A less enthusiastic take on HSR in China

Image Credit: The Globe and Mail (August 12, 2011)

We have blogged about high speed rail (HSR) several times before, particularly focusing on China (see here and here). Amid my research this past year and constant enthusiasm for HSR in China, my own perspective on it has changed dramatically over the past few months. I was skeptical about its rapid progress to begin with, but the July 23rd crash only furthered my worries and general skepticism.

As shown in the map above, China leads the world in kilometres of HSR. The environmental motivations for this nation wide network are admirable, but given the citizens' demand for more low-cost transportation, along with a security of reaching destinations in a safe manner, HSR provides a case of tremendous uncertainty.

You can read this article for a more complete picture outlining genuine concerns of HSR in China. Take note: I am not against HSR in China. I think the country is on the right track in terms of sustainable transportation. However, rushing such projects with complete government control to ostensibly show off the nation's great technological rise is a bit idiotic, and when crashed do occur, this not only instills fear in the nation's citizens, but casts doubt from people all over the world.

The Beijing-Shanghai High Speed Rail is now operating

I have been following China's High Speed Rail (HSR) plans for quite some time now. It's been particularly fascinating tracking the development of the Beijing-Shanghai line which will link China’s two largest cities in just under 5 hours. Scheduled trains will make stops along the way in Tianjin, Jinan and Nanjing. It cost $33 billion and the trains can travel between 250-300 km/h over the 1,318 km of track between the two cities.

Despite the ongoing critiques of HSR in China (we have documented them before on this blog, you can view them here and here), this is an impressive achievement which will provide more transportation options for China's growing citizenry. Adam Mayer who blogs at "China Urban Development Blog" says:

"Linking China’s government/cultural center with its commercial/financial hub is a milestone on the path towards creating a connected nation. Airlines will certainly be hurt by the line, but because China’s air traffic is already at capacity, the train should help ease the strain on Beijing and Shanghai’s airports".

Now that the line is open, expect a diversity of discussion on Enviro Boys surrounding its environmental, planning, economic, social and political implications.

Read more here.

Bike Share System in Hangzhou, China

Following up on Chris' post on the theme of bicycles, I thought I would provide this video (thank you to my friend, DS, for sharing it with me) about a very successful public bike share system in Hangzhou, China that is paving the way for green transportation.

The video above provides all the details, anecdotes and statistics about the system so I'll leave the video to satisfy your curiosity. However, from a planning and development perspective, there are a couple of things worth mentioning.

One, bike share programs are especially useful as an inter-model transit strategy meaning that citizens might rent a bike to travel to a transit station where they could then park the bike at the bike share parking facility located at the transit station,  hop on transit and walk to their final destination. The bike share parking stations are meant to be close to other transit modes to help people effectively transition when making a journey. Further, they are also located near residential complexes and busy streets. Bikes in general are wonderful for commuting but bike share programs help alleviate fears about bicycle theft and allow people to integrate them effectively into their traveling.

The Hangzhou story is also promising considering the great fall of cycling China over the past 20 years. Indeed, according to some sources, "just ten years ago there were 500 million cyclists in China. The bike was emperor of the roads. It was the only way to go and the fastest way to get there. But whereas two thirds of families traveled by bike in the 90's, it is only 20% today. Bike ownership in cities has plummeted by 25% in the past five years".

There are researchers in my graduate program who are particularly interested in reviving bicycling in China. You can view their abstract here which focuses on Beijing.  This is a significant problem in China as cycling, a once dominant mode of transportation, is being pushed aside by the car which brings with it a series of factors including convenience, social/economic status, flexibility and more.

It's reassuring to know that some places in China such as Hangzhou and Guangzhou are moving forward with popular and affordable transportation programs to improve the livability and sustainability of their cities.

Beijing's new subway lines

Just last week Beijing opened up five new subway lines and 108 kilometres of new track. The new subway lines cost $9.4 billion to build and were not supposed to be completed until 2012. The Chinese however, have an impressive track record for completing large scale urban infrastructure projects ahead of schedule.

From the Toronto Star:
“We intend to bring on more new track every year for the next five years,” says Jia Peng, chief spokesman for the transit corporation. “We have the technology, we have the funds; the only thing we don't have much of is time — and time is crucial.

These new subway lines will undoubtedly ease traffic congestion both inside and outside of the urban core. Both congestion and pollution (air and noise) in Beijing have hitherto been an egregious problem with multiple social costs for the populace.

"Last year more than 2,000 new cars flooded into Beijing's streets and highways each day, for a total of nearly 800,000 new vehicles in 2010."

"Desperate to curb congestion in the city, the government announced it will restrict new car sales in Beijing this year to just 20,000 per month, holding a monthly public lottery for the privilege of buying one. Annual sales in the capital in 2011 will be capped at 240,000."

Sounds bold and progressive but is certainly doable in China.

The point of the Toronto Star article was to compare Beijing's remarkable progress in public transit expansion with Toronto's abysmally slow progress with new subways, light-right etc. While I commend the Beijing Mass Transit Railway Operation Corp with its success thus far, it operates in a jurisdiction that has much less stringent planning and environmental processes. Indeed, environmental impact assessments for such urban infrastructure projects in Canada can take months if not years.

