Forum Replies Created
- Posts
There wasn't much fuss when the Stonecutters Bridge was announced, even though it was to be a major project. Not much re justification for the bridge; the only argument I can recall in its supposed favour was that it would cut travel time from Sha Tin to the airport by 15 mins (wow!).
Looks to me a huge waste, built chiefly to please construction industry that's been clamouring for things to do (maybe the'd be up for the tunnel to Antarctica Jake van der Kamp sometimes moots in the SCM Post: no use save for the supposed economic boost thro simply building the thing). From Highways Dept website:
Quote:Stonecutters Bridge is a 1.6 km long dual 3-lane high level cable stayed bridge, with a clear span of 1018 metres. … The Stonecutters Bridge when completed will be one of the longest span cable-stayed bridges in the world.Here's a recent shot of southern end of the partly built bridge, rather obscured by smog – which the bridge traffic will contribute to, esp as it's for road not rail. [img]https://www.hkoutdoors.com/images/fbfiles/images/stonecutters_bridge_building.JPG[/img]
Here’s a letter I recently had published in the South China Morning Post, in response to an opinion piece from the grandiose sounding International Policy Network.
Quote:I am writing regarding the article “Alarmism is not the way to tackle climate change”, by Kendra Okonski, of the International Policy Network. Finding the article highly unbalanced, I checked re the network, and learned it has received over US$390,000 from ExxonMobil – surely the most infamous supporter of global warming “sceptics”.Given this, Okonski’s claim of “biases” – towards global warming “alarmism” – resulting from funding by “powerful interest groups” is ludicrous. Her piece is riddled with cherry picked facts, half truths, or worse.
It’s immensely deceptive to claim, “The science of climate change remains hotly contested.” No, it does not; witness the standpoints of august bodies such as the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Britain’s Royal Society, and our own Hong Kong Observatory. Among all but a tiny minority of actual scientists, there is no longer debate over whether warming due to greenhouse gases is real – instead, any debates are now over just how severe it will be, and what measures are needed to ensure we don’t devastate the world as we know it.
Okonski asserts the International Government Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “is also biased towards alarmism” – which is curious, given that some of the more alarming forecasts of scientists have been removed during the editing process. She appears oblivious to the fact that some observed changes – such as melting of Arctic ice, and expansion of the Tropics, have proceeded more swiftly than in even some of the more alarming forecasts.
While noting the number of people killed by weather disasters has fallen since good records began, Okonski fails to mention vastly improved warning systems, and Oxfam¡¦s report that the number of number of natural disasters has increased fourfold since two decades ago.
With no scientific foundation whatsoever, Okonski claims the best thing to do about climate change is adapting, while helping people create wealth. Here, she is seemingly blinded to the obvious: if the worst of climate change predictions come true, adaptation will prove impossible for countless people, and there will be widespread economic reversals.
Overall, it seems Okonski’s piece stems from fear of doing the right thing, and adopting measures that economists have suggested could cost 1 percent of world income. With climate change real, the outcomes uncertain yet potentially devastating, it is alarming to read calls for yet more procrastination.
It may not be the kind of White Christmas people tend to dream of, but looks like we could have some days of white yet cloudless skies over Xmas – thanks to massive amounts of suspended particulates (which are invading our lungs in HK as I write) Here, the sun virtually setting in mid-afternoon yesterday, because of the murk. Just utterly horrendous, and shameful (yet how many with power to do anything major about air pollution feel any sense of shame re this?).
With northerlies/northeasterlies persisting, and no rain for what seems ages, foul air pollution seems never ending at present; and – of course! – Edward Yau hasn’t made any utterances on the issue. Checking Env Protection Dept site, can see that air pollution is "High" at all stations (well, very high at two), with respirable suspended particulates the main contributor. Reflecting fact this is a regional issue, even at Tap Mun out in Tolo Harbour, the API is horribly high. Here’s latest chart – showing pollution level stuck at nigh on 100.
Hong Kong Pathfinder is available in several local bookshops, and can be ordered online through Swindon Books Online – direct link is Hong Kong Pathfinder.
Hi:
I’m not always good at times; tend to be bit hazy re how long things take – and people can vary greatly in speeds.
But for sw Lantau, maybe allow 3-4hours for hike. Add travel to/from hike area (ferry, bus, being my suggestions – rather than mtr to tung chung and then bus), and becomes a day outing.
