SCMP 1_9_2008
Open water now stretches all the way round the Arctic, making it possible for the first time in human history to circumnavigate the North Pole. Basically what this does represent is that a lot of Artic ice has melted.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
Global warming open up seas peviously part of the Arctic
SCMP 1_9_2008
Open water now stretches all the way round the Arctic, making it possible for the first time in human history to circumnavigate the North Pole. Basically what this does represent is that a lot of Artic ice has melted.
Monday, September 1, 2008
David Chan (no4) - Sustainability and Conservation
Dear Electors,
My name is David Chan, Candidate No 4 for the AS&P functional constituency.
I am running this on a platform of sustainable development and conservation which affects our future, in particular our children future and the younger generations. The leaflets outline some of the main issues and would be very please if you do take a little of your time in reading it. The issues of global warming really is a lot more serious than most of us think and lead to believed. Unfortunately, my works does mean I need to do quite a bit of research into this topic and the more I do that the more I can see this as a problem that is not going to go away. The prospect of some part of Hong Kong being under water is really a possible reality that could happen within our lifetime.
So hence, my reason to run, that I would try in getting this message across for the changes needed, to make a better Hong Kong. That if we can really stop or slow this global warming process down, I can say to my children when they grown, that what we have done now have improve their future.
On Sustainability - I will be pushing for changes to the legislation and the introduction of sustainable building codes, Currently the Environmental Bureau (EB) have completed the public consultation and will be looking at how this could be implemented with a view of taking this to LegCo. The issue being the is primarily a EB/EMSD initiative and we know that there is an another side of this which is for building. The Buildings Department have launch a voluntary code, CEPAS, Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme For Building. While this is quite a detail documents, the take up rate for using this has being disappointing.
I think the way forward is for this or part of this to become mandatory.
It is worth noting that an environmental labeling system does not itself created green buildings, but just that by labeling sustainability, it that does provide consumer a choice when they buy or rent premises. The choice would be put to the consumers so that like buying a fridge or an Air-conditioning, you will have a clear label so that you know how energy efficient your building really is.
There is a separate exercise that is also required to amend the current building regulations and code of practices to international level so that better energy efficiency can be achieve, simple things like insulation windows with a performance driven energy requirements. In fact it is the time really to review the whole Building Ordinance totally so that it better reflect the design and construction requirements of modern times. Compare to other countries we are really quite behind. The recent problem with fire safety for example, further highlight the imminent need for changes to our understanding and implementation, and enforcement of fire safety, we should also be considering looking at a more performance basis systems.
On Conservation of our heritage
Conservation is part and parcel with sustainability and affect ours and the next generations. Ultimately what we do decide to destroy as part of our heritage now will mean those in the future will never be able to touch, feel and experience and that will be forever! The key message is that many parts of Hong Kong including Central, Wanchai has reached saturation point in its development and destruction of its heritage. It is quite obvious the condition of traffic in Hong Kong Island are congested and will remain so, even with the new proposed P2 bypass that has resulted in the lost of two of our most important heritage landmark, Star Ferry and Queens Pier, both now only exist truly in our collective memories.
If we continue at this unabated development rates, traffic congestion can only get worst, air quality further deteriorate, heat island effect increases, the city will get hotter, pollutant level higher and overall living and working conditions worsen.
At Mid-levels and Central we simply cannot build any higher with the current infrastructure and only the last remnants of the area's heritage remain - if you destroy these, then there is none left and Hong Kong will be lifeless as a chain of one mega shopping centre to another. Is that really what we want Hong Kong to be, a soulless city for shoppers?
For instance there is a great deal of anger and concern at URA's proposal on wanchai and central which will likely increase alienation and disaffection in the community against the government and the URA who will be seen as mainly enriching developers while destroying Hong Kong's heritage, destroying existing communities and destroying some of the most wonderful icon of Hong Kong which is loved by tourists and local people. I meet a lot of people from overseas, from international finance, expats and heads of large international companies, many are quite certain that places such as SOHO, Wanchai market are things that made people love Hong Kong and want to live here.
We are about to destroy more of these for short term profit replace with Disney style theme park shops, more high towers and again yet more shopping centres. We already have a Disney style Star Ferry, do we really want more? Will people still comes to Hong Kong for just gimmicks and shopping alone?
