Reply To: Tamar – HK Govt aesthetics rooted in concrete


email received:

Concerning the debate about Tamar and Dioxins, might I direct your
>attention to a blog post of mine.
>The assertions made by Dr. Sarah Liao and her media spokespersons
>are not rooted in science and could be quite hazardous to Hong
>Kong’s environment. As I note in my blog post, the reason the EPD
>can claim dioxins have not been found in marine sediment in Victoria
>Harbour is because the EPD doesn’t test for dioxins. I provide links
>in my blog post to the online data provided by EPD on Marine
>Sediment and Water Testing between 1998-2004 and you can check the
>list of contaminants tested for. Dioxins are not on the list.
>Given the list of standard contaminants being tested for does not
>contain dioxins, my guess is that the government’s Environmental
>Impact Assessment for the Tamar site never tested for dioxins as
>As for the assertion that dioxins are not found at naval shipyards
>and only at mass incinerators, note the debacle at Penny’s Bay and
>the acquisition of the Cheoy Lee Shipyard for the construction of
>Thomas Legg