For longer hike, might start at Ngong Ping; see Big Buddha etc – gets touristy from mid morning on; then down Lantau Trail, above Shek Pik Res; reach road (after around 1.5-2hrs?) and follow the trail on up into hills of sw Lantau. Keep to the trail after it turns from the hills, down to pass Ng Yuen garden (go in if you’re lucky and it’s open), and from there can decide if walk down steep path to Tai O, which is well worth a wander round, or cut down to narrow catchwater road, then along to road to take bus. So for part of route, around the reverse of route in the sw Lantau article here; reverse as means if include Ngong Ping, walk down from it, rather than uphill.
Note to anyone who might read this later: this is written with current cool, non humid weather in mind; when it’s hot and humid, this could be very tough route.Tai Long Wan: yes, weather is pleasant for chilling out by beach. If you want long hike here, can head south to Sai Wan at the next inlet, then walk up to near High Island Reservoir, and see if you’ve energy for Luk Wu Hiking Trail. If not, you’ve long walk down road north of the reservoir, to road junction where you can catch bus to Sai Kung (on weekends, on to Diamond Hill MTR station) or may be lucky enough to catch one of very rare minibuses from above Sai Wan to Sai Kung.
Again: Tai Long Wan and Luk Wu Hiking Trail combo is something for cooler days; and even then, quite a trek as far as I’m concerned!Bit brief here; as you’ve seen, there’s info elsewhere on the site, but hopefully helpful.
If you go, hope you’ll post re results.Martin
Hi Vicky:
I’m delighted you had such a good day out!
For others who may be interested, Vicky joined one of the hiking groups organised through:
Roz’s Hiking PagesMartin
Now, denial that story change in Batman was due to pollution – but is this true, or is this holy PR?
Quote:Director Christopher Nolan said the scene was axed due to a script change, and that it had nothing to do with the health risk posed by the harbor's filthy water, as had been widely reported in Hong Kong media. "That was my decision (to cut the scene), nothing to do with pollution. It was simply a script decision," Nolan, who also directed the earlier "Batman Begins" told reporters in Hong Kong. "Once you see the finished film, you will understand why. As far as the pollution question goes, I honestly have no problem dumping actors in it."Batman director says Hong Kong harbor pollution did not force scene cut
Well, Donald Tsang may still like to figure that air pollution is mainly about whether we have nice views, but evidence mounts re dangers.
Inc in new report from Europe:Quote:The latest in a series of assessments of the pan-European environment published by the EEA over the past 15 years, the report assesses environmental progress in 53 countries
…
Despite some success with air pollution, current levels — mainly nitrogen oxide, fine particles and ground-level ozone — are estimated to shorten average life expectancy in Western and Central European countries by almost a year and to threaten the healthy development of children.Pollution Cuts Life Expectancy, Threatens Child Development In Europe
WWF Hong Kong CEO had letter in SCMP yesterday, responding to the AFCD letter. Wasn’t impressed by AFCD letter, which had no extra initiatives to further marine conservation.
Includes:Quote:The current efforts by government are woefully inadequate and fail to provide any reassurance that stronger measures will be introduced within the next decade.
The time for real action is now. Our one marine reserve, while the marine parks are failing to allow heavily depleted fish populations to recover.Ah, but if you exercise in smog, also get increased damage to lungs (and, perhaps, bloodstream).
From NY Times:
Quote:… “Athletes typically take in 10 to 20 times as much air,” and thus pollutants, with every breath as sedentary people do.
…
a 2004 review of pollution studies worldwide conducted by the University of Brisbane, Australia, found that during exercise, low concentrations of pollutants caused lung damage similar to that caused by high concentrations in people not working out.
…
there are long-term consequences. A study that used the mass of data included in the Women’s Health Initiative found that women who lived in communities with relatively high levels of air pollution in the forms of tiny particles — a k a soot — were far more likely to die because of heart attacks than women who lived in cleaner air. …“Fine particulates are definitely something to worry about,” said Dr. Rundell, especially for athletes, who, in the process of exerting themselves, “can take in very elevated doses.”
