SCMP: China is Waging War on Waste and Hong Kong Needs to Think Bigger about How to Manage Its Rubbish

China is banning imports of trash and starting a zero-waste programme for cities. In Hong Kong, the authorities should consider passing a waste separation law if an economic deterrent is not enough to increase recycling rates

A major item on the agenda for the G20 summit in Osaka on June 28-29 will be cutting plastic waste in the ocean. Japan, as host country, will present a plan to world leaders, including the presidents of China and the United States.

This is the right issue to push at the highest political level. Countries need to work hard to deal with waste domestically, and to cooperate internationally. Rising water temperatures caused by climate change, coupled with untreated waste water and plastic pollution, are damaging marine biodiversity and coastal areas. Urgent and concerted action is needed now, otherwise it will become more difficult to reverse the degradation with every passing year.

Japan’s plan includes collecting data on plastic waste flowing into the ocean, reducing plastic trash, charging for plastic shopping bags, developing biodegradables, installing recycling boxes next to drink vending machines, and pressing soft-drink makers to raise the recycling rate of plastic bottles to 100 per cent. Japan will also crack down on illegal waste dumping.

China is already waging war on waste. In July 2017, it announced that it would ban imports of some paper and plastic waste, with effect from January 2018. It has plenty of its own waste to handle; besides, much of the recyclable material imported for processing was low-quality or mixed with non-recyclable material.

In signalling that it would no longer be the largest dumping ground for rich countries’ rubbish, China is forcing the world to improve waste management. Developed countries might have to clean up after themselves, as developing economies in Asia adopt or consider the Chinese approach to imported waste.

Last December, the State Council issued guidelines for cities introducing zero-waste practices. Zero waste doesn’t mean that no waste is generated; instead, in the case of China, waste is meant to be fully utilised through advanced urban management that involves recovery, reusing, recycling and treatment.

The economics of waste needs to be overhauled for such a system to function: waste businesses need to be encouraged and expanded, and society needs to cooperate.

In early June, President Xi Jinping saw fit to remind the country to sort its waste and contribute towards sustainable development. The way Chinese leaders see it, the key to success is strengthening waste management systems and changing people’s habits with regard to recycling.

Forty-six major Chinese cities are set to establish waste separation systems by 2020, as will nearly 300 other cities by 2025.

Hong Kong has been coming to grips with waste management for some years. The city already imposes a charge on plastic shopping bags. It has commissioned a state-of-the-art sludge treatment plant and a food waste-to-energy plant, as well as an e-waste treatment facility using the latest technology.

It is also testing co-digestion of food waste with sewage sludge. All of these are advanced systems that are relatively new to Asia. Hong Kong is also building a new incinerator that will blast up to 3,000 tonnes of waste a day into electricity, although it will not be completed until 2024.

Currently, a waste charging bill is being scrutinised by the Legislative Council and it is a necessary component of a new waste management system for Hong Kong. In Asia, Tokyo and Taipei are two comparable cities that have done well in waste separation, recovery and recycling, even though they still face many challenges.

The question for Hong Kong is whether it will need to follow up the waste charging law with waste separation legislation. If an economic deterrent like a waste charge is not enough to reduce waste and increase recycling, then a law on waste separation might just be necessary.

Moreover, with the unveiling of the outline development plan for the Greater Bay Area in February, there must be opportunities for the Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macau authorities to cooperate.

Hong Kong and Macau are separate customs areas from the mainland, so China’s import ban on certain kinds of waste affects the two cities as much as other countries. Both cities lack land for large-scale recycling and processing, and they have to work harder at reducing waste than other major cities, such as Shanghai, Tokyo and New York, which can send their recyclables inland for processing.

Hong Kong and Macau must reduce waste at source, develop ways to handle types of special waste, and – like Singapore – take a pragmatic approach to large-scale waste treatment. China wants clean recyclables, so the extent to which Hong Kong and Macau can export their waste to the mainland depends on how well they separate their recyclables to meet China’s increasingly stringent standards.

The Guangdong environmental authorities have indicated that the implementation of the zero-waste plan is a top priority. No doubt, there will be experiences Guangdong, Hong Kong and Macau can share that will benefit them all.

In the meantime, regional campaigns to collect and analyse data, reduce food waste, improve waste separation, clean shorelines, and eliminate single-use plastic and styrofoam seem like no-brainers.