Professional Unity - one thing I have learnt is that there is a difference of opinions that had lead to really quite a degree of disagreement between the various institutes of AS&P. Primary this has been between architects and planners and the surveyors. It is interesting to note that this should not be happening because in the commercial world the various members of what we do actually compliment each others. That is almost all projects consist of Surveyor, Architects, Planners and Landscape architect at some stage of the design, construction and in fact over a building cycle. I believe there could be better way for us to work more closer together in particularly when under a LegCo who represent is, this should be the case, rather than architect will always side on architects, surveyors to surveyors, planner to planners etc. The voice of some of the smaller institutes such as Planners in fact and within surveyors the BS and Land surveyors should also be represented.
Overall I do believe in one man one vote and eventually the functional constituency will need to fall in line with what has been given in the time frame under the basic law under the principle of one man one vote. Until then we could do a lot more as "Professional" and a lot lot more for our environment. In many universities, the fact that Architectural, Surveying and Planning are all under the faculties of the Environment speaks for the fact that is really what we do.
Politically we need to think more that we are a city, a city within China that has a a high degree of autonomy, we are not a country so should not be driven politically or aspire to be one. As professional it is our duty to explain the benefits and problems when we build and develop onto our fragile environment.
I hope the future will be for all of us working together for a better world for us and our children we can all share as goal for a better future, in the end do we really want to be seen as elitist group of a little over 6000 plus of different disciplines and groups who cannot even agreed amongst themselves, particularly over important issues of conservation and environment. How can we as professional expect public support when we have fail them. We can continue to sit sit inside the small circle and continue to debate and scheming over the next best to protect the personal interest.
In the end, the final choice for the Electors are really between "conservatives", "liberals" or in the "middle of the road", those that "bends like a willow tree" or will "speak out" for the people:
So do you want a LegCo member who will delivered more of the same as before or do you want something very different, like putting environmental and conservation right up front as part of his political agenda, Look closely at the all the mail which you have, you will see unity, create business opportunity, promote professionalism, cultivate young talents etc etc. To me these are not platform but prerequisite to anyone who is standing for LegCo, why would anyone standing should want to state the obvious, which if you remember 4 years ago the statements are much the same as last time round.
It is like calling ourselves honest, trustworthy, dependable, professional. Is this not given?
Would you elect anyone who is not?
Attached is my original election platform and a couple of recent articles on sustainability features on the newspapers FYI. Some of my thoughts I have also put under my blog:
http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
The Key I think is not to over promise of everything under the sun and giving a whole list of promises and can do's, which if you count them one by one, the question must be can this really be achievable within the next few years? Can anyone really do all that under a LegCo system with limited power and authority - a LegCo where as a Law maker, he or she can only passes laws that are put forward by the government, giving that one vote amongst many? We do need to be realistic, in promising the earth, this can only lead to future disappointments to their electors. but then he will already be in for a term and reach that goal.
For me doing 2 things:
Sustainability and Conservation, if I can just do these two tasks and do them well, I am certain we will already have a better Hong Kong for all of us.
I do look forward to your support, please support a better sustainable, greener Hong Kong.
Best Regards
David Chan - Candidate No 4 http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
My name is David Chan, Candidate No 4 for the AS&P functional constituency.
I am running this on a platform of sustainable development and conservation which affects our future, in particular our children future and the younger generations. The leaflets outline some of the main issues and would be very please if you do take a little of your time in reading it. The issues of global warming really is a lot more serious than most of us think and lead to believed. Unfortunately, my works does mean I need to do quite a bit of research into this topic and the more I do that the more I can see this as a problem that is not going to go away. The prospect of some part of Hong Kong being under water is really a possible reality that could happen within our lifetime.
So hence, my reason to run, that I would try in getting this message across for the changes needed, to make a better Hong Kong. That if we can really stop or slow this global warming process down, I can say to my children when they grown, that what we have done now have improve their future.
On Sustainability - I will be pushing for changes to the legislation and the introduction of sustainable building codes, Currently the Environmental Bureau (EB) have completed the public consultation and will be looking at how this could be implemented with a view of taking this to LegCo. The issue being the is primarily a EB/EMSD initiative and we know that there is an another side of this which is for building. The Buildings Department have launch a voluntary code, CEPAS, Comprehensive Environmental Performance Assessment Scheme For Building. While this is quite a detail documents, the take up rate for using this has being disappointing.
I think the way forward is for this or part of this to become mandatory.
It is worth noting that an environmental labeling system does not itself created green buildings, but just that by labeling sustainability, it that does provide consumer a choice when they buy or rent premises. The choice would be put to the consumers so that like buying a fridge or an Air-conditioning, you will have a clear label so that you know how energy efficient your building really is.
