of PM10 and PM2.5 under the new AQOs are also not stringent enough. The number of exeedances under the new Hong Kong AQO is a mere single digit number, while under the WHO standard, the number of exceedances reaches a hundred.

Chief Executive Officer of Clean Air Network, Sum Kwong, says, “This mid-year air quality review shows just how critical it is that the Government take immediate action to implement effective policies in order to safeguard public health. There has been no progress seen, for example, with the early retirement of old diesel commercial vehicles, which was announced in CY Leung’s Policy Address in January this year. And after the launch of the Clean Air Plan in March, there has been no concrete commitment made by the Transport and Housing Bureau towards optimizing traffic management policies, as a way to lessen traffic congestion and roadside air pollution. Similarly, there has been no feedback or follow up action from the Commerce and Economic Development Bureau after Clean Air Network submitted a 3,000-strong petition urging the Bureau to install on-shore power facilities to curb ship emissions.”

Source: CAN

Featured image: HK by http://www.flickr.com/photos/66521457@N03/9206821993

If you value what we do here, create your ad-free account and support our journalism.


Your support makes a difference

Dear valued reader,

We hope that our website has been a valuable resource for you.

The reality is that it takes a lot of time, effort, and resources to maintain and grow this website. We rely on the support of readers like you to keep providing high-quality content.

If you have found our website to be helpful, please consider making a contribution to help us continue to bring you the information you need. Your support means the world to us and helps us to keep doing what we love.

Support us by choosing your support level – Silver, Gold or Platinum. Other support options include Patreon pledges and sending us a one-off payment using PayPal.

Thank you for your consideration. Your support is greatly appreciated.

Teo Blašković

$5 /month

  • Ad-free account
  • Clean user interface and fast browsing
  • Direct communication with us via chat and email
  • Suggest new features, content and applications
  • Early access to new apps and features

$50 /year

$10 /month

  • Ad-free account
  • Clean user interface and fast browsing
  • Direct communication with us via chat and email
  • Suggest new features, content and applications
  • Early access to new apps and features

$100 /year

$25 /month

  • Ad-free account
  • Clean user interface and fast browsing
  • Direct communication with us via chat and email
  • Suggest new features, content and applications
  • Early access to new apps and features

$200 /year

You can also support us on Patreon

support us on patreon

or by sending us a one-off payment using PayPal:

Commenting rules and guidelines

We value the thoughts and opinions of our readers and welcome healthy discussions on our website. In order to maintain a respectful and positive community, we ask that all commenters follow these rules:

  • Treat others with kindness and respect.
  • Stay on topic and contribute to the conversation in a meaningful way.
  • Do not use abusive or hateful language.
  • Do not spam or promote unrelated products or services.
  • Do not post any personal information or content that is illegal, obscene, or otherwise inappropriate.

We reserve the right to remove any comments that violate these rules. By commenting on our website, you agree to abide by these guidelines. Thank you for helping to create a positive and welcoming environment for all.

Leave a reply

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