NOTES FROM THE GRASSROOTS: THE DOUBLE BURDEN OF AIR POLLUTION IN THE NEW TERRITORIES

Some comments from a DC member in the New Territories --

"On solving the air pollution problem, many people in the New Territories believe that the government and Legco have favored the interests of people living in city districts (mostly wealthy people) over the interests of those living in the New Territories. The government built and Legco supported the government offices, Legco building, public infrastructure and all commercial activities to be concentrated oin only Central or other city districts. This forces people living in the New Territories to travel all the way from the New Territories to Central (or other city districts) to look for jobs, eventually increasing the demand for buses running on the road. It has never been the wish of people in the New Territories to travel all the way to Central to work, but instead they have to bear the costs of cleaning up air pollution. Whether cutting short bus routes or increasing bus fares, it is the grassroots living in the New Territories who have to pay to clean up air pollution in Central. One way to reduce air pollution is better city planning, not just replacement of old buses. If the government could relocate some offices or public infrastructures from city districts to the New Territories, this could provide job opportunities to people in the New Territories, allow them to stay in the NT and, consequently, reduce the demand for buses.

Another point: The view of Victoria Harbour means nothing for the grassroots in the New Territories. Many of them can't even afford to travel to Central."

i share this letter with you because it gives genuine insight into WHY sometimes the grassroots finds it hard to support air pollution clean-up measures: THESE MEASURES (BUS-RELATED) FALL DISPROPORTIONATELY ON THEM - who have already been penalized by the great distance they must travel to work.

what it means for CAN is that we must find political approaches which acknowledge and,if possible, REDRESS these inequities. SPECIFICALLY, bus companies, NOT bus riders should bear MUCH more of the cost of cleaning up air pollution. NOT the average bus rider.

whether it is EFFICIENT for business centers to be established throughout the NT is, of course, another question entirely -- one which i'm not qualified to comment on. ditto for the question of whether the long commute distance from the NT is reflected in rents and real estate prices in those areas. rather, the point of today's blog is to shed light on the POLITICAL obstacles our movement confronts.

i just attended a breakfast about marine pollution sponsored by amcham this morning. to quickly sketch the backdrop of the issue: marine fuel is several THOUSAND TIMES higher in sulphur content than vehicle diesel. to quote one of the lead participants, arthur bowring, the head of the hk shipowners association: marine fuel is so viscous that if you turned the jar of bunker fuel he keeps in his office upside down, the fuel wouldn't actually move. basically, it's about as thick as asphalt!
bowring said it many times over and over: we want to clean up, but we need a level playing field. a level playing field means coordinated PRD legislation of green harbour measures which would not exceed the international MARPOL regime. (standards tighter than MARPOL, the international maritime regime which covers ship pollution of all sorts, would necessitate additional capital expenditures and technical difficulties such as fuel switching and extra fuel tanks, beyond those considered internationally reasonable). Moreover, a fair playing field would assume the ready availability of cleaner fuel - a state of affairs which does not yet exist - with no penalty if such fuel was not available despite shipowners' best efforts.

apparently, bowring has sought meetings with the government for a long time, in order to convey the support of the shipowners association for more aggressive marine abatement measures. but it's only today that, for the first time, they've had the chance to meet face to face -- thanks to representation from the EPD at today's breakfast. WOW. that means that, to date, the hk govt has been trying to protect the interests of a constituency which didn't want its interests protected -- at least not like this. i hope arthur will convey his support for a stronger SO2 AQO in his upcoming conversation with the EPD, since the main thing holding the latter back has been been perceived resistance from the shipping industry to stricter sulphur standards.
besides learning that marine fuel is the absolute dregs of the oil refinement process accounting for its cement-like viscosity, there were some other interesting takeaways from today --
oil refiners don't want to make higher value distillates (cleaner fuels) because it's convenient and cost-effective for them to continue dumping the dross (marine bunker fuel) into the shipping industry.
the creation of distillate results in substantially greater carbon emissions than the burning of marine bunker fuel, but it's easier for several hundred refiners to scrub their emissions than 100,000 ships to implement scrubbing technology.
to date, no single technology has been able to remove all the contaminants in fuel. rather seawater scrubbers are required to remove SO2 and PM, whereas selective catalytic reduction technology is required to reduce NOx. while both these technologies can effectively filter out 80-90% of contaminants, both come with major technical challenges. in the case of sea water scrubbers, the process results in solid contaminant waste which must then be safely disposed of. in other words, seawater scrubbing merely displaces the problem, converting air pollutants into toxic solid matter. regarding scr, ships must carry large amount of urea and the process must take place at very high temperatures.
in singapore, apparently, scientists have successfully conducted preliminary trials of a new sound wave technology which reduces the ph of emissions, successfully eliminating ALL contaminants, and reducing them into a form of calcium carbonate. ZOUNDS! if it works, it will be revolutionary. (sounds too good to be true, but, then again, i previously worked at a company which successfully eliminated carcinogens from cigarette smoke without affecting the cigarette-smoking experience.)
amcham gets a big gold star for organizing today's breakfast: it went a long way towards improving communication between the shipping industry and the government while bringing us (comparative) neophytes up to speed on 360 degrees of this incredibly complex issue.

