9 environmental outcomes

The Project

9.1 The existing Cape Collinson Crematorium has started operation since 1962. Cremator Nos. 1-10 were replaced in 1995 and Nos. 11-12 were commissioned in 2001. There has been local concern regarding possible air pollution caused by emissions of the existing cremators. This project proposes to demolish the existing crematorium and to construct a new crematorium at the same site to meet the increasing demands for cremation services in Hong Kong. New cremation technology to enhance the handling capacity of cremators and improve control on air emissions will be employed. Their timely replacement will minimise any adverse impact on the environment and should address local concern.

9.2 The construction and demolition works will be undertaken in two phases as detailed in Section 2.

Key Environmental Impacts

9.3 A summary of the key environmental impacts arising from the Project is provided in Table 9.1 below.

Key Environmental Outcomes

Population and Environmental Sensitive Areas Protected

9.4 Environmental impacts arising from the Project, if not mitigated properly, could potentially affect the nearby population and sensitive receivers during the construction, demolition and operation periods, for example, dust emission from construction and demolition activities, noise from construction machinery and emissions from chimney of the new crematorium. In addition to the nearby population, there will be workers accessing the Project work sites during the construction and demolition phases. With proper implementation of the environmental mitigation measures, the surrounding population and sensitive receivers will not be adversely impacted from the Project.

Adoption of Environmental-Friendly Designs

9.5 The preferred scenario is redevelopment of the existing Cape Collinson Crematorium site by adjusting into its adjoining area so that the overall site area can accommodate ten cremators and other ancillary facilities by 2014. The preferred scenario has taken into account the environment, incorporating the following environmental-friendly features into the design to mitigate any adverse impact and benefit the environment as far as practicable:

l Replacement of the existing crematorium by a new one with cremators of improved design and APC technologies will improve the air quality in the vicinity of the Cape Collinson Crematorium;

l Adoption of APC technology based on the ‘dry process’ significantly reduces wastewater production;

l Adoption of Towngas which is a cleaner fuel with almost no SO₂ emissions and lower NO₂ emissions when compared to ULSD;

l The existing crematorium site is bounded by dense hillside vegetation and the surrounding landform. This help to reduce the visual impact to the surrounding sensitive receivers compared to other more urban and open sites; and

l The noise level generated from the plant will be reduced by locating them as far as practical from the NSRs within the Site, and/or by orientating the noise emission points away from the NSRs, and/or by the application of acoustic louvers and barriers to the concerned equipment.