There is a separate exercise that is also required to amend the current building regulations and code of practices to international level so that better energy efficiency can be achieve, simple things like insulation windows with a performance driven energy requirements. In fact it is the time really to review the whole Building Ordinance totally so that it better reflect the design and construction requirements of modern times. Compare to other countries we are really quite behind. The recent problem with fire safety for example, further highlight the imminent need for changes to our understanding and implementation, and enforcement of fire safety, we should also be considering looking at a more performance basis systems.
On Conservation of our heritage
Conservation is part and parcel with sustainability and affect ours and the next generations. Ultimately what we do decide to destroy as part of our heritage now will mean those in the future will never be able to touch, feel and experience and that will be forever! The key message is that many parts of Hong Kong including Central, Wanchai has reached saturation point in its development and destruction of its heritage. It is quite obvious the condition of traffic in Hong Kong Island are congested and will remain so, even with the new proposed P2 bypass that has resulted in the lost of two of our most important heritage landmark, Star Ferry and Queens Pier, both now only exist truly in our collective memories.
If we continue at this unabated development rates, traffic congestion can only get worst, air quality further deteriorate, heat island effect increases, the city will get hotter, pollutant level higher and overall living and working conditions worsen.
At Mid-levels and Central we simply cannot build any higher with the current infrastructure and only the last remnants of the area's heritage remain - if you destroy these, then there is none left and Hong Kong will be lifeless as a chain of one mega shopping centre to another. Is that really what we want Hong Kong to be, a soulless city for shoppers?
For instance there is a great deal of anger and concern at URA's proposal on wanchai and central which will likely increase alienation and disaffection in the community against the government and the URA who will be seen as mainly enriching developers while destroying Hong Kong's heritage, destroying existing communities and destroying some of the most wonderful icon of Hong Kong which is loved by tourists and local people. I meet a lot of people from overseas, from international finance, expats and heads of large international companies, many are quite certain that places such as SOHO, Wanchai market are things that made people love Hong Kong and want to live here.
We are about to destroy more of these for short term profit replace with Disney style theme park shops, more high towers and again yet more shopping centres. We already have a Disney style Star Ferry, do we really want more? Will people still comes to Hong Kong for just gimmicks and shopping alone?
Professional Unity - one thing I have learnt is that there is a difference of opinions that had lead to really quite a degree of disagreement between the various institutes of AS&P. Primary this has been between architects and planners and the surveyors. It is interesting to note that this should not be happening because in the commercial world the various members of what we do actually compliment each others. That is almost all projects consist of Surveyor, Architects, Planners and Landscape architect at some stage of the design, construction and in fact over a building cycle. I believe there could be better way for us to work more closer together in particularly when under a LegCo who represent is, this should be the case, rather than architect will always side on architects, surveyors to surveyors, planner to planners etc. The voice of some of the smaller institutes such as Planners in fact and within surveyors the BS and Land surveyors should also be represented.
Overall I do believe in one man one vote and eventually the functional constituency will need to fall in line with what has been given in the time frame under the basic law under the principle of one man one vote. Until then we could do a lot more as "Professional" and a lot lot more for our environment. In many universities, the fact that Architectural, Surveying and Planning are all under the faculties of the Environment speaks for the fact that is really what we do.
Politically we need to think more that we are a city, a city within China that has a a high degree of autonomy, we are not a country so should not be driven politically or aspire to be one. As professional it is our duty to explain the benefits and problems when we build and develop onto our fragile environment.
I hope the future will be for all of us working together for a better world for us and our children we can all share as goal for a better future, in the end do we really want to be seen as elitist group of a little over 6000 plus of different disciplines and groups who cannot even agreed amongst themselves, particularly over important issues of conservation and environment. How can we as professional expect public support when we have fail them. We can continue to sit sit inside the small circle and continue to debate and scheming over the next best to protect the personal interest.
In the end, the final choice for the Electors are really between "conservatives", "liberals" or in the "middle of the road", those that "bends like a willow tree" or will "speak out" for the people:
So do you want a LegCo member who will delivered more of the same as before or do you want something very different, like putting environmental and conservation right up front as part of his political agenda, Look closely at the all the mail which you have, you will see unity, create business opportunity, promote professionalism, cultivate young talents etc etc. To me these are not platform but prerequisite to anyone who is standing for LegCo, why would anyone standing should want to state the obvious, which if you remember 4 years ago the statements are much the same as last time round.
It is like calling ourselves honest, trustworthy, dependable, professional. Is this not given?
Would you elect anyone who is not?