In Canada, the public input alone is invaluable but incredibly time-consuming. Interest groups, community associations, business organizations, system users and concerned citizens might have reservations or suggestions about the transportation project. They are all important stakeholders and our elected officials must respond to them. It is therefore unfair do compare the two cities simply based on their planning processes.

In Toronto, for example, the urban transportation planning process might establish a vision of what a community wants to be and how the transportation systems fits into this vision. As you can imagine, in Toronto, with such a diversity of people, needs and interests, this process can take eons to complete thus delaying the building of the project be it subway or light-rail.

But, the urgency around public transportation in Beijing -- notwithstanding the limited planning and public involvement -- still showcases the commitment of the Beijing government to reduce traffic congestion and bring about a healthier and more efficient metropolis.

As the article writes, in Beijing "The government is planner, builder and arbiter all in one."

Read the full version of the Toronto Star article here.

Problems with HSR in China...

A number of months ago, I wrote about China's high speed rail (HSR) construction. China has the world's longest high-speed rail network with 6,920 kilometres and will expand to 13,000 kilometers within the next three years.

I also wrote about the many benefits of China's HSR growth. HSR will help stabilize the country's greenhouse gas emissions in its transportation sector. It will (over the long-term) decrease demand for airlines services, it will advance China's transportation network, foster a greener ethic in its citizenry etc.

BUT, recent news from the Chinese Academy of Sciences suggests that such HSR expansion is happening too quickly and might be too expensive for the nation long-term, if demand is lacking.

"The Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) reported to the State Council recently, urging the large-scale high-speed railway construction projects in China to be re-evaluated. The CAS worries that China may not be able to afford such a large-scale construction of high-speed rail, and such a large scale high-speed rail network may not be practical".

"Some local media have reported recently that the recently enabled Wuhan - Guangzhou high-speed rail is currently running an average daily attendance of less than half capacity, while the newly opened Shanghai-Hangzhou high-speed rail attendance is even lower. The main reason for the high-speed rail low attendance is that fares are too high; the high-speed railway ticket prices are usually double or higher than normal train fares". Read more here.

I have and continue to argue that HSR ticket prices must be competitive with airfare tickets. The success, popularity and future ridership of HSR will largely be dependent on how affordable it is for China's citizenry. HSR construction is indeed really expensive. However, if one of the goals is to have an extensive high speed train system with very high rates of use, then prices must be affordable to all income groups. With decent rates of ridership, the benefits will pay off long-term and the Ministry of Railways can recover the costs of construction.

I do hope that China continues to expand its HSR corridors. The Beijing-Shanghai line is supposed to open next year. I imagine it is going to have decent ridership and significantly reduce the amount of GHG emissions due to less demand for airlines. But, the issue of cost is something the Chinese Ministry of Railways must better address in this critical time for the nation.

China's dependency on Coal

The Green Blog from the NY Times discusses China's heavy reliance on coal.

"the single most important issue is how to get China to deploy carbon capture and storage into its coal sector.”

"the technology is still in its infancy, with only a handful of projects up and running globally, and expensive to deploy. Who will cover the cost?"

"China, which counts itself as a developing country, say the industrialized world should underwrite such investments. But will Western countries be willing? To what extent should China be responsible for curbing its own coal emissions, and how much should the industrialized world contribute?"

China will probably consider carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology but is waiting for the United States, Canada and other Western nations to prove their commitment to this technology. Like many technologies for climate change mitigation, there are big costs and lots of uncertainties. Given China's coal dependent economy, there is a lot of opportunity for CCS. I think Canada and China should partner up and run a trial CCS initiative to evaluate its efficacy. This could showcase its potential and attract other nations.

China's straddling bus

A couple of weeks ago, Chris (and people around the world) reported on China's nine day traffic jam. The traffic jam was on the Beijing-Tibet expressway. Beijing itself has had many challenges with traffic congestion due to poor urban planning and transit policies that favor the automobile over public transport. When I was in Shanghai, I noticed the impressive transit system and was told by locals that it is well used. Beijing's public transit system is less impressive I'm told.

As Chris mentioned, congestion zone charges, highways tolls and carbon taxes could help ease traffic and pollution in cities like Beijing. Alas, these sorts of policy tools would probably not be well received by the motorists.

The straddling bus has been proposed by Chinese civil engineers. It would help save road space and could carry up to 1400 passengers. I think there are two really unique aspects of this transit mode (if is does come into operation). 1) The bus stations will have supercapacitors which would re-charge the bus with energy so it could make trips continuously. 2) It could carry over 1000 passengers. You do the math to figure out how many cars that could take off the road over a one year period and the drastic reductions in carbon emissions that would accompany this process.

Powered by electricity and capable of carrying over 1000 passengers, it sounds like a promising project for China's top tier cities like Beijing. Can't subways do the same thing? They sure can, but they are really expensive ($100 million per kilometre of construction) and they take years to construct.

