Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2012 Hong Kong Air Quality Review
Clean Air Network
Jan 2013
1
Highlight • 2012 roadside NO2 concentrations were the 2nd worst in
HK’s history, and NO2 concentrations at Mong Kok reached record high (122 µg/m3) (page3-4)
• HK’s urban NO2 concentrations ranked the 2nd to last among 32 major Chinese cities (page5)
• Kwai Chung and Tsuen Wan had the highest SO2 levels among all stations, indicating significant contribution from ship emissions (page9)
• Ozone levels at Kwun Tong, Sha Tin and Tsuen Wan reached record highs (page7)
• Overall air pollution health cost – 3,096 deaths (page10)
• The new HK AQO is too lax (page11-13)
• Recommendations (page17-18)
2
• All stations (except Tap Mun) exceeded WHO/New HKAQO annual standard* (40 µg/m3);
• Roadside stations 2x worse than general stations;
• 2012 – 2nd worst in history
NO2 – Still Bad
• NO2 health impacts:
- significant inflammation of the respiratory systems;
- reduced lung growth and function ;
- lower resistance to respiratory infections such as influenza;
- death;
3 Source: EPD * Based on distribution model (Lai et al., 2011)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
ug/
m3
NO2
WHO Annual Guideline*/New HKAQO Annual Standard*
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
ug/
m3
NO2 - Mong Kok
• NO2 concentrations at Mong Kok reached record high (122 µg/m3)
NO2 – Still Bad
4 Source: EPD * Based on distribution model (Lai et al., 2011)
WHO Annual Guideline*/New HKAQO Annual Standard*
Record high
NO2 – Still Bad
2011 NO2
ranking City
2011 NO2
ranking
(cont'ed) City
1 Hai Kou 16 Xi An
2 Tai Yuan 18 Lan Zhou
2 Lhasa 19 Chang Chun
4 He Fei 20 Kun Ming
5 Xi Ning 21 Ha Er Bin
6 Yin Chuan 22 Zhen Zhou
6 Gui Yang 22 Chang Sha
8 Chong Qing 24 Nan Jing
9 Fu Zhou 24 Guang Zhou
10 Shen Yang 26 Shang Hai
10 Nan Ning 26 Cheng Du
12 Ji Nan 28 Bei Jing
13 Tian Jin 28 Wu Han
13 Nan Chang 30 Hang Zhou
15 Hohhot 31 Hong Kong
16 Shi Jia Zhuang 32 Ürümqi
• HK’s urban NO2 concentrations remained to be the 2nd last among the other 31 major Chinese cities, worse than Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou.
Source: China Statistical Yearbook 2012 5
Ozone – Not Getting Better
• O3 levels at all stations exceeded the WHO’s annual guideline*(23.5 µg/m3)
6
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
ug/
m3
O3
WHO Annual Guideline*
Source: EPD * Based on distribution model (Lai et al., 2011)
Ozone – Not Getting Better
• O3 pollution at Kwun Tong, Sha Tin, and Tsuen Wan reached record highs
7 Source: EPD * Based on distribution model (Lai et al., 2011)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
ug/
m3
O3
Kwun Tung Sha Tin Tsuen Wan
WHO Annual Guideline*
Record highs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
ug/
m3
PM10
WHO Annual Guideline
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
ug/
m3
PM2.5
PM10 & PM2.5
• Both PM10 and PM2.5 levels at all stations exceeded the WHO annual guidelines by 2~3 times;
• PM10 levels at Causeway Bay and Central, and PM2.5
levels at Causeway Bay exceeded the new HKAQO annual standards.