Attached is my original election platform and a couple of recent articles on sustainability features on the newspapers FYI. Some of my thoughts I have also put under my blog:
http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
The Key I think is not to over promise of everything under the sun and giving a whole list of promises and can do's, which if you count them one by one, the question must be can this really be achievable within the next few years? Can anyone really do all that under a LegCo system with limited power and authority - a LegCo where as a Law maker, he or she can only passes laws that are put forward by the government, giving that one vote amongst many? We do need to be realistic, in promising the earth, this can only lead to future disappointments to their electors. but then he will already be in for a term and reach that goal.
For me doing 2 things:
Sustainability and Conservation, if I can just do these two tasks and do them well, I am certain we will already have a better Hong Kong for all of us.
I do look forward to your support, please support a better sustainable, greener Hong Kong.
Best Regards
David Chan - Candidate No 4 http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
Tuesday, August 26, 2008
Effect of global warming - Wilkins Ice Shelf, Near Antarctica, Hanging By Its Last Thread
(Credit: Image courtesy of British Antarctic Survey)
ScienceDaily (July 10, 2008) — The Wilkins Ice Shelf is experiencing further disintegration that is threatening the collapse of the ice bridge connecting the shelf to Charcot Island.
This image acquired by Envisat’s Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar (ASAR) on 9 July 2008, shows the current state of the break-up event which began on 28 June on the east (right) rather than the on west (left) like the previous event that occurred last month. By 8 July, a fracture that could open the ice bridge was visible. (Credit: ESA)
I think the images speaks for themselves.
And back in HK.......
And the trailer for film - An Inconvenient Truth 《不願面對的真相》
Monday, August 25, 2008
Q: How do you see your chances?
Q: How do you see your chances being 1 of 5 in fighting for the limited votes?
I see this as how to bridge the gap between various really quite different professions, obviously trying to run on a single ticket is quite radical as often Hong Kong people like to see the more the better. However I think I am being realistic as I know the limit as what a LegCo can do and achieve in one term. I think some of the promises made by other candidates in their political platform are almost impossible to fulfilled and only leads to disappointments. In reality promising the earth, trying to be vague are often the ploy with many politicians in the West do and people do see through that, Hong Kong political scene however are quite new so there is a tendency to over promises. This as we all know is a major problem associated with Hong Kong, the government including our own CE who have been the most competent Financial Secretary and Chief Secretary in the past but suffer in recent times as people aspirations and high expectations for him was drum-up to be too high.
Similarly we see the same for many members of the Legco and heads of the political parties. But saying yes to everyone and promising everything may get you into politics, but sooner the later people will find out and just get disillusion when things are not done. By concentrating on one doable but important issue, one goal which I think could be achievable within a 4 years term. I think I can at least do that for the Electors. Not that the other issues are not important but these will be tackle one by one as time and as the economy changes anyway, what is decided now may not be the same in a year time. But the problem of the greenhouse gases and pollutants in our atmosphere does not changes.
I see this as several issues:
1) As a Director running a building surveying division, I managed surveyors as well as working with architects, QS and contractors. In some way I probably a lot more closer to the Quantity Surveyors and Building Surveyors than the GP surveyor. I know for instance that for many of the building surveyors has felt that they have been left out of recent improvements in the property markets, in fact we are now talking about a down turn already and many BS are saying what has happen? In similar terms we do a lot of joint projects with land surveyors so I can also see synergy in that too. We do worked quite a lot with government architects and surveyors in renovations, maintenance, on enforcements of unauthorized building works, inspection and hand over of HA flats etc. I can hence also say that I know most of the Electors in terms of what they expects of a LegCo member.
2) For most of my career I have worked along side QS on several infrastructure and development projects for the railway corporations, including sitting inside a project offices (AKA working in these a metal container shed) , I am quite familiar with the the workload and aspirations of QS, for instance, the portable nature of the skill sets of the QS are in fact a strong selling point allowing many to venture into new market such as mainland, middle east such as Dubai and other parts of the world in consulting, contracting and as clients. The biggest problem that QS has found that they have not been represented well by successive LegCo and the HKIS who are now primarily an GP organisation. QS works together or with architects, engineers and contractors but rarely with GP, so it will not be surprising that they feel left out of many issues.
3) On Green building, as one of few people amongst the candidates that has written and presented in conference on the issues of sustainability and the effects of global warming. I think there is a growing number of electors that share the same concerns as me, as to what kind of world Hong Kong will be like in the near future, what kind of environment will we be providing for our children? For me it is this reason alone that I am standing for LegCo - the lingering question am I doing enough? I can at least say that I have try my best.