Can the straddling bus help improve urban transit? We'll have to see what happens. 186 kilometres have been planned out in Beijing's Mentougou District.

China's nine day traffic jam...

And you think your daily commute on the 401 is bad. Imagine being stuck on that road for over a week. That, sadly, is what is has come to on one of China's major expressways.

Two days ago, the CBC reported that a traffic jam had entered its ninth day of existence and is well over 100 km long. It could very well still be jammed up. According to the Chinese government, the jam occurred due to insufficient traffic capacity and maintenance issues. So basically, there are too many cars and too few roads.

One might think you could simply jump off the expressway and take another route home, but the jam is so solidly backed up that even that won't work. And really, you can't do much else except wait it out. So what exactly might you do for several days on the road?

Food and drink is very much available as vendors have set up shop to appease the stuck drivers. But a quick review of supply & demand theories will lead you to understand why the food is far from affordable. I'm sure gas is being sold to the poor souls who run out, but again, probably far from the normal price. And we can only hope that most cars aren't idling the whole time.

Emergency vehicles must be screwed, too.

Urban planning institutes and consultants frequently release reports citing the added costs of traffic congestion to the economy, usually in the billions. But North American traffic congestion is nothing compared to what China is experiencing. And apparently, this isn't the first time it has happened.

It won't be the last, either. China is growing outrageously fast in almost every dimension of its existence. People there are getting richer and wanting more cars. Building the infrastructure to house the cars doesn't happen quite as quickly.

So, here are the typical solutions: more public transit, congestion zone charges, toll highways, carbon taxes and voluntary drops in vehicle usage. Forgive me for being so blunt, but I don't think China really cares that much. Of course, they are implementing all sorts of programs like this. But will they trump the sheer desire to own and drive a car, especially as the economy grows at 9% per year? Doubtful. One can only hope that some lessons are learned from this jam and the future ones that take place.

Water in China Part III

Image above: The Yangtze River. China's longest river, 6,397 km in length. The Yangtze River flows across 13 provinces, with many branches, such as Min River, Wu River, Xiang River, Han River, Huangpu River and more.

Image credit: Odd and Funny Blogspot.

**Lcd: litres per capita per day**

This post will conclude the three part series of water in china. You can read part one here, and part two here. Most of this information is derived from Peter Gleick's publication titled "China and Water".

China is slowly starting to introduce water pricing to induce conservation. Such measures in water management have already been brought about in places like Guelph, Ontario. For a long time, water utilities have been subsidized by the Central government which has reduced the need to encourage water conservation. But now, with sustainable water management as a long-term national goal, Chinese cities are slowly implementing water pricing. In Beijing, price for domestic water use have more than doubled 4 yuan per cubic meter. For water intensive activities such as commercial car washing, it cost 45 yuan per cubic meter.

In Shenzhen (Southern China) local government officials have called for initiatives to recycle water, introduce rainwater harvesting and cut back on overall water use. Price-driven quotas are being introduced in Southern China, which means that urban homes that use more than 210 lcd (Canadians use about 343 lcd) will have to pay a surcharge on additional use. The more you consume past the 210 maximum, the more you pay for.

Separate quotas are being imposed on the various water users which includes industrial, agriculture, residential and commercial. The key point is that local governments in Southern China (where water is more abundant) are adopting flexible pricing systems based on different water users; this is an important step because the industrial and agriculture sectors use lots of water and constitute a greater share of GDP output. The greatest cuts need to happen in the residential sector; but this can only happen with education and good incentives to use less. Moreover, Northern cities should follow Beijing's initiatives and adopt smarter pricing systems. Northern cities have less water than southern ones yet they are slower to bring about water management initiatives. Reducing national water use requires participation from each city.

According to Peter Gleick, China has invariably experienced poor public participation grades for water projects and water policy. The Three Gorges Dam is notorious for its non-existent public consultation process which led to the displacement of 1.3 million people. Gleick writes:

“A major environmental law passed in China in 2003 for the first time ostensibly encouraged public participation in environmental decision making. This law, the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Law requires all major construction projects to undertake an impact assessment". Further, it states “The nation encourages relevant units, experts and the public to participate in the EIA process in appropriate ways”. In addition, the law states that “the institutions should seriously consider the opinions of the relevant units, experts and the public” and “should attach explanations for adopting or not adopting the opinions".

Sounds like a well thought out law; however, its effectiveness is questionable. Some citizens have taken many matters into their own hands; some have sued chemical plants to force compensation for health and environmental damages (due to polluted water supply) or to make more environmental information accessible to the public. With China's explosive growth -- in economy and population -- and with the indispensable role water plays for economic growth –through dams, wastewater, agriculture, irrigation and forthcoming desalination—it is clear that it is a extremely valuable resource that will shape China’s future.

With sensible pricing structures being introduced, and with wastewater treatment plants helping provide cleaner water, the test for China will be whether it can engage more of its citizens in an equitable and efficient manner. Public participation should not be viewed as a hindrance to dam construction; citizens are demanding that such construction be built in a way that minimizes harm to their livelihoods and that effective compensation measures are in place for those affected by it.

