Government Ignores the Citizens’ Right to Know the True Environmental and Social Costs
Aircraft
WWF questions why the government has not committed to conducting a full Social Return on Investment (SROI) study to increase its project transparency. The study will reveal the true environmental and social costs of this project including the aviation emissions and the associated costs, which will not be taken into account in the current Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process. In the study conducted by the University of British Columbia (UBC) Fisheries Centre which released by WWF earlier, the third runway will cost fishing industry losses in catch value of HK$48 million and losses in net profit of HK$11 million over an 18 year period.
Considering that carbon tax on the aviation industry have been imposed by the Australian government, and the European Union has applied Emission Trading Scheme to Hong Kong airlines, WWF has also pointed out that the estimated total carbon tax to be imposed on Asia-Pacific flights alone from a third runway could range up to HK$59 billion for the next 20 years (Year 2008-2030).
Dr Andy Cornish, Director of Conservation at WWF-Hong Kong says, “Any business would want to know the costs as well as benefits of new projects before giving them the green light. Yet for some reason, the government is refusing to even answer this very reasonable request for a third runway. We can’t understand why, do they have something to hide?”
“Despite our repeated asks of Airport Authority Hong Kong (AAHK) to provide aviation emissions projections, WWF has only received a small set of raw flight data. AAHK is completely avoiding its responsibility to provide this basic information to the public nor is it addressing the concerns on increasing aviation emissions.”
According to a public poll conducted by WWF-Hong Kong and Greenpeace Hong Kong in January, 73 percent of respondents expressed that the government should consider the environmental and social costs of a third runway option. At the CE forum recently organised by green groups, the same view was shared by the three Chief Executive candidates: a more sustainable approach to development, including SROI studies, should be a prerequisite to the planning of mega-infrastructure projects in the future.
In this case, the government is clearly refusing to provide information which is in the public interest; and leaving Hong Kong citizens to bear the environmental and social impacts of the project in the future.
“The impacts of large developments are most acute in small geographic localities like Hong Kong, so it is even more important that we get these decisions right, in order to conserve a living planet for present and future generations. Proceeding without such basic information is risky, and nothing less than poor planning.” Cornish concludes.
Aircraft