4) Unfortunately, being labeled as "the expert" at conferences does meant that I do need to do a considerable amount of research on this topic. The problem is the more I get myself involved the more worry I get, in fact the word 'scary' come to mind, scared that the problem is actually much more serious than it is and the fact that most people including the government in Hong Kong are unaware or oblivious to the fact that many parts of Hong Kong could really be flooded well within our life time. Imagine we may need to build tall wall defenses along the coastline?
5) Anyway, this is the reason I have try and provide some practical solutions as to how environmental could become central to how we can develop and construct and maintain buildings , as many countries and cities around the world have already started. Also why I have given in greater detail within my "platform" as to how sustainable development could really be implemented by changes to the building ordinance, code of practices etc as well as land and planning, not just giving lip service as "green is good".
To get this message through is in fact much more important to me.
Many architects are already really quite focused on the environment and sustainable construction. But I hope that they will share the same passion that I have on this issues and do something about, not just talking.
In the end pushing for legislation and new sustainability codes is the only way forward.
I see this as how to bridge the gap between various really quite different professions, obviously trying to run on a single ticket is quite radical as often Hong Kong people like to see the more the better. However I think I am being realistic as I know the limit as what a LegCo can do and achieve in one term. I think some of the promises made by other candidates in their political platform are almost impossible to fulfilled and only leads to disappointments. In reality promising the earth, trying to be vague are often the ploy with many politicians in the West do and people do see through that, Hong Kong political scene however are quite new so there is a tendency to over promises. This as we all know is a major problem associated with Hong Kong, the government including our own CE who have been the most competent Financial Secretary and Chief Secretary in the past but suffer in recent times as people aspirations and high expectations for him was drum-up to be too high.
Similarly we see the same for many members of the Legco and heads of the political parties. But saying yes to everyone and promising everything may get you into politics, but sooner the later people will find out and just get disillusion when things are not done. By concentrating on one doable but important issue, one goal which I think could be achievable within a 4 years term. I think I can at least do that for the Electors. Not that the other issues are not important but these will be tackle one by one as time and as the economy changes anyway, what is decided now may not be the same in a year time. But the problem of the greenhouse gases and pollutants in our atmosphere does not changes.
I see this as several issues:
1) As a Director running a building surveying division, I managed surveyors as well as working with architects, QS and contractors. In some way I probably a lot more closer to the Quantity Surveyors and Building Surveyors than the GP surveyor. I know for instance that for many of the building surveyors has felt that they have been left out of recent improvements in the property markets, in fact we are now talking about a down turn already and many BS are saying what has happen? In similar terms we do a lot of joint projects with land surveyors so I can also see synergy in that too. We do worked quite a lot with government architects and surveyors in renovations, maintenance, on enforcements of unauthorized building works, inspection and hand over of HA flats etc. I can hence also say that I know most of the Electors in terms of what they expects of a LegCo member.
2) For most of my career I have worked along side QS on several infrastructure and development projects for the railway corporations, including sitting inside a project offices (AKA working in these a metal container shed) , I am quite familiar with the the workload and aspirations of QS, for instance, the portable nature of the skill sets of the QS are in fact a strong selling point allowing many to venture into new market such as mainland, middle east such as Dubai and other parts of the world in consulting, contracting and as clients. The biggest problem that QS has found that they have not been represented well by successive LegCo and the HKIS who are now primarily an GP organisation. QS works together or with architects, engineers and contractors but rarely with GP, so it will not be surprising that they feel left out of many issues.
3) On Green building, as one of few people amongst the candidates that has written and presented in conference on the issues of sustainability and the effects of global warming. I think there is a growing number of electors that share the same concerns as me, as to what kind of world Hong Kong will be like in the near future, what kind of environment will we be providing for our children? For me it is this reason alone that I am standing for LegCo - the lingering question am I doing enough? I can at least say that I have try my best.
4) Unfortunately, being labeled as "the expert" at conferences does meant that I do need to do a considerable amount of research on this topic. The problem is the more I get myself involved the more worry I get, in fact the word 'scary' come to mind, scared that the problem is actually much more serious than it is and the fact that most people including the government in Hong Kong are unaware or oblivious to the fact that many parts of Hong Kong could really be flooded well within our life time. Imagine we may need to build tall wall defenses along the coastline?
5) Anyway, this is the reason I have try and provide some practical solutions as to how environmental could become central to how we can develop and construct and maintain buildings , as many countries and cities around the world have already started. Also why I have given in greater detail within my "platform" as to how sustainable development could really be implemented by changes to the building ordinance, code of practices etc as well as land and planning, not just giving lip service as "green is good".
To get this message through is in fact much more important to me.
Many architects are already really quite focused on the environment and sustainable construction. But I hope that they will share the same passion that I have on this issues and do something about, not just talking.