Table 9.1 Key Environmental Impacts

Key Environmental Impact	Construction and Demolition Phase	Operation Phase	Overall Impact
Air Quality	With the implementation of dust suppression measures stipulated in Air Pollution Control (Construction Dust) Regulation during construction, no adverse dust impact would be expected.	The predicted air quality impacts on all the ASRs satisfy all the relevant limits and guidelines, and no adverse air quality impact from chimney emission would be expected.	There would be no adverse air quality impacts arising from the Project with proper implementation of the mitigation measures during the construction and operation phases.
Waste Management	Phase 1 · Excavated materials to public fill: 13,580m^3 · C&D waste to public fill: 720m^3 · C&D waste to landfill: 810m^3 · Chemical waste: small amount · General refuse: small amount · Phase 2 · Excavated materials to public fill: 25,650m^3 · C&D waste to public fill: 12,850m^3 · C&D waste to landfill: 2,010m^3 · Chemical waste: small amount · General refuse: small amount Contaminated materials - ACM: To be confirmed* - DCM: To be confirmed* - TPHCM: To be confirmed*	· Bone ash: 233.6 kg /day · Non-combustible residues: 292 kg/day · Fly ash (used activated carbon and unreacted lime): 18 kg/day · Fly ash (particulate matter): 76 kg/day · Chemical waste: small amount · General refuse: small amount	There would be no adverse waste impacts arising from the Project with proper implementation of the mitigation measures for handling, storage, treatment and disposal of during the construction and operation phases.
Land Contamination	Land contamination was identified at BH1 (1.5 – 1.95m) with concentration of lead exceeded the relevant RBRG. Remediation on contaminated soil by cement solidification/ stabilization shall be carried out during the demolition phase. Further site investigation for the pipeline, Cremator Rooms 1 and 2 shall be conducted after decommissioning and prior to the demolition of the existing crematorium. If any soils are found contaminated, suitable soil remediation shall be undertaken.	As Towngas will be used as burning fuel instead of diesel in the new crematorium, possible leakage or spillage from the underground fuel tank and the pipeline system is eliminated. With the new design of cremators which is capable of meeting the newly revised requirements described in “A Guidance Note on the Best Practicable Means for Incinerators (Crematoria)” BPM12/2(06), the quantities of metals and dioxins emission will be limited and thus surface soil contaminated with heavy metal or dioxin by surface deposition is not anticipated.	There would be no adverse environmental impacts arising from the Project with proper implementation of the mitigation measures.
Visual	Visual impact on VSRs R1, R2, GIC1 and OU1 would be substantial due to the close distance to the Project. With implementation of mitigation measures, there would still be some moderate adverse visual impact on these VSRs. However, such visual impact would be temporary and can be minimised by decorative hoarding.	Day 1 after mitigation measures, there would be moderate adverse visual impact on R1, R2 GIC1 and OU1. Architectural appearance will be aesthetically designed to compatible with adjacent landscape setting. Landscape roof garden will enhance and embrace the amenity space with the existing Garden of Remembrance to strengthen the overall visual characters of the site. Imminent viewers R1, R2 GIC1, OU1 will be slightly benefited from the Project.	Overall, visual impacts of the proposed development are acceptable with mitigation measures recommendation are properly implemented
Noise	Without noise mitigation measures, the predicted noise levels related to Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the Project are in the range of 60 to 79 dB(A) and 61 to 81 dB(A), respectively. Use of quiet powered mechanical equipment for excavator/loader, soil nailing drilling machine, rock dowel drilling machine, bulldozer, dump truck and crawler mounted rock drill are recommended to mitigate the noise impact.	Newly Proposed Equipment The predicted noise levels at SQ1 and SQ2 would exceed the daytime/evening planning noise criteria by 3 dB(A), while the predicted noise levels at all representative NSRs would exceed the night-time planning noise criteria by 1 to 6 dB(A). Existing and New Equipment During T&C Stage of Phase 1 The predicted noise levels at representative NSRs due to operation of new equipment under Phase 1 would range from 41 to 46 dB(A) which are 19 to 24 dB(A) below the relevant ANL of 65 dB(A). As such, it is anticipated that the noise contribution from the new fixed plant under Phase 1 to the cumulative noise impact at representative NSRs would be insignificant.	There would be no adverse noise impacts arising from the Project with proper implementation of the mitigation measures during the construction and operation phases.
Water Quality	Water quality impacts from the land-based construction and demolition works can be controlled to acceptable levels by implementing the recommended mitigation measures. No unacceptable water quality impacts would be expected from the land-based construction and demolition activities. Site inspections should be undertaken routinely to inspect the works areas in order to ensure the recommended mitigation measures are properly implemented.	No effluent will be discharged from the Air Pollution Control equipment in the new crematorium as “dry” process will be adopted. Sewage generated by visitors and workers, as well as wastewater from cleaning activities will be connected to the sewerage system. Sewerage impact assessment has been conducted for the Project. Assessment results indicated that the additional sewage / wastewater generated from the Project would not cause any adverse impacts to the existing sewerage systems. Hence, adverse water quality impact is not expected.	Overall, there would be no adverse water quality impacts arising from the Project with proper implementation of all the recommended mitigation measures.

Notes: * After decommissioning and prior to the demolition of the existing crematorium, supplementary site investigation will be carried out at sites currently not accessible.

Key Environmental Problems Avoided

9.6 In order to avoid or minimise the environmental impacts of the Project, a number of preventive measures have been recommended in this report. The key environmental measures and problems avoided are highlighted below:

l With the implementation of dust suppression measures during the construction and demolition works, the dust emission from the construction sites will be reduced and no adverse construction dust impact will affect the nearby sensitive receivers;

l Special demolition and handling methods for the contaminated materials will be adopted to avoid fugitive emission of asbestos and other air pollutants;

l During the construction and demolition phase, the surplus excavated materials will be reused on site as far as practical to minimise the amount of waste requiring disposal at landfill; and

l The existing cremators can be upgraded as soon as possible, thereby addressing the local concern and improving the air quality.

Compensation Areas

9.7 No compensation area outside of the site boundary will be required for this Project.

Key Environmental Benefits of Environmental Protection Measures Recommended

9.8 The key environmental benefits of implementing the recommended preventive and mitigation measures during construction, demolition and operation phases can be summarized as follows:

l The air, noise, water quality and visual impacts at the sensitive receivers will all be minimized or mitigated to within the acceptable criteria and standards;

l The amount of waste materials requiring disposal of will be minimized through reduction, reuse and/or recycling of waste;

l The potential secondary environmental impacts arising from the handling and disposal of various types of waste materials as well as the potential impacts on the capacity of waste collection, transfer and disposal facilities will be controlled to acceptable levels; and

l All the contaminated soil and materials will be handled, treated and disposed of properly, thereby minimizing their associated environmental impacts.

Potential New Environmental Benefits Due to the Reprovisioning of the Crematorium

9.9 The potential new environmental benefits that will be brought about by the Project include the following:

l The existing cremators will be upgraded, thereby addressing the local concern on air emissions;

l Towngas will be used as burning fuel for the new cremators. When compared to diesel used for the existing cremators, the emissions of air pollutants from fuel consumption would be much reduced;

l Replacement of the existing crematorium by a new one with cremators of improved design and APC technologies will lead to an improvement in the local air quality; and

l The Project will help meet the increasing public demand for cremation service. There would be an increase in the total annual cremation capacity in the territory to about 51,000 sessions and shortening of waiting time from the current pledge of 15 days by 1 to 2 days.