today was a crucial day in our campaign. our pro bono partners, ddb and hill & knowlton, came over to advise us on how to move our chess pieces around the board. (ddb is one of the world's top advertising agencies, whereas hill & knowlton is one of the world's top pr agencies.) now, mind you, it's those chess pieces i've been creating from dust, spit, and sweat since i came on board on 1 october. by "chess pieces", i mean the advertisements, celebrities, visuals, viral content, pr events and media contacts which, taken together, form a campaign. the primary challenge, until now, had been knocking on ceos' and suppliers' doors with a begging bowl, asking for free everything, from advice to programming. but, now, armed with a sufficient number of chess pieces -- at least for the next six months - it was time to decide, how should we move them? in what order? and how do we actually WIN the game? after 20 minutes of head-knocking between 12 people, we figured it all out. ha! now whether, 6 months from now, the public will congratulate us for having crafted a truly coherent and compelling tour de force of marketing which influences hong kong society and, in the process, the government, is for you guys to witness and judge for yourselves : ) one thing's for sure though: this is DEFINITELY the most ambitious, kaleidoscopic campaign i've ever undertaken -- what with moving parts which whizz and whir over at least 3 media platforms at any single time. in the lingo of my past private sector life, i'm trying to be walmart and louis vuitton at the same time, seducing everyone from the man on the street to the titan of industry. the trade-off for taking on such a promethean task is the chance to take crazy, unprecedented, artistic risks, with the excuse that, hey, i have no choice anyway, because my budget is zero. and, therefore, my ingenuity has to flourish in direct, inverse proportion.
....
that said, i can't wait to launch our first animated video tomorrow. i'm on tenterhooks for several reasons: it took us THREE MONTHS to make it. in my entire 10-year career, very very few projects have taken three months of serious concentrated effort. on the other hand, i can't really take credit for this film. it's actually jessica louie, the artist, whose genius and hard work are showcased in it. all i did was crack the whip and alternately gasp with admiration, shock and frustration from time to time. next, this film takes a lot of risks: it dares to genuinely shock the viewer with gut-wrenching representations of what air pollution can do to the human body (against an original score of absurdly ironic music). finally, i want this clip to become viral so badly that i can't believe i just admitted that. but, then, NOTHING can make something viral unless it's just plain damn good. i asked my friend, jimmy wales, the founder of wikipedia, to look at it this morning. he said, "i really want to sign the f!@#$&*(% petition after seeing that, but where's the call to action? you gotta knock people over the head with that." so, for the umpteenth time, i asked victor pena, our saint-like post-production guy, to make another change to the film. if i've learned something from social media, it's that every single tiny visual cue or omission counts -- sometimes fatally -- and that it's impossible to resuscitate a missed opportunity. you really only get ONE chance to hook someone's eyeballs in the online world - let alone ask them to do something. having no money and no chances, i can't very well chance it with an imperfect product. so, here's to keeping all body parts crossed until YOU watch it -- and, hopefully, share it : )

in a poll of 66 nations, hk came out 65th in an index just published by gallup polls. the only country to do worse was iraq!
http://www.gallup.com/poll/124193/Potential-Net-Migration-Change-Developed-Nations.aspx
the main reasons for hk's abysmal ranking, among sri lanka, trinidad & tobago and mexico: overcrowding, traffic congestion and AIR POLLUTION.
tellingly, singapore was number one. it's worth noting that, to date, singapore is the only asian country with a congestion charging scheme. the congestion charging scheme relieves the city of traffic congestion and its toxic concomitant - air pollution.
even if hk's poor gallup showing is not fully warranted, it's still a painful smack in the face for the current administration.
...
i attended donald tsang's presentation to the HK general business chamber two weeks ago. his remarks focused on how the govt intends to support revitalization and encourage innovation in our economy through various investment and conservation schemes. but, what is the point of entrepreneurial ingenuity and vigor, when commerce unfolds against the backdrop of hk's benighted skies? his remarks will ring hollow and his initiatives remain academic unless he can also provide the minimimum requirements for healthy living, so crucial to the flourishing -- indeed, survival -- of its residents.

i still haven't managed to blog from my bkberry yet. waiting for the right, long cab ride. so, this is yet another backward-looking post...
...
yesterday, one of hk's top movie stars wrote me that he wants to do "anything he can" to help CAN! that kind of made my day. other news: we will be holding an online sticker competition for kids sponsored by the SCMP Young Post in December; CUHK students will help us to do a sign-up on campus for three days next week; our first GUY started working at the office yesterday. HALLELEUIA!
...
i attended a dinner with a bunch of hedge fund and finance guys (all possible donors) last night and met claire nouvian, too. she is one of the world's leading advocates of shark rescue. wow, marine conservation is so utterly arcane and thankless, as an ngo field. i got a palpable sense of that when i casually listened in from time to time on her conversation. thank GOD air pollution is so easy to explain and relate to.
...
the weather's turned cold. it "feels clean" because we're not sweating buckets 24-7, but, in fact, we're now settling into the 6-month pollution trough brought in by seasonal winds from guangdong : ( really, you can't win in hong kong: the cleanest month, august, is the least tolerable from the standpoint of temperature. the most dangerous month, typically january or february, gives you a false sense of security. it's common for kids to develop an allergic cough during these winter months. my own son, sam, 10 years old, usually does. it's one of the main reasons i got involved with this issue.