1.1.1
The existing Wo Hop Shek Crematorium
is a coffin crematorium with two twin cremators. A skeletal cremator building
with a single cremator operates nearby for the cremation of skeletal remains
from burial. The skeletal cremator and the coffin cremators were commissioned
in the 1960’s and 1991 respectively.
1.1.2
The five existing cremators are
approaching the end of their serviceable life. They are beyond economic repair
and further restoration work is not considered cost-effective or sustainable.
They should therefore be replaced and the capacity of the crematorium
facilities should be expanded to meet increasing public demand.
2.1.1
The number of cremations has been
rising steadily in the last 30 years and the existing public cremators in
the territory are operating at almost their full capacities. In 2006, 86% of dead bodies were
cremated. Although
the pledge of undertaking the cremation within a maximum waiting time of 15
days after application could be fully met, the present provisions would not be
sufficient to cater for any increase in demand of the cremation in the coming
years.
2.1.2
The Food and Environmental Hygiene
Department (FEHD) therefore proposes to demolish the existing coffin
crematorium and the skeletal cremator building at Wo Hop Shek and to construct
a new crematorium in the existingsame site. The current Wo Hop Shek
site is already established and the use of an existing site is a more
sustainable approach than using a greenfield site – due to environmental
concerns and general public’s resistance against cremators in their
neighbourhood, it is extremely difficult to identify suitable new land for
crematorium development.
2.1.3
New cremation technology will be used
to enhance throughput and to improve the control on air emissions from the
cremators to meet the latestnewly revised “Best Practicable Means
for Incinerators” BPM 12/2 (06).
This will improve the air quality in the vicinity of the Wo Hop Shek
Crematorium.
2.1.4
If the existing cremators are not
replaced and upgraded in time, or if sufficient numbers of additional cremators
were not provided, a the majority of the applications for
cremation sessions will not be met within the present pledge of 15 days. An
extended waiting time for the bereaved family would not be acceptable to the community.
2.2.1
The followings alternative
options were considered for the new crematorium:; new sites in
more remote areas outside the Wo Hop Shek Cemetery; alternative
site at Tuen Mun; alternative extension in other existing crematorium
sites at Kwai Chung, Fu Shan, Diamond Hill and Cape Collinson; expansion of the existing Wo Hop Shek site; and alternative
extension options such as expansion by in-situ development of the existing Wo Hop Shek
Crematorium Site. Table
2-1 summarises the environmental benefits and
dis-benefits of the afore-mentioned alternative extension options:.
2.2.2
The preferred
scenario is to expand the
existing Wo Hop Shek Crematorium site to re-provisioning of
four existing coffin cremators and one existing skeletal cremator in-situ and
to provide four additional coffin/dual-purpose cremators in three phases at the
existing Wo Hop Shek Crematorium site, because:
§
It
is the most suitable option ready for early implementation;
§
Human disturbance already exists at
the current site, therefore the environmental impact of the expanded project on
the local environment will be marginal;
§
The existing cremators can be upgraded
using the latest cremation technology, thereby
addressing the local concern and improving
the air quality; and
§
The existing crematorium site is fully
enclosed by hillside and the surrounding landform, which helps to reduce the
visual impact to the surrounding areas.
2.3.1
The Project Site is shown in Figure 2-1 Location Plan, below. It falls within the Wo Hop Shek Cemetery area which has
been allocated to FEHD under Government Land Allocation No. DN 81. The Site
does not currently fall into any Outline Zoning Plan.
2.4.1
The construction phase will be divided
in the three phases outlined below:
§ Phase I (Year 20089 to Year 20101). Demolition of the existing
coffin crematorium building, transformer room and pump room and provision of five
new coffin cremators, one dual-purpose cremator, one new skeletal cremator, one
cremation plant room with sufficient space for housing nine single cremators
and other ancillary facilities such as service halls. The new crematorium will
provide seven cremators upon completion of Phase I.
§ Phase II (Year 2010 to Year
20112). The existing skeletal cremator
building will be demolished upon completion of Phase I (i.e. there will be no
overlapping between Phases I and II).
§
Phase
III: Future Expansion Phase (for completion by around 2014). Two additional cremators and one
additional service hall will be provided upon completion of Phase II to allow
future expansion.