In the end pushing for legislation and new sustainability codes is the only way forward.
Sunday, August 17, 2008
Q: Why am I running?
Q: Why did you decide to run for LegCo?
A few weeks ago, my family and I decided to take the ferry from central to TST. We walked along from the tram stop at central and up along the elevated footbridge. About mid point is the Central reclamation.
My children stop and asked me a simple question. What happen here, is this not where the ferry pier use to be? The conversation went on about how the government has knock down the pier and is going to build a road there instead. My daughter further ask why does the government do that, can't we do anything about it?
She also asked me "Daddy why can't you tell the government to stop, can you stop all this from happening?"
It then dawn on me that yes, maybe I should have tried harder before and do something more than just complaining about it. Perhaps I can and should make a difference?
Q: What are your view about the Queens pier?
I like to start with the Star ferry pier, you see the ferry pier has quite a lot meaning to me and my family. Each year just before Christmas for the past eight years, we do this trip where we take the tram to central, then the ferry from the old Star ferry to TST, the purpose is simply to see the display of lights from the harbour. The walk starts at stature square where there is really a wonderful display there annually, we then walk along the underpass, for which every year except for the last was decorated, full of Christmas display. We then take the ferry, the same journey that I use to take with my Grandmother over 30 years ago, the smell of grease and oil with the sea air, walk on the old wooden gang-plank as we board.
The cool slightly chilly breeze of winter. Yes, these are really perfect moments, encapsulating everything what Hong Kong is all about.
And the harbour, this beautiful harbour of ours that has set the scene for so many stories, films and novels, from Suzy Wong to 007.
From the ferry, we look across both sides to see our skyline in all its glory.
I guess my point is that the Queens Pier may have equally as strong memories for others as the Star Ferry Pier has been for my family and I, after all it is where many gets on their boats to rides out to the islands, where the old royals, and successive colonial governors goes for their sea trips, in short historically it forms what is now commonly known as our "collective memories".
And yes, these are parts of our heritage of the people of Hong Kong, our collective memories that now only exist in our thoughts alone.
So back to the the reason why I am standing for LegCo?
There are times when we say "enough is enough" this is the line which must not be cross but they are. When citizen rise up and say no more.
When someone say "what would you prefer a star ferry pier or the queens pier that is part of Hong Kong history, our history. Or knock it all down and put a big multi-lane road. There is really no contest. When we are ask do we want this harbour or more road and offices? The answer to me should be simple.
Q: So do you mean collective memory, what are your view of this collective memory?
When something is gone from our lives, that is it, we might have fond memories. , even if you try and replicate it, rebuilding it is really not the same. If we want to see replicants, there are many places to go, including just across the boarder to the "Window of the World" in SZ or Disney or Lego land (perhaps "LegCo Land" of the future may share the same fate).
The question to everyone of us must be , what can be the next? Are there anything that can be considered as sacred , How about the old LegCo building itself? Should that become part of a road too? What about Victoria park, this last remainly bit of green space in HK? I am sure building a roard across would ease traffic big time. Would there not be a day when the government decide even the entire Victoria harbour could be filled in, because traffic is just so bad and slow. So that we can then just drive across, we can build more tall towers, offices and huge shopping centers all the way along the stretch from Shengwan over to quarry bay as a continue strip, we could then have a further 12 lane super highway running across it.
As LegCo, I think I can help to defend for our collective memories, be that voice who would and should have said a firm No. To draw that line and be that voice for the Electors.
To ask the question is there really a better way? Are we to forever continue to build and build without any regards to the future, our future for us and our children who has no say in whether they would want to continue to take the ferry from star ferry.
To be able to breath fresh clean air, everyday. To be able to see across the harbour and the distance mountains. To see the stars up in our night sky. To have a harbour that does not get narrower and narrower year on year.
That is my dream, my believe and my pledge to electors that I will speak out. As I truly believe that many like me, we are at the tipping point of enough is enough.
But in the end, it is your choice too, I am hoping that people would join me, help to make a better world for our future. A better, cleaner and greener future.