As Gleick says “Sustainable water management has long taken a backseat to the Chinese for economic growth. With supplies dwindling, the Chinese will start conserving it through pricing and through desalination construction" (which is problematic but necessary considering China’s population).

Patricia Adams, an executive director of Probe International says that cities like Beijing can't keep going further with larger engineering projects to take water from other peoples' watersheds. "Beijing needs to implement regulatory and pricing regimes that reflect the scarcity of water in their own watershed and induce conservation and watershed rehabilitation". Clearly, the country needs some sort of water education program to inform people not only about conservation but about the impact of certain chemicals and contaminants to reduce health impacts from exposure.

Key message: If China truly wants to achieve sustainable water management, it will need to ensure that its central governments puts pressure on local governments to develop the legal, technological, and institutional tools to clean up water pollution, reduce wasteful and inefficient uses of water, restore natural ecosystems, and develop sustainable sources of supply.

** China is spending 500 billion yuan (77 billion Canadian) on the South-North Water Diversion Project. It will be completed by 2050 and is the largest scheme of its type in the world. It will divert about 44.8 billion cubic meters of water per year from various rivers. Hopefully, this project is accompanied with extensive water conservation education and with water pricing systems. You can read about this project here.

Energy Intensity in China

Image Credit: South China Morning Post

Energy intensity is a macroeconomic measure of the energy required per unit of economic output. It is commonly expressed as units of energy per unit of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). For China, it is the amount of energy needed to produce each yuan of economic output.

According to official figures from Beijing, last year China burnt the equivalent of almost 108 tonnes of coal to produce each million yuan of economic output.

From 2005 to 2009, energy intensity fell by 16 percent in China. Do not be totally deceived though. The output of the service industries - retail businesses, media, financial services and banking all use much less energy than manufacturing and industrial businesses. The service industries have started to rise of late and have formed a greater share of overall economic output. As a result, energy intensity tends to decrease as a natural consequence of economic growth.

Energy intensity remains relatively high because of China's large-scale infrastructure projects such as high speed rail construction and hydro-electric dams. When energy is priced at a lower amount, there is less of a need to conserve and use it more efficiently. The Germans have been efficient in almost every aspect of their economy.

In Germany, conservation of energy has not necessarily slowed down economic growth. Using energy efficiently has led to better allocation of it, which leads to better transmission and distribution of electricity across the nation. This keeps the economy going (it's amazing how much you can save with smart energy allocation) and does little harm to the environment.

Another example: Italy 's annual energy intensity of 122.8 tons of oil equivalent makes it the most energy efficient country in the G8 and one of the most energy efficient in the industrial world. This is mainly due to the traditionally high energy prices which have resulted in more efficient company and consumer behaviours. No one likes higher energy prices (whether you're an industry or household resident). But higher prices force you to innovate (and conserve) and design products that are less energy intensive. This drives competition and overtime, the entire economy benefits and people adjust accordingly.

China’s wasteful industrial and chemical plants are what keep energy intensity high. They help keep economic growth in check but have negative ramifications on the environment. Adopting environmental regulations would risk slowing down such growth. It seems that the Chinese Communist Party is content with how the economy is growing (now the world's second largest) but be critical and ask yourself if such growth is truly sustainable given the population size, political system, increasing numbers of university graduates and outstanding human rights cases.

Key message: Through innovation and smarter design, energy efficiency will get better in China, but it is going to be an extremely difficult task given the current economic growth.

Some Links on High Speed Rail in China

High Speed Rail (HSR) is major source of discussion today in fields such as Urban Planning, Transportation Engineering, Public Policy and Economics to name a few. Several countries (with the exception of Canada) are currently constructing or expanding their high speed rail networks. China has the world's longest high-speed rail network with 6,920 kilometres (see map) and will expand to 13,000 kilometers within the next three years. This won't be cheap.

Spending billions of Yuan on HSR construction should mean that ticket prices should be high to recover operating and maintenance costs, right? Well, in theory, but prices need to be competitive with airlines otherwise people won't use HSR. This will prove to be a challenge for the Chinese government as they will have to consider a number of incentives such as subsidizing fares to ensure that HSR is affordable for its citizens. Some argue that fares should be high at first to recover revenue to pay for operation and maintenance. An interesting debate indeed.

I blog about this and share links because HSR growth in China will help stabilize the country's greenhouse gas emissions in its transportation sector. It will (over the long-term) decrease demand for airlines services, it will advance China's transportation network, foster a greener ethic in its citizenry (insofar as HSR prices are affordable). The infrastructurist blog writes

"high speed rail has fully infiltrated the population, and it’s only getting bigger — by 2020, there will be HSR lines connecting every Chinese city with more than 500,000 residents, meaning that 90% of the country’s population of 1.3 billion will have HSR access." This is good, but will it be affordable?

To read about HSR competition with airlines, see here.

A blog post on HSR vs airlines in China, see here.

An interesting financial analysis criticizing HSR in China, see here.

For a critical commentary from HSR riders in China, see here.