2.5.1
The major benefits of the Project
include:
§
Replacement of
the existing crematorium by a new one with cremators of improved design and improved air pollution control technologies
would improve the air quality in the vicinity of the Wo Hop Shek Cemetery within the
shortest possible time; and
§
Air emissions by using either
Towngas or ultra-low sulphur diesel could meet all the BPM12/2(06) requirements. Nonetheless, in order to further reduce emissions of air pollutants from
fuel combustion thereby to be more
environmentally-friendly, Towngas has been selected as burning fuels for
the new cremators instead of ULSD which has been using for the
existing cremators in Wo Hop Shek, despite the higher operation cost of using
Towngas; and
§
The Project will help meet
the increasing public demand for cremation services. There will
be an increase in tThe total annual public cremation
capacity in the territory will be increased
to by 2014 and this will ensure that the
current pledge of a maximum waiting time of 15 days be met.
3
Summary of Potential Impacts and Recommendations
3.1.1
The major air quality impacts at Air
Sensitive Receivers (ASRs) will be fugitive dust from the demolition and
construction and gaseous emissions from the cremators during operation. An air
quality impact assessment was carried out to assess the air quality impact
during both construction and operation phases of the Project.
3.1.2
Dry type air pollution control units will be adopted for the new
cremators which are, to be
designed with equivalent specifications as for the recent crematoria projects
at Fu Shan and Diamond Hill with. A adoption of new
technology to meet all the BPM12/2 (06) requirements, at full load
conditions.
3.1.3
With
the implementation of dust control measures for the dusty construction works
and unpaved haul roads and areas, no unacceptable construction dust impact to
the nearby ASRs during the construction phase of the Project is anticipated.
3.1.4
There
will be no adverse odour impact due to operation of the Project and no adverse
impact to the nearby ASRs due to the chimney emissions.
3.1.5
High
temperature inside the secondary combustion chamber of the new cremators will destroy
all pathogens and so there are no health concerns relating to pathogens.
3.1.6
Advanced joss paper burners with high dust and
smoke removal efficiency will be used to minimise the air pollutant emissions
from joss paper burning. Furthermore, in view of the nearest ASR is located far away from the new
crematorium, they will not affect impact on ASRs will be minimal.
3.1.7
Confirmatory
test of dioxins in the depositions on the interior surface of chimneys, flue
gas ducting and combustion chambers of the existing cremators shall be carried
out after decommissioning but prior to the demolition.
3.2.1
Noise impact assessment was carried
out to assess the noiseair quality impact during both
construction and operation phases of the Project.
3.2.2
Construction noise impact assessment
was conducted for the three phases of construction activities based on standard
acoustic principles and the methodologies. Potential construction noise impacts
to the Noise Sensitive Receivers (NSRs) will be mainly from the use of Powered
Mechanical Equipment (PME) during construction activities. Use of quiet PME iswas recommended
as the mitigation measure during construction phase. Good site practice wais also recommended
to further minimise the noise nuisance.
3.2.3
Noise generated from operation of the
fixed plants during operation phase of the Project was assessed. The assessment
results showed there will be no adverse operation noise
impact from the operation of the new crematorium.
3.3.1
A land contamination assessment was
undertaken and the Interim Contamination Assessment Report (CAR) indicates that
no significant soil contamination was detected in the soil samples collected.
3.3.2
The CAR stated that there is no
historical evidence indicating that there were any contaminating landuses on
the site prior to the existing crematorium operations. It is considered that
soil contamination is unlikely at most of the areas within the site, except
for around the underground fuel tanks and transformer room.
3.3.3
Further site investigations in areas
that are currently in continuous operation and cannot be accessed for
investigation will be requiredcarried out after decommissioning but prior to
demolition. These areas include the transformer
room, dangerous goods stores, day tank room, fuel pump room, sunken fuel pipe
and cremator. Precautionary measures and practices weare
recommended for the operational stage to
prevent uncontrolled leakage of fuel and hencegiving rise to land contamination.
3.4.1
The key waste materials to be
generated during construction phase of the Project will include excavated materials,
construction and demolition materials, contaminated materials, if any, (including ash
waste, building structures and contaminated soil), chemical waste and general refuse. Ash and non-combustible residues, chemical waste and general
refuse are expected to be the major types of waste arising frorm the operation
of the new crematorium.
3.4.2
It is anticipated that all excavated
materials will be re-used and backfilled on site during construction. There
will be no surplus of excavated materials that will require off-site disposal,
unless significant volumes of contaminated soils are detected.
3.4.3
Contaminated materials will include
those contaminated by asbestos, dioxins, heavy metals and
hydrocarbons (such as polyaromatic hydrocarbons, total petroleum hydrocarbons
and polychlorinated biphenyls).