(Pictures are copyright under a creative common attribution sharealike license from Wikipedia)
Thursday, August 14, 2008
2008年立法會選舉候選人
陳贊輝 (候選人 G4)
建築、測量及都市規劃界
綠色票-可持續發展
親愛的選民， 我主要的重點是可持續性發展和環境問題，以及我們如何作為建築師，測量師及規劃師能夠有所作為。
不過，如果我當選，我承諾：
ü 更廣泛地代表我們專業的利益;
ü 每月舉行業界會議，讓你們從而對政府高級官員和立法機關作出影響;
ü 有關你們提出的任何問題/電子郵件，若合情理，定必儘快答覆;
可持續性發展和環境
全球絶大多數的頂尖科學、生態專家均一致評論： [ 温室效應所導致的後果 ]，其實比許多人預期的還要嚴重更多。世界上大部分冰川將在20年內逐漸融化，導致海洋水位不斷上升，這一切將會在我們及下一代內呈現眼前。甚至香港的部分土地亦有可能長埋於海底之中。
全世界超過百分之四十的能量都消耗於建築物的相關使用上，其實即使是微小的力量也能改變我們的未來。雖然解決或緩減温室效應這工作看似很困難，但我深信作為建築師、規劃師及測量師，我們是有責任去盡力改善一切的﹗眾所周知，香港一些關於規劃、設計、建築、物業管理及維修的立法，大部分已不合時宜及追不上現今的環境生態。我認為應刻不容緩地作出根本性的改變，使其趕上及達至國際的環保水平。
土地的規劃發展 – 為實現理想的持續發展，政府應推出更多的鼓勵政策，如增加綠色的規劃設計，額外地積比率等。
建築設計 – 現行一般設計上的規律方法(Prescriptive)，應改為從效應(Performance) 的角度出發，才能切合現今的環保需求。上世紀的條例或常規做法已不能符合變幻莫測的新科技及新時代。對於環境方面的條例應有明確規定，並與國際標準接軌。
建築 – 是否實施可持續的理想發展，應該由消費者選擇。帶有 [ 能源和碳指標 ]的標籤應清楚說明我們可以根據基準，決定自己想購買、居住或工作的建築物。我們可以選擇不購買或不使用一些有可能破壞未來環境的建築物。
發展 – 認為開發和建築祗有壞處是一種錯誤的觀念。事實是，我們需要發展商和承建商去建設我們的社會及家園。在建設發展的同時，他們會為我們帶動社會經濟及投資商機，亦為成千上萬的香港巿民提供就業機會。本人深信未來的發展方向是在可持續的理想目標上與發展商合作。如果我們真正想擁有一個綠色的未來，我們需要有相關的政策和領導，實施強制性、可持續性的 [ 能源和碳指標 ] 標籤，讓消費者來選擇和決定購買、租住一些有效能的理想環境。令消費者選用更多的環保設施，這將使發展商興建及推動更多環保的發展。我們應該為一些致力於環保發展上的發展商提供更多彈性奬勵。值得指出的有，採用有綠色特徵(green features)的成功案例已清楚表明了巿場有這種需求。故對於有關的合作夥伴關係如私人機構與政府的合作夥伴關係(Public & Private Partnership)，一些如免稅、貸款、回贈款、稅務回扣等等，可在建設發展過程中作進一步考慮，將有助加快推動更多環保的發展。
現有的建築物 – 我們應速使舊有樓宇更有效率地利用能源。最簡單的方法是政府能夠為舊有樓宇提供 [ 持續性低息貸款 ]。事實上，政府、專業人士和公眾之間的不信任，緩慢了整個社會的發展。我們應該實施理念，使大眾互相信任。我們應該背負這個使命，在政府、專業人士，發展商及公眾之間，維持一個和諧的社會。簡而言之，如果對抗及指責文化盛行於社會上，滲入到香港巿民的生活中，這樣必定無利於社會，更不會給任何人帶來好處。
我現今的工作需要到世界各地，如中國內地、新加坡、日本及亞洲其他地區發展物業。由於工作關係，我曾視察超過200個物業項目，他們都有顯著的“綠化建築設計” ，尤其是在中國，我所看到有著難以置信的進步，並在多方面比香港明顯地更好，香港應該擁有與國家相同的理想。保護環境和實施可持續發展已經成為國家的一個首要工作，對於我們的香港及未來，我們有義務保護這個屬於每一個人的美麗地球。
理想的發展為我們的世世代代，讓孩子和他們的子女有一個值得居住的美好家園。
這是我們的當務之急。
如果您安於現狀，接受現有的舊方法和思想，正如我們所看到的過去十年，同樣的舊政策，雖然有很多人可以接受這一點。
但
如果你認為必須有一個更好的政策，並像我真正地相信香港可以改變得更美好，請投陳贊輝一票，為我們的未來 – 實施可持續發展，建立一個綠色的未來。
陳贊輝 (Candidate No G4) 建築、測量及都市規劃界
http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
Tel. (+852) 6198–4853
Email. dtfchan@gmail.com
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Elections to the Legislative Council 2008
The Green Ticket – Sustainable Development
David Chan陳贊輝 (Candidate No. G4)
Architectural, Surveying and Planning Functional Constituency
David Chan陳贊輝 (Candidate No. G4)
Architectural, Surveying and Planning Functional Constituency
- http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
Tel. (+852) 6198–4853
Email. dtfchan@gmail.com - Dear Electors:
- My message and main emphasis is on sustainability and environmental matters and how we as Architects, Surveyors and Planners can make a difference. However, if elected, I also pledge to:
- To Be your Voice and represent the wider interest of our professions;
- Hold monthly constituency meetings to give electors access to influence senior government officials and the legislature;
- Reply expeditiously to all sensible e-mails from electors concerning any issues raised by them;
Sustainability and the Environment
Scientists around the globe are converging with the conclusion that the effect of global warming is actually more serious than originally forecast. The likely effect could be that the significant areas of the polar ice caps and world’s glaciers could melt within 20 years, which will result in rising sea levels. There is the real threat that within most of our lifetime some parts of Hong Kong could be under water.