Key message: HSR has the ability to drastically ameliorate China's national transportation system and significantly cut down on greenhouse gas emissions. It is a very sustainable transportation solution as we have seen in Europe and Japan. However, if tickets prices are too high and made unaffordable, ridership will be low and the billions of Yuan spent on HSR will be seen as a waste of money and hence anger a lot of people. HSR ticket prices need to be comparable (or cheaper) than airline tickets, this will require a lot of work on the policy front.

Water in China: Part II

Water quality in China is in need of desperate revitalization. For such a large developing (arguably now developed) country that has made immense economic progress over the past 20 years, it is no surprise that water quality has been a victim of such economic development. As discussed in part 1, the priorities of economic growth in China have superseded the priorities of environmental protection and ecological balance. Like part 1, all of the information in this post is derived from Peter Gleick's "China and Water" publication.

As reported by Peter Gleick, there is not a lot of information or data available on China’s water quality. However, China’s State Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) have published some data on China’s water quality and have made it available to the public. The data and resources reveal that many of China’s rivers are grossly polluted by human and industrial wastes. An uncounted number of aquatic species have been driven to extinction. An estimated 20,000 chemical factories, half of which are along the Yangtze River (China’s longest river) are dumping uncontrolled or marginally controlled pollutants into China’s rivers.

In 2006, nearly half of China’s major cities did not meet state drinking water quality standards. China’s 10th 5-year plan (2001-2006) mandated the construction of thousands of new wastewater treatment plants, yet a 2006 survey by SEPA revealed that half of the new plants actually built were operating improperly or not at all. In 2005, China’s experienced 1,400 environmental pollution accidents of which half involved water pollution. Water quality has been deteriorating in main rivers including the Songhua, Hai He, and Huai He rivers.

On a positive note, drinking tap water in Beijing has been declared “safe” under the country’s new national drinking water standards for 106 contaminants in spite of some local complaints about its taste. Unfortunately, the OECD has reported that hundreds of millions of Chinese are drinking water contaminated with inorganic pollutants such as arsenic and excessive fluoride including toxins from untreated factory wastewater. Some concerned farmers, living in contaminated regions grow grain with poor water quality, sell that grain and purchase grain from other parts of China they believe have safe water.

Make no mistake about it, untreated wastewater is so problematic affecting every facet of life including social, economic and personal development. Approximately 4.4 billion tons of untreated or partially treated wastewater are dumped into the Huai He River annually.

Now over to the positive and promising. So, we know that wastewater treatment is indeed a critical indicator of public health, environmental and economic progress. Even countries like the U.S. have had issues treating certain contaminants to improve water quality. Wastewater progress must be concomitant with the country’s other development indicators as it plays an indispensable role in ameliorating social and personal well-being.

Fortunately, the government has recognized this challenge and has pledged to commit more capital and labour towards the construction of more wastewater and water treatment plants. The country is also looking at private companies from abroad to assist with wastewater financing and construction.

“More traditional water-supply and treatment infrastructure is also being built rapidly, including water and wastewater treatment plants. Officials announced plans to build ten sewage disposal plants in northwest China’s Shaanxi province, along the Weihe River, the largest tributary of the Yellow River. Another 30 plants are to be built by 2010”.

In one agreement, French Water Company Veolia has set up a joint French-Chinese venture to build a series of water projects, including urban and industrial wastewater treatment plants, desalination facilities, water-treatment equipment, and water-management services in the northern city of Teda. This is just one example, other joint ventures will become more commonplace as the Chinese turn to foreign technical expertise to assist with such essential water projects to improve water quality. What is now needed is a clear institutional and legal framework committed to reducing industrial waste and using a more sustainable approach to water management.

While massive water companies like Veolia and Suez have earned notorious reputations –namely because of water privatization—they will nonetheless have an important role to play in countries like China for increasing public health standards and taking China into a more prosperous water future.

The final part of the series will feature discussion around the economics of water in China along with the importance of public participation in water projects.

Charging for plastic bags: Hong Kong

It has been one year since Hong Kong introduced a levy scheme charging 50 HK cents (6.6 cents Canadian) per plastic bag. That's right, if you forget to bring your reusable bags to the supermarket, you get charged 50 HK cents for every plastic bag you need. Hong Kong’s levy scheme has been successful as evidenced from the statistics below.

Recent news in Hong Kong confirm the success of the 50 cent charge. The only surprising statistic, which can be both negative or positive (depending on how you look at it) was that the government was expecting to pool in about $200 million from the levy over the course of the year, however, it only brought in $20 million. Obviously, this this can be attributed to the large scale reduction in plastic bag use and the massive increase in reusable bag use.

This news provides a great deal of relief to city officials who have been criticized for their lackluster efforts on waste management. As land is scarce in Hong Kong, there is little space for waste sites and landfills. This continues to challenge city officials as to what approach might be most effective and efficient with dealing with waste. Fortunately, plastic bag use has dropped significantly.