Source: EPD 8
WHO Annual Guideline
WHO Annual Guideline
New HKAQO Annual Standard
New HKAQO Annual Standard
SO2 • SO2 levels at all stations exceeded the WHO annual guideline*
(5 µg/m3);
• Kwai Chung and Tsuen Wan had the highest SO2 levels among all stations, indicating significant contribution from ship emissions
9 Source: EPD * Based on distribution model (Lai et al., 2011)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
ug/
m3
SO2
WHO Annual Guideline*
• Observation #1:
- There was no exceedance for 24-hr SO2 in 2012 under both the current AQO and the new AQO ;
• Indication: New AQO does not set the bar high enough; WHO IT-2 is well within the achievable range.
Comparison of Standard Exceedances
10
Under
Current AQO
(350 µg/m3)
Under
Proposed AQO
(125 µg/m3)
Under WHO
Interim Target-2
(50 µg/m3)
Under WHO
Guideline
(20 µg/m3)
Central/Western 0 0 1 25
Eastern 0 0 0 14
Kwai Chung 0 0 12 100
Kwun Tong 0 0 1 19
Sha Tin 0 0 0 27
Sham Shui Po 0 0 9 56
Tai Po 0 0 0 1
Tap Mun 0 0 0 8
Tsuen Wan 0 0 1 96
Tung Chung 0 0 0 44
Yuen Long 0 0 0 12
Causeway Bay (Roadside) 0 0 0 20
Central (Roadside) 0 0 0 36
Mong Kok (Roadside) 0 0 2 32
# of exceedance for 24-hr SO2
Comparison of Standard Exceedances
• Observation #2: The number of exceedance for 24-hr PM10 is not much different between the current and new AQO, however, significant difference is found between the new AQO and WHO AQG
• Indication: New AQO is more stringent than current AQO for 24-hr PM10, although still far more lax compared to WHO AQG.
Under Current AQO
(180 µg/m3)
Under Proposed AQO
(100 µg/m3)
Under WHO Guideline
(50 µg/m3)
Central/Western 0 6 138
Eastern 0 2 94
Kwai Chung 0 5 119
Kwun Tong 0 8 118
Sha Tin 0 4 110
Sham Shui Po 0 4 115
Tai Po 0 2 121
Tap Mun 0 2 100
Tsuen Wan 0 2 117
Tung Chung 0 20 142
Yuen Long 0 11 127
Causeway Bay (Roadside) 0 20 226
Central (Roadside) 0 10 165
Mong Kok (Roadside) 0 5 131 11
# of exceedance for 24-hr PM10
Comparison of Standard Exceedances
• Observation #3: The number of exceedance for 24-hr PM2.5 is significantly different between the new AQO and the WHO AQG. There is little exceedance under the new AQO;
• Indication: New AQO for 24-hr PM2.5 is extremely lax compared to WHO AQG and provides little constrains in regulating current PM2.5 levels.
Note: no current AQO for PM2.5
12
# of exceedance for 24-hr PM2.5
Under Current AQO
Under Proposed AQO
(75 µg/m3)
Under WHO Guideline
(25 µg/m3)
Central/Western - 3 183
Eastern - 0 149
Kwai Chung - 5 193
Kwun Tong - 3 168
Sha Tin - 0 156
Sham Shui Po - 1 169
Tai Po - 2 177
Tap Mun - 0 161
Tsuen Wan - 1 174
Tung Chung - 9 173
Yuen Long - 2 184
Causeway Bay (Roadside) - 7 279
Central (Roadside) - 5 232
Mong Kok (Roadside) - 4 230
Comparison of Standard Exceedances
• Observation #4: The number of exceedance for 8-hr O3 has increased from 2011 to 2012, under both the new AQO and WHO AQG.
• Indication: O3 pollution is getting worse and the gap for meeting the new AQO is getting bigger.
