CAN urges the Airport Authority to provide more air quality information regarding the construction of the third runway (English version follows the Chinese version)
機場管理局就機場是否興建第三條跑道展開為期三個月的公眾諮詢。健康空氣行動(CAN)認為，機管局所公布的資訊未足夠，難以令市民理解工程對空氣質素以致公眾健康的影響，對此表示失望。在欠缺下列數據的情況下，市民實在無法客觀評估工程的影響、紓緩措施是否足夠等重要問題。
1. 機場於施工期間的排放量及其所構成的健康影響:
- 灰塵
- 揮發性有機化合物(及其主要來源)
- 由非路面工程造成的廢氣排放
- 路面車輛的廢氣排放
- 受工程影響，令車輛減速及交通擠塞而引致的額外廢氣排放
- 施工船隻的廢氣排放
- 由以上污染物與區域性排放臭氧的化學反應
- 因應以上評估，機管局將採取什麼措施，減少或紓緩所引致的環境及公眾健康影響?
- 如何證明以上提及的措施有效?
2.第三條跑道落成後，運作期間所造成的環境及公眾健康評估:
- 估計未來機場升降量及所排放的廢氣量
- 未來停泊飛機量及所排放的廢氣量
- 由機場營運車輛及相關器材所排放的廢氣量
- 機場擴充後額外產生的車流量，以及其排放的廢氣量(尤其對東涌、屯門一帶的影響)。(CAN認為環評不應僅限於工程範圍五百米以內的受眾，應包括相連交通幹道例如屯門一帶所受的影響)
- 以上因素產生的污染物，與區域性排放的臭氧，產生的二次化學反應及其影響
- 以上提及的污染物，對鄰近機場及交通幹道的「敏感受體」(例如醫院、學校、託兒所)的影響。
- 評估空氣污染質素時，是否已經計算未來鄰近大型工程，例如港珠澳大橋所產生的協同效應? (目前環評條例及技術備忘均沒有涵蓋這部分)
- 這些預計的排放量/污染物濃度是否符合政府建議的新空氣質素指標(AQO)──即是否符合未來香港的法定標準（雖然這仍不足以保障公眾健康）。
- 如何將累計排放量/污染物濃度，與世衛組織空氣質素指引(AQG)作出比較（這真正可衡量對公眾健康的影響，是較新建議AQO更嚴謹的指標）。
- 是否已考慮珠三角地區在未來沒有足夠潔淨能源（例如水力發電、核電、優化煤電機組）的情況下，仍不斷擴張工業發展，所帶來的空氣污染?
- 針對以上因素，將會採取什麼紓解或補償措施?
- 如何證明以上措施的成效?
3.環評包括考慮其他代替方案。機管局是否已考慮其他代替方案，包括響應泛珠三角的更緊密融合方案，充分運用其他珠三角機場的剩餘客運／空運量？
欠缺以上的數據以及公眾健康的評估，公眾難以理解興建第三條跑道的利害關係。興建第三條跑道，關乎香港人的未來，但決定如此重大基建前，市民有權知道對空氣質素及公眾健康所帶來的潛在影響。因此健康空氣行動要求機場管理局，在進入法定的環評程序前，先公布以上資訊，勿讓港人蒙在鼓裏，作出錯誤的決定。
CAN urges the Airport Authority to provide more air quality information regarding the construction of the third runway
Clean Air Network is disappointed that Airport Authority is not providing enough air quality information regarding the construction of the third runway. Before ANYONE can have an opinion the following impacts need to be calculated, and strategies to avoid, mitigate or compensate for them need to be produced
1. What are the expected construction phase impacts in terms of:
- dust
- VOC emissions (what are the key sources)
- emissions from off-road construction equipment
- emissions from on-road vehicles – trucks etc
- additional emissions caused by slower traffic speeds & greater congestion caused by more vehicles in the vicinity
- vessel emissions
- reactions from any of the above with regionally-produced ozone and other pollutants
What evidence do you have that these measures will be effective?
2. What are the operational phase impacts?
- What are the expected emissions from aircraft in flight
- What are the expected emissions from parked aircraft
- What are the expected emissions from airport vehicles and equipment
- What is the expected impact of emissions from increased road traffic, especially in Tung Chung, Park Island and populations close to major highway links (e.g. TuenMun) NB these go out far beyond 500 metres required to be studied in the EIA Ordinance.
- reactions from any of the above with regionally-produced ozone and other pollutants
- How will these emissions impact the concentrations of key pollutants especially for sensitive receivers close to either the airport or the highways that serve it.
- Do your calculations take into account other projects such as the HKZM bridge and connecting infrastructure. Should such an assessment not be required on a strict reading of the EIA Ordinance and TM this will be a key issue in the minds of the public and should be considered
- Will these projected emissions/concentrations comply with the proposed new AQOs – the HK statutory standard, but not a measure of healthy air).
- How will the cumulative emissions/concentrations compare against the WHO AQG (which is a real measure of the public health impact).
- What will be the air quality impact in stimulating further industrial development in the PRD, a place where clean fuel supplies (Hydro nuclear, modern coal-fired power stations) cannot currently meet demand.
- Once these impacts have been calculated what measures will you take to avoid, mitigate or compensate for them?
- What evidence do you have that these measures will be effective?
3. The EIA process requires consideration of alternatives. Will you evaluate:
An alternative approach: making use of idle capacity at other PRD airports (in line with current mainland & Government policy of closer integration between PRD cities?)
Without the above answer and the health impact assessment, it is unfair for the public to consider building the third runway and these are essential information that public should know before making comments on whether or not to support building the third runway. CAN would expect these issues to be included in the project profile and we intends to submit comments similar to the above to the statutory consultation on the project profile and study brief for the EIA for this project.
沒有留言:
發佈留言