Toronto and Washington D.C. both have plastic bag levy schemes. Washington DC, unlike Toronto and Hong Kong, is clearer as to how they spend the revenue raised from the scheme. For example, Washington D.C. raised $150,000 from their 5 cent levy in January 2010. This money went towards cleaning up the Anacostia River. Thus, environmental remediation efforts in D.C. have been aided by the levy and citizens are much clearer about how the revenue is spent.

Hopefully the government of Hong Kong will be a little clearer as to how they will spend the revenue.

Here is a summary of some of some statistics:

-$19.8 million was the total amount of money collected from the levy between July 2009 and March 2010. This revenue goes directly to the government

-Usage of plastic bags is now far less than before the levy was introduced, with a reduction of 90%

-The number of registered outlets now collecting the plastic bags levy has reached 3,000

Water in China: Part 1

Three major rivers in China.

As someone deeply passionate about water resources, and being close to Mainland China, I thought I would write a three part series about China’s water situation and provide some analysis. Most of the information in this series is derived from a chapter of a publication called “The World’s Water 2008-2009”. The chapter, titled “China and Water” is written by Peter Gleick. Part 1 of this series will feature the salient connection between China’s economy and its dependence on water resources. These posts will be lengthy so feel free to just read sections.

Simply put, demand for fresh water is growing in China. Renewable water availability is 2,138 cubic meters per person per year. That’s more than India’s 1,719 cubic meters but smaller than the US (10,231 cubic meters). A lot the water is located in the Southern region of the country. More recently, there has been more pressure to pipe water over long distances to the north with economic development happening there. China’s voracious demand for water comes at a time when the country is growing so rapidly (both in population and economy) with some provinces already over 100 million people (Henan Province, for example).

China’s response to such growth has been through the construction of more water infrastructure such as hydro-electric dam projects on China’s many rivers. The country has over 14 major rivers including the famous Yangtze river running over 6000 kilometers in length. These projects are economically beneficial in that they produce electricity for various industries and they provide water for various users including the public, industry and agriculture. Manufacturing and other industries consume lots of water but help keep productivity and China’s trade surplus in check.

With such immense economic growth, and with water being indispensable for that growth, social friction starts to arise as citizens become displaced and soon homeless from such massive water projects. Hydro-electric dams like the Three Gorges Dam (the biggest hydro-electric dam in the world) has displaced millions of people along the Yangtze River where public consultation was non-existent and simply an impediment to building such a critical project.

According to Gleick’s research, many local governments are forced to protect local industries and jobs at the expense of displacement and crippling water protection. Economic development is driven by the utilization of water resources. Case in point, water use per unit of GDP or economic productivity is higher in China compared to many other countries. In 2003, 465 cubic meters of water were used to produce 10,000 yuan worth of GDP, four times the world average and nearly 20 times that of Japan and Europe at that time.

The Chinese are currently building the South to-North Water Transfer Project, to “funnel 45 billion cubic meters a year to the northern part of the country from the Yangtze River basin. That project was approved in 2002 to address water shortages in the north. Even if fully built, it will not be completed until in the middle of this century. Amid construction, there is growing concern about both environmental and social problems.”

This is just a contemporary example of a hydro-electric dam stirring up controversy. China recently announced that total investments in the water sector during its five year plan (2006-2011) could be as large as one trillion yuan (156 billion Canadian $). This investment will focus on water distribution systems and the construction of thousands of wastewater treatment plants. Fortunately, wastewater treatment plants will help improve quality of life and help with environmental protection efforts (I'll blog about this in Part 2).

So, is China suffering from that conventional economy versus environment debate? Water resources are being exploited for energy purposes, industrial uses and keeping local economies going. However, such large scale projects have produced a lot of social issues and polluted rivers.

We often overlook the salient connection between water and economic growth. In China, this connection is indeed a critical one and vastly important for the country’s future. China is expanding water supply through dams and forthcoming coastal desalination. These are innovative engineering solutions but the equations do not always account for “people”. And in China, people or persons equal 1.3 billion. Thus, expanding water supply must be done in an equitable way that benefits all water users including the public, industry, agriculture and commerce. Dams and increasing water supply must be balanced with public participation and consultation, water education and conservation.

In the next part, I will discuss water quality in China and the current policies in place to protect that water. I will also touch on quantity and what China is doing in terms of pricing and rationing i.e. some of the economics.

Buy bottled water and you get a free water bottle...

I took a picture of this Volvic ad because I thought it was hilarious. It's posted right outside a grocery store near my place. If you purchase bottled water (four to be precise) you are eligible to receive a “Free” water bottle. That seems a bit odd in that water bottles (which are a perfect way to carry around your water) are also used because they are reusable and better for the environment than bottled water. But, the store will only give you the water bottle if you buy four un-recyclable, over-priced, energy intensive and wasteful bottles of bottled water.

Let’s do some quick math: if twenty customers, on average, everyday over one week were attracted by this bizarre incentive and went ahead with the deal, we would have the following:

20 persons/day x 4 bottled water = 80 bottles of water/day in aggregate or 4 per person/day.

80 bottles/day x 7 days = 560 bottles per week.

The price of one 500 ML bottled water at the store is 15 HK dollars ($2.02 CAN). So you need to spend $60 HK dollars in order to receive the free water bottle that probably costs the same price but, alas, is harder to find.

