| Concerned parties - Kadoorie Farm & Botanic Garden (KFBG), World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), Hong Kong Waste Management Association (HKWMA), Green Power (GP), The Conservancy Association (CA), The University of Hong Kong (HKU) |
| Concerns from Concerned Parties (KFBG, WWF, HKWMA, GP, CA, HKU) |
Summary of Discussion / Follow-up Actions |
| Whether any drop / increase in water level at Ping Yuen River if the NENT extension was in place? |
Based on the DIA findings, there would be an increase in 35mm of water level in Ping Yuen River during the restoration phase. During construction, some catchment will be diverted to the leachate treatment plant and the water level in Ping Yuen River will slightly decrease. |
| Whether there was any detailed model for the ground water yield assessment? |
Groundwater model had been developed and the change in water yield in the adjacent area had been assessed and considered insignificant. |
| What was the height and setback distance of the proposed retaining wall ? How to make sure that there would be no poor workmanship and leakage afterwards? |
The max. height of the retaining wall would be about 20m height (depending on the location). The wall would be set back from the ridgeline to allow working space for construction. It would be an impermeable structure with liner placed on top. The workmanship would be checked by independent consultant to ensure the construction was in good order, and risk of leakage to LMH catchment could be minimised. |
| Any LFG monitoring data for the existing NENT landfill? Any leakage in the past? |
LFG in existing landfill was monitored monthly and recorded in the monthly report. No leakage of LFG was observed in the past. |
| Any compensation planting beyond the site boundary? Restoration might not be considered as compensation. |
In order to avoid impact to the adjacent area, works were confirmed within the project boundary. Only on-site compensation was proposed. The restoration will be developed in phases, the EIA has proposed for re-vegetation/compensatory planting in order to preserve the ecological value in the area. |
| Why exotic species would be required during early stage of restoration and then replanted for native species? Any reference on this? It is preferable to plant local species say Aquilaria sinensis 土沈香 and Endospermum Chinense 黃桐 that were found in the existing site. |
There was a study (by Hong Kong Baptist University) for landfill site stating that native trees would not be suitable at the early stage of restoration (due to the presence of landfill gas and leachate). On top of the ecological value, exotic species serve visual screening effect, and help to provide shelter for the native species. Also, natural ecological succession will take place as the pioneer species are established. Native trees would then be planted at the later stage of restoration. |
| In terms of hydrological aspects, any monitoring of leakage of leachate in surface water and ground water? What parameters had been monitored? |
There were long-term groundwater and surface water monitoring for the existing NENT. This data was also presented to the public. In general, COD and NH3 would be the key control parameters. |
| Whether the existing landfill could be filled higher to increase to waste capacity ? |
The existing landfill will be filled up to +245mPD only to avoid adverse visual impact. The adjacent Wo Keng Shan is about +300mPD. If the landfill is higher than +300mPD, adverse visual impact is anticipated. Besides, owing to the slope stability of the compacted waste, it is not practicable to have a slope profile greater than 1:3. |
| How the ecology survey could conclude that the butterfly species identified during the survey was not a habitat within the proposed extension site. |
The butterfly species of conservation concern was Yellow Coster. This species is very rare in Hong Kong and is only recorded in a few localities in Hong Kong, It was recorded at grassland at the Project Area. Yellow Coster is usually found in areas with their larval foodplant Boehmeria nivea and Hairy Gonostegia Gonostegia hirta. The larval foodplant of Yellow Coster were not found within the Project Area. The habitat of Yellow Coster is dry abandoned agricultural land, which is not found within the Project Area. |
| Whether the trees at Wo Keng Shan, as a visual barrier, would shed their leaves in winter. |
There are a lot of trees around the Wo Keng Shan Tusen as shown in the aerial photo. Past experience shows that these trees provided a good visual barrier even in winter. |
| Would there be any odour issue on this landfill ? |
Riding on the experience of existing NENT landfill, there is no anticipated adverse odour impact for the extension landfill. The existing landfill received only a few odour complaints in the past ten years and many of the cases were found to be related with other odour sources including livestock/pig farm adjacent to the landfill. |
| How is the interface between the existing operator and the future operator in using the haul road to the Borrow & Stockpile area ? The future extension would also require a Stockpile & Borrow Area ? |
The proposed extension would be constructed in phases so that the existing operator could still use the materials in the SBA for final capping. Surplus excavated material would be placed in non-active phase/area of the extension site. |
| The proposed afteruse should match with the local community character and compatible to the cultural/ecological environment of the surrounding. EPD could make reference to Taiwan and Japan to provide resort and community recreational areas near the incinerator and landfill site. |
Noted. |