# of exceedance for 8-hr O3 (2011 vs. 2012)
13
Under New AQO (160 µg/m3) Under WHO Guideline (100 µg/m3)
2011 2012 2011 2012
Central/Western 0 3 39 55
Eastern 0 0 39 31
Kwai Chung 0 0 5 22
Kwun Tong 0 0 21 52
Sha Tin 2 6 71 123
Sham Shui Po 0 0 15 23
Tai Po 1 1 85 32
Tap Mun 14 34 233 256
Tsuen Wan 0 0 17 30
Tung Chung 1 16 70 113
Yuen Long 1 15 48 65
Comparison of Standard Exceedances • Observation #5: The number of exceedance for 1-hr NO2 has
in general reduced from 2011 to 2012, except for Kwun Tong and Sha Tin.
• Indication: Different from other areas in HK, NO2 pollution in Kwun Tong and Sha Tin seems to be getting worse.
# of exceedance for 1-hr NO2 (2011 vs. 2012)
14
Under New AQO/WHO Guideline (200 µg/m3)
2011 2012
Central/Western 12 10
Eastern 11 8
Kwai Chung 31 31
Kwun Tong 43 80
Sha Tin 4 11
Sham Shui Po 29 15
Tai Po 1 0
Tap Mun 0 0
Tsuen Wan 15 4
Tung Chung 9 5
Yuen Long 8 1
Causeway Bay (Roadside) 783 660
Central (Roadside) 887 615
Mong Kok (Roadside) 613 485
• There is, in general, a decreasing trend of air pollution (mainly PM and SO2) in HK, which is likely due to the improvements in regional air quality;
• Hong Kong’s NO2 pollution problem is getting worse, which is the fault of local sources, not the PRD.
Air Pollution Trend
15
% of change in annual concentration (2012Jan-
Jun vs. 2006)
SO2
NO2
O3
PM10
Regional ↓64% ↓20% ↓6% ↓26%
Hong Kong ↓55% ↑3% ↓3% ↓27%
Regional vs. Hong Kong air quality improvement (2012Jan-Jun vs. 2006)
Source: EPD & “Pearl River Delta Regional Air Quality Monitoring Network – A Report of Monitoring Results for the Period between January and June 2012” & “Pearl River Delta Regional Air Quality Monitoring Network – A Report of Monitoring Results in 2006”
Recommendations - for roadside emissions • Replacing and upgrading pre-Euro III commercial
diesel vehicles (CDVs), with licenses no longer being handed out to any vehicles over 15 years old
• Establishing scrapping schemes for polluting CDVs
• Replacing catalytic converters for taxis and mini-buses
• Franchised bus retrofitting with selective-catalytic reduction devices
• Setting standards for vehicle inspection and maintenance
• Developing public transport blueprint
16
Recommendations - for roadside emissions (cont’d) • Re-routing of bus and incentives such as discounts for
switching buses
• Inter-departmental and cross-bureau collaboration is needed for decision making, and the Transport Department and the Development Bureau should also participate in air quality-related policy making.
• Promoting EVs and alternative fuel public transportations, etc.
• Long-term environment, public health and economic studies should be conducted for making optimal long-term city and transport development plans.
17
Recommendations - for marine emissions • Requiring a mandatory switch to fuels with less than
0.5 percent sulphur content.
• Building power grid system for docking in New Kai Tak Terminal
• Ship emissions need to be brought under control by enacting a law for all marine vessels in Hong Kong waters and set up low emission zones in the greater PRD waters.
• Long-term environment, public health and economic studies should be conducted for making optimal long-term city and transport development plans.
18
Overall Air Pollution Health Cost
• Air Pollution related health cost estimates by Hedley Index
• The death toll due to air pollution in 2012 is ten times higher than the total number of deaths caused by SARS in Hong Kong in 2003
2012
Premature Deaths 3,096
Dollar Cost (million HKD) 39,499
Hospital Bed Days 151,300
Doctor Visits (million) 7.167
19
Source: Hedley Environmental Index (http://hedleyindex.sph.hku.hk/home.php)
Acknowledgements
• Hong Kong Environmental Protection Department
• Environmental Health Research group, School of Public health at University of Hong Kong
• Hedley Environmental Index
• Civic Exchange
20