Not to totally criticize the Volvic deal, but it’s pretty horrendous for the environment. We have blogged about bottled water and its unfortunate realities numerous times. Sadly, drinking water from the tap in Hong Kong is simply not the same as it is in Canada because the water is not treated as adequately. I have been advised not to drink tap water so I have been consuming bottled water here at my place. Indeed, I am somewhat of a hypocrite, but truthfully, I have no other option.

It makes me think how fortunate we are in Canada to have clean, affordable and environmentally-friendly drinking water right at the turn of the tap.

Hong Kong: Geography, Climate and Population

Image of Hong Kong from Victoria Peak (552 meters in height).

Seeing as I'll be in Hong Kong for the next two months, many of my posts will be about this City and its progress and challenges surrounding the environment. Don’t worry though, every so often I’ll post something that isn’t entirely focussed on the “environment” so you don’t get too bored.

This post is a general overview of Hong Kong’s geography, climate and population. Yes, this information is widely available on Wikipedia but I figured I could break it down so you know a little bit more about this very vibrant and dynamic place. As someone who studied the Environment and Human Geography for the past four years, the least I could do is provide some information about place, location, demographics and density.

To begin, Hong Kong is a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of China. This means that it is a part of Mainland China but has its own economic and political system "one country, two systems".

Hong Kong has the fourth highest population density in the world in terms of special regions/countries (Macau, Monaco and Singapore are first, second and third respectively). The population of Hong Kong is just over 7,000,000 people with a total land area of 1,104 square kilometers; this puts its population density at 6,480 persons per km² (Toronto's is 3,972 persons per km²⁾.

Hong Kong’s 1,104 square kilometers is spread out over three regions that constitute the City, these regions include New Territories, Kowloon and Hong Kong Island. New Territories is the most northern region located just below Mainland China. It is the biggest by land size but has the smallest population density at 3,820 persons per km². Hong Kong Island (where I work) is the smallest by land size and has a density of 16,220 persons per km². The airport is located on Lantau Island which is another island of Hong Kong.

Finally, I live on Kowloon Peninsula which has the highest density at 43,970 persons per km² (it’s intense but I love it). If you look at the map, there is an area in Kowloon called “Mong Kok”. The population density is intense, I reckon it has the highest density in Hong Kong and is one of the most dense places in the world.

Hong Kong has a humid sub-tropical climate (very humid and wet in the summer, very dry in the winter). Right now, the average temperature has been around 30 degrees Celsius with intense humidity and lots of rain. Victoria Harbour is the body of water between Kowloon and Hong Kong Islands. The City is also surrounded by a number of mountains and peaks which you can view here. Hong Kong is just south of the Tropic of Cancer. The South China Sea is immediately south of Hong Kong Island which is excellent for its exports and international trade.

The former airport, Kai Tak, was located on Kowloon side right in the urban area. As the city’s population started to grow (immensely) residential space became more limited and thus justified the re-location of the airport on Lantau Island, just West of Kowloon and immediately south of New Territories. The International Airport on Lantau Island has much more land and is quite far from any residential developments. The previous airport (Kai Tak) is prime real estate and City Planners are currently zoning the plot of land into various uses which I’ll blog about in the coming weeks.

All three regions of Hong Kong are very different in terms of density, development and infrastructure. The New Territories has a lower population density and has lots of agricultural land. The district is under more pressure to develop residential units so as to accommodate Hong Kong’s growing population. The City however, is not growing as fast as it once was. Population growth slowed 0.3 percent from 2008 to 2009.

I hope this has furthered your knowledge of Hong Kong just a little bit. More to come.

Plastic Bags in HK

“Love Hong Kong, Use Less Plastic Bags”.

I was strolling around the Hung Hom market this past weekend shopping for groceries and cheap kitchen utensils. Walking around the market really confirmed the Hong Kong I envisioned, that of a super capitalist and hard-working society.

I was fascinated by the various merchants and their marketing techniques to entice both foreigners and locals alike into buying their products. This sense of capitalism is quite interesting and mixed with a bit of greenery.

While Hong Kong is a free market society, they are quite self-sufficiently green. I took this photograph to illustrate the City’s sense of environmental stewardship. Based on some observation, plastic bags are rarely used in the grocery stores; everyone brings their own backpack or reusable bags.

While Toronto and other international cities have recently started to charge for plastic bags (see here), Hong Kong seems to have convinced many of its citizens and tourists to strongly consider avoiding plastic bags. The store I shopped at had a nominal charge on plastic bags but overall, they used signs and their customers to foster a culture of conservation.

Reducing plastic bags significantly alleviates pressure on waste management systems. A culture of greenery and sustainable consumption is something that Hong Kong should pride itself on.

Key message: Hong Kong is committed to reducing the number of plastic bags used in the City. Good on you, Hong Kong.

The MTR in Hong Kong...

I recently arrived in Hong Kong to begin a two-month internship with a property development company called Cheung Kong Holdings. I start work on June 21st.

