***************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Raymond Ho and an oral reply by the Secretary for the Environment, Transport and Works, Dr Sarah Liao, in the Legislative Council meeting today (January 11) :
Question:
The objectives of the waste recovery and recycling programmes implemented by the Environmental Protection Department are to enhance waste recovery and recycling, and minimize waste which requires disposal. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the percentage of recyclable waste in the total amount of waste recovered in the past three years;
(b) as the waste recovery and recycling programmes include domestic waste recovery programmes, commercial and industrial waste recovery programmes and pilot product responsibility programmes, of the most effective type of programmes in the past three years and the supporting data for that; and
(c) of the overseas experience in implementing the domestic waste recovery programmes and commercial and industrial waste recovery programmes and the supporting data for that?
Reply:
Madam President,
(a) In 2002-2004, the recovery rate of locally generated municipal solid waste (MSW) ranges from 36% to 41% with an average of 39%. The recovered materials were either recycled locally (about 9%) or exported for recycling (91%). The quantities recovered by material types and the corresponding recovery rates are attached in Annex I. Summing up, the recovered rate in metals is more than 90%, which is the highest one; 70% in electrical and electronic equipment; and 50% in paper and rubber tyres. We have submitted a detailed annex for reference (Annex I).
With the measures set out in the Policy Framework for the Management of Municipal Solid Waste in Hong Kong issued in December 2005, we aim to increase the MSW recovery rate to 45% by 2009 and 50% by 2014.
(b) In 2002-2004, the overall average recovery rate for domestic waste was 14% and that for commercial and industrial (C&I) waste was around 59%.
The Government has been testing out various forms of domestic waste separation and recovery in recent years with a view to identifying the modes that are most convenient to residents, cost-effective and best suit local needs. The Government is now actively promoting the territory-wide programme on source separation of domestic waste, which is a major domestic waste reduction initiative launched in 2005. The implementation of the source separation programme aims to increase the domestic waste recovery rate from the present 14% to 20% by 2007 and 26% by 2012 with the help of other measures such as MSW charging and mandatory producer responsibility schemes being in place.
The recovery rate for C&I waste is relatively high because the recyclables from C&I sources are generally more uniform and less contaminated than domestic waste. Although the C&I sector in Hong Kong is already doing quite well in waste recovery and recycling, the Government will continue to encourage the business sector through measures like the Wastewi$e Scheme to promote waste reduction and recycling of C&I waste.
Producer responsibility schemes (PRSs) work by assigning responsibilities to appropriate parties to collect, recycle and properly dispose of used products that do not have a ready market. A voluntary producer responsibility scheme for recovering rechargeable batteries was initiated in April 2005. Based on overseas experience, it would take time for similar programmes to fully develop their effectiveness. Legislation will be introduced into the Legislative Council in 2006 to provide the framework for PRSs, with product-specific measures introduced through subsidiary legislation subsequently.
(c) In other countries, the waste recovery rate of the C&I sector is also generally higher than that of the domestic sector like that in Hong Kong. For the domestic sector, many countries have implemented various household waste recovery programmes which include door-to-door collection of recyclables, setting up of waste separation facilities in public places as well as introduction of domestic waste charging through use of pre-paid refuse bags etc. Some examples are given in Table 1 in the Annex II.
In simple terms, the recovery rate for domestic waste in Taipei is 27%. Recyclable materials are collected five days a week free of charge whereas non-recyclable waste or trash has to be put in special pre-paid trash bags for collection. Contravention carries a penalty. In Fukuoka, Japan, ˇ°Home garbage Collection Feeˇ± has been charged since October 1, 2005. Citizens have to buy designated garbage bags from local supermarkets and convenience stores. In Korea, the recovery rate of 38.2 % is among the highest. A Volume-based Waste Fee System imposes different treatment cost as determined by the amount of waste generated by each household. Waste is collected in purchased volume-based bags. Recyclables are sorted and put out in separate bins.
The use of economic instruments to boost the recovery rate is becoming popular in many overseas countries. The policy instrument that attracts most attention in recent years is PRS. Under PRS, the obligation for managing end-of-life products is placed on the producers, distributors or sellers of the products. A well-designed PRS spurs producers to design products that generate less waste, or that can be reused or recycled. PRS has been widely employed through legislation in Europe, North America and Asia to manage products such as electrical and electronic equipment, batteries, packaging materials and vehicle tyres. However, the degree of success of such schemes depends on a series of factors such as the recovery arrangement, publicity of the programme and the environmental awareness of the general public. Among the overseas PRS programmes being implemented so far, two selected successful examples are given in Table 2 in the Annex II. Norway has achieved a recovery rate of over 90% in accordance with the EU guideline on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE). In addition, the tyres recovery rate in Alberta, Canada is 14%. An advance disposal fee of C $4/tyre is imposed on the sale of new tyres. Therefore, we have been able to make reference to many successful or unsuccessful overseas examples as a reference before developing a recovery programme which is suitable to Hong Kong.
Ends/Wednesday, January 11, 2006
Issued at HKT 19:15
NNNN