amount that needs disposing. The Environment Bureau presents its waste-management policy as if waste charging alone will make a substantial difference. A further reality that the bureau wilfully ignores is that waste recovery and recycling is impossible without a mandatory major waste-separation programme. Recyclable waste, such as paper, metal, glass and plastic, needs to be handled separately from waste that ends up in landfills or the incinerator. Such a programme cannot be enforced without legislation. Taipei introduced a Waste Disposal Act and a Resource Recycling Act which mandates comprehensive waste separation and recycling. introduced a Waste Control Act and Act on Promotion of Saving and Recycling of Waste. It takes political will to push through such laws, a will that the Environment Bureau does not want to exercise. Key to recovering more waste is a recycling industry that can profitably process such waste into marketable products like recycled paper, glassware, plastic items, building materials. To support its recycling industry, has an annual recycling fund of NT$6 billion (HK$1.5 billion, US$194 million). It has become a leading developer of recycling technology. The government-sponsored Korea Environmental Corporation provides ongoing financial assistance to the recycling industry, resulting in a 50% increase since 2003 in the number of recycling companies in South Korea. While the Hong Kong government looks to waste charging as the panacea to reduce the waste generated, it ignores the other side of the equation: waste separation mandated by legislation and the creation of a viable recycling industry. Yet without these essential components, it aspires to achieve in seven years from now what Taipei took more than a decade to accomplish. This is wishful thinking, not a waste-management policy.
amount that needs disposing. The Environment Bureau presents its waste-management policy as if waste charging alone will make a substantial difference. A further reality that the bureau wilfully ignores is that waste recovery and recycling is impossible without a mandatory major waste-separation programme. Recyclable waste, such as paper, metal, glass and plastic, needs to be handled separately from waste that ends up in landfills or the incinerator. Such a programme cannot be enforced without legislation. Taipei introduced a Waste Disposal Act and a Resource Recycling Act which mandates comprehensive waste separation and recycling. introduced a Waste Control Act and Act on Promotion of Saving and Recycling of Waste. It takes political will to push through such laws, a will that the Environment Bureau does not want to exercise. Key to recovering more waste is a recycling industry that can profitably process such waste into marketable products like recycled paper, glassware, plastic items, building materials. To support its recycling industry, has an annual recycling fund of NT$6 billion (HK$1.5 billion, US$194 million). It has become a leading developer of recycling technology. The government-sponsored Korea Environmental Corporation provides ongoing financial assistance to the recycling industry, resulting in a 50% increase since 2003 in the number of recycling companies in South Korea. While the Hong Kong government looks to waste charging as the panacea to reduce the waste generated, it ignores the other side of the equation: waste separation mandated by legislation and the creation of a viable recycling industry. Yet without these essential components, it aspires to achieve in seven years from now what Taipei took more than a decade to accomplish. This is wishful thinking, not a waste-management policy.
Paper-to-Intl-Solid-Waste-Conf-attendees.docx