Buildings consume over 40% of the world’s energy use hence, each building user / owner can make a difference, however small it may seem.
While the task appears insurmountable, I believe there is much we can do as Architects, Surveyors and Planners.
Ø Legislation – It is well known that our legislation for the planning, design, building, building management and maintenance are grossly outdated. The time has come for major changes to bring it up to international level and beyond.
Ø Land and Planning – the Government should provide greater incentives for achieving sustainable development such as a mechanism that allows Developers to build more green features with a corresponding reduction in land premium. The property will be worth more and hence will generate a higher ratable value over the buildings lifecycle exceeding the reduction in land premium. Hong Kong citizens win by getting sustainable buildings with a corresponding smaller carbon footprint and the Government sees more revenue albeit spread over the lifecycle of the building instead of at a short term land auction.
Ø Design – the use of prescriptive method in design should be replaced with a more performance based building codes, which suitably address the needs and aspirations of today’s world. Our Ordinances, Code of Practices, formed generations ago does not fully meet the needs of the constantly changing world and technological advance of our time. There should be concessions for sustainable innovations with clear sets of environmental codes at least on par with international standards.
Ø Building labeling – The implementation of sustainability labeling to give consumers the choice. With labeling for energy and carbon usage clearly stated we could benchmark and decide for ourselves do we want to buy, rent, live or work in an environmental efficient building.
Ø Existing buildings - there is clearly a need to upgrade the energy efficiency for older buildings and the simplest way I think is by promotion and provision of no interest loans for refurbishing buildings incorporating sustainable features.
Ø Development – Clearly there is a misconception that all development and building is bad – Not true – we need Developers and Builders to build our homes and offices. Whilst they do so primarily for financial gain (and conversely undertake financial risk) we need policies and leadership so they build more sustainable buildings.
To encourage Developers to build more building with green features we could, for instance, provide more flexible incentives. It is worth pointing out that the success in adopting the currently available, albeit nominal, green features clearly indicate a demand. Consideration could be in the form of for tax breaks, partnership, loans, public and private partnership (PPP) etc could be a way forward.
The mistrust between our sector, Government and the public that has been allowed to filter into today’s society must be addressed by strengthening the ideal that Professionals and Government are in tune with the publics wishes and to reverse the blame game inherent in society. Lets get everyone on side to support the Green Ticket to begin to see environmentally friendlier and sustainable buildings in Hong Kong.
About myself, I don’t have a Campaign Manager nor will I be sending you glossy books or brochures to highlight my candidacy. It just plain illogical to base my candidacy on the message of protection of the environmental yet insist on sending reams of paper that will only to go in the bin within days.
The green voice is not currently being heard in our legislature and if you would like more of the same for the next few years then there are other candidates who would be able to deliver this for you. If you believe perhaps there could be a different way, a different future. We as citizens, individuals of Hong Kong, China and of this Earth, can truly make a difference by simply adopting sustainable development principles and challenging our Government take the lead to consider everything we do today on sustainable terms and how each of us can affect our world.
Look for the candidate that will work with you and map out the future and beyond. Not as a member of an elite group but truthly believing in supporting our future and to be your voice, a representative, that will speak on your behalf to our Government of your concerns and aspirations.
I urge you to spare a moment to look at the following websites.
http://www.climatecrisis.net/
http://www.wecansolveit.org/
I have also copy of the film “An Inconvenient Truth” if anyone wishes to borrow it.
Maybe after watching, you can then decide how to cast your vote? Decide for yourself and ask the question