3.4.4
With effective implementation of the
recommended good practice and mitigation measures, it is anticipated that the
associated impacts on the environment and the potential impacts on the capacity
of waste collection, transfer and disposal facilities will be insignificant,
during both construction and operation.
3.5.1
The
impact on landscape resources after mitigation is in general acceptable.
Impacts on landscape resources are mainly due to the removal of trees. Amenity
planting, woodland mix planting and tree compensation will mitigate the impact
to an acceptable level.
3.5.2
The
landscape character will be benefited by the better aesthetic outlook of the
proposed crematorium and it’s external landscaping areas.
3.5.3
Since
the majority of visual impact of the new crematorium will be screened by natural
topography, the most adverse visual impact will be to occasional visitors of
the cemetery during the construction phase.
3.6.1
The water sensitive receivers (WSRs)
are the two streams to the south of the Site. However, since the two streams are
ephemeral, the potential water quality impact likely to be induced is
anticipated to be minimal. No effluent will be discharged from the air
pollution control system and scrubbing system in the new crematorium as “dry”
process will be adopted. Hence, adverse water quality impact during operation
phase of the Project is not expected.
3.6.2
The major impacts associated with
construction include demolition and construction runoff and drainage, sewage
generated from the on-site construction workers and groundwater from basement
formation.
3.6.3
Sheet piling shall be provided at
suitable location around the basement excavation to minimise the effect of
lowering the water table from any dewatering process. Other mitigation measures
are recommended during construction to handle the construction run-off.
3.6.4
Only a small amount of sewage will be
generated from the public and general cleaning from the new crematorium. Sewage
will be diverted to communal sewer and directed to government sewage treatment
facilities.
3.7.1
Potential ecological impacts arising
from construction activities include habitat loss. This impact is only
anticipated during Phase I of the Project with, in
particular a loss of 0.25ha of semi-natural woodland and 0.3ha of scrubland.
Together, these represent only 0.42% of the total woodland within the Study
Area and the impact is considered
insignificant.
3.7.2
Construction
will require removal of an individual of Aquilaria
sinensis and a colony of Cibotium barometz, however, these will be
transplanted to similar habitat nearby. Some individual of Fraxinus spp.
will also be affected within and, together
with other trees in the semi-natural woodland, will also be
transplanted if applicable. Felled trees, which are unavoidable, will be
compensated by planting trees within or outside Study Area.
3.7.3
As habitats surrounding the Site are
mainly semi-natural woodland
growing on slopes, slight variation in underground
water table during the dewatering work for during
basement excavation should not have significant impact on the existing
vegetation. Nevertheless, sheet-piling, or any similar method, will be provided
during basement formation to minimize the variation in water table.
3.7.4
Indirect impacts from
construction activities, such as increased human activities
or disturbance is considered minor in view of the existing level of
disturbance.
3.7.5
Some disturbances to adjacent habitats
may arise due to noise and activity associated with an increased number of
visitors during operation of the new crematorium. The Site and surrounding areas,
however, have already been subjected to considerable human disturbance due to
the presence of graves, crematorium and columbaria., t The minor increase
in number of visitors will have minimal impact.
3.7.6
Overall, the Project is not likely to
cause any significant additional disturbance impact on the valuable habitats
within and around the Site during its operation.
3.8.1
Environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) is recommended for the Project, in particular, environmental monitoring
during construction phase is recommended for air quality, landscape and visual
impact, water quality and ecology.
3.8.2
Site audit is recommended to be
undertaken routinely during construction to ensure that appropriate
environmental protection and pollution control mitigation measures are properly
implemented.
3.8.3
Operation phase monitoring is
recommended for air quality. Details of the EM&A programme, including
monitoring methodologies, procedures, locations, and frequencies, are documented in the
stand-alone EM&A Manual for the Project.
4.1.1
This EIA has considered the
environmental impacts from the demolition of the existing crematorium as well
as the construction and operation of the new crematorium.
4.1.2
In general, the environmental impacts
arising from the Project are either considered minimal or can be mitigated to
an extent where the impacts on the sensitive receivers are acceptable. No
significant residual impacts are anticipated, provided that the recommended
mitigation measures are properly implemented.
4.1.3
An environmental monitoring and audit
(EM&A) programme is therefore recommended to ensure that the mitigation
measures have been properly implemented and environmental quality has not been
seriously affected throughout the Project.
_Public%20Inspection_files/image002.jpg){kind=small}
_Public%20Inspection_files/image004.jpg)
_Public%20Inspection_files/image005.jpg){kind=small}
_Public%20Inspection_files/image006.jpg)