…
Dr. Newby has seen, in action, the effects of those particles on active people. In 2005, he and his colleagues had 30 healthy volunteers ride exercise bikes inside a laboratory for 30 minutes, while breathing piped-in diesel exhaust at levels approximately those along a city highway at rush hour.Afterward, the researchers … found that the vessels were abnormally dilated, meaning blood and oxygen could not flow easily to the muscles. … “Those are ideal conditions for a heart attack,” Dr. Newby said.
…
Still, it is not wise to give up outdoor exercise, even if, as Dr. Bell put it, there is a “trade-off between physical health from exercise and damage from air pollution.”“Be sensible and try to cut back” on your exposure to particles, Dr. Rundell advised, but don’t use pollution as an excuse to cut back on exercise.
In the calculus of health concerns, “Breathing air pollution is not nearly as bad as smoking,” Dr. Lippmann said.
“The bottom line is that running and cycling are healthy and, over all, good for the heart,” Dr. Newby said. With proper care, he said, outdoor exercise does not have to be harmful — and, done en masse, could even ease pollution.
“I ride my bike back and forth to work every day,” he said. “If everyone else did that, too, we wouldn’t be having this problem at all, would we?”
For Athletes, an Invisible Traffic Hazard
From American Lung Association:
Quote:You can minimize your exposure to air pollution by being aware of pollution and by following some simple guidelines: If you live in an area susceptible to air pollution, here’s what you should do:* Do train early in the day or in the evening.
* Do avoid midday or afternoon exercise, and avoid strenuous outdoor work,if possible, when ozone smog or other pollution levels are high.
* Do avoid congested streets and rush hour traffic; pollution levels can be high up to 50 feet from the roadway.
* Do make sure teachers, coaches and recreation officials know about air pollution and act accordingly.
* Most important, do be aware of the quality of the air you breathe!
Don’t do the following:
* Don’t take air pollution lightly, it can hurt all of us!
* Don’t engage in strenuous outdoor activity when local officials issue health warnings.
Hi Cliff:
Believe I’ve heard that Wang Chau, one of easternmost Sai Kung islands, is ok for climbing cliffs then jumping off.
Dunno about Tung Lung Chau, off Clearw Bay peninsula – certainly has impressive sea cliffs, but not sure if can jump off them and live!
Wonder re southern Tung Ping Chau – might be places where could jump and not land on wave cut platform (ouch!)
Martin
Out and about on Cheung Chau earlier today, and a very windy day.
Partly northeast monsoon, but also severe tropical storm Lekima around southsouthwest of us, trundling towards Hainan.Looking at HK observatory info for various weather stations, can see that winds generally strengthened this morning. At Cheung Chau, sometimes averaging (over 10 mins) more than 60 km/h – so just reaching gale force. At Ngong Ping, sometimes over hurricane force (average of 118 km/h), with peak for 10-min average reaching 140 km/h around 6am.
Over at Weather Underground forum, some discussion re this: why just Strong Monsoon Signal issued, when winds well within range for T3 signal, and in places reaching gales, ie Number 8? Notions there that nowadays, the Obs doesn’t like issuing typhoon/trop storm wind signals; also wondering if people might be too relaxed re weather with only a monsoon signal in place.
Well, let’s see – will it turn out that numbers of people have been out doing stuff they wouldn’t have done had T3 been issued, then had some problems? Also, if Lekima comes closer – and especially if get rain bands with squalls coming nearer – can see if Obs switches to T3.The letter Charlie F posted above did elicit response, which appeared in today’s SCM Post. By Joseph Sham, for director of agriculture, fisheries and conservation.
Rather bland response, as if repeating corporate type info.
Says we have marine parks and reserves, with management, plus monitoring thro Reef Check surveys, and public education efforts.
– all things that Charlie of course knows very well.So, no real response re improving management of marine parks, and establishing no take zones. Nothing re the incidents Charlie cited. Nothing re moving towards sustainability. Nothing to really refute Charlie’s assertion that, “On the global stage of marine protection Hong Kong must surely rank at the very bottom.”
And certainly no allusion to Dr Ballantine’s quote in above post re HK having one of world’s worst marine ecosystems!Nor, indeed, anything re AFCD being in charge of both taking marine life such as fish, and of protecting marine life such as fish: that has to be a tough balancing act.
And in saying reserves help protect species such as Chinese white dolphin, doesn’t note that high-speed ferries still permitted in dolphin areas.Wonder if Mr Edward Yau will chip in with something more substantial.