As someone deeply passionate about urban planning, my first observations in Hong Kong were: one, its high density environment and two, its extremely adequate public transit system, known as the Mass Transit Railway (MTR). The MTR is an integral part of Hong Kong's transportation system. I took the MTR from the Airport, located in the far west, to Hung Hom Station located in Kowloon (the station closest to where I am staying).

I had to switch trains a couple of times with my luggage (a pain to carry around) but was completely distracted by the MTR's efficiency, good ridership (approx 4 million trips made on the MTR on an average weekday) and intelligent technology. The trains have TVs that provide updates of transit delays, the weather and local news to name a few. Overall, a much more exciting and interesting way to travel than a cab.

Enviro Boys has blogged extensively about public transit in the past. A lot of my posts on public transit have been based on what I have read from academic journals, news articles and other publications. I have first-hand experience with Toronto's TTC, but this system is in need of desperate revitalization.

The MTR is going to be my main method of transit over the next two months. It could take me anywhere I need to go around Hong Kong. I will use it to go from Kowloon (where I live) to Hong Kong Island (where I work). Most impressively, the MTR is incredibly efficient and affordable! Efficient and affordable public transit systems are a rarity in Canada. Of course, Hong Kong's high density and compactness justify the need for an excllent transit system. Nonetheless, there are so many lessons to learn from the MTR, lessons I will bring with me to Vancouver and my grad program.

There will be more posts about the MTR as the weeks progress. Hopefully, these posts will come from observation and first-hand experience, a different approach to my coverage of public transit on this blog.

Photo Image: Picture of MTR West Line Train courtesy of flickr.com

Coal-loaded ship runs aground on the Great Barrier Reef...

If the rapid development of coal-fired power plants in China wasn't enough to piss off the environmental community, the crashing of a Chinese coal-carrier on the Great Barrier Reef certainly won't help.

The ship ran aground late last night and is carrying 72,000 tons of coal, as well as 1000 tons of oil. Some of the oil has started to leak and local officials are very worried that the ship is on the verge of breaking apart. A break could spell significant environmental disaster on one of the world's most fragile ecosystems.

Australia's Great Barrier Reef is in serious danger from climate change, as rising ocean temperatures tend to cause significant coral bleaching, which, if occurring annually, could very well kill the Reef.

For more information on the story, go here.

This has not been a good week for China's coal industry. In addition to the Reef incident and the constant criticism of its coal plants by environmentalists, 153 miners have been trapped inside a coal mine in China for nearly a week.

Despite all the wonderful economic and energy benefits of coal, there sure are many downsides. Hopefully these downsides start to be taken more seriously before it's too late.

Photo: Guardian Newspaper

A cleaner, cheaper, more useful type of clean coal...

Imagine if all you needed to resurface your driveway was a little sea water and some carbon dioxide? And what if I told you that by resurfacing your driveway you would be taking advantage of carbon free energy and even creating some relatively clean water?

Bollocks, you'd probably say (and I would hope in an English accent). Well, there's a company in the United States that is hoping to prove you wrong. Based off the naturally occurring process corals use to make their bones, some very innovative entrepreneurs at Calera have developed a method to take carbon emissions from gas and coal-fired plants and mixing it with ocean water to create calcium carbonate. Calcium carbonate -- the substance making up coral bones -- can be turned into cement or used as aggregate in construction projects.

There are plenty of small innovative firms out there with cool ideas like this, but Calera could very well make a significant impact. It has already attracted attention from Thomas Friedman, author of The World is Flat and columnist for the New York Times, and more importantly, significant investment from a major engineering firm confident enough to build several Calera plants.

There are hopes that this process will actually lead to a "clean coal" future, something that is heavily criticized by many because of the extraordinary expense and excruciatingly slow development of mainstream carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. By capturing the carbon emissions from coal and gas plants, it essentially makes them carbon emissions-free. Moreover, the carbon is stored in useful products like cement, as opposed to being pumped in large quantities underground.

A wonderful bonus that comes out of this process is relatively clean water. The salt water used loses about 80% of the properties that make it unsafe to drink, which happens to make it much easier to convert to fresh water using desalination as less energy is required to filter the water.

Considering how much coal is being used to power the world's electricity systems, this process, if actually scalable in an economic fashion, could change the whole playing field. The company is touting the potential of this technology in China and India, which are developing coal plants at a rate of nearly one a day. And since major construction projects and fresh water crises are bound to define much of each country's upcoming future, the technology is especially attractive.

But even if all the potential of this technology does come to fruition, it won't be perfect. Coal is a finite resource. Coal plants, even without carbon emissions, still have significant impacts on our lives. They emit dangerously high levels of toxic chemicals into the air -- even with scrubber technologies -- causing severe health complications. And coal mining is among the most environmentally devastating processes known to our history. I mean, how many other industries can say that they blow the tops off mountains to get what they want?

The trouble is, coal is going to be used excessively whether we like it or not.

No energy technology is perfect, but the Calera technology could at least make a significant dent as we try to lower carbon emissions. It's amazing what we can learn from nature. One hopes we don't kill too much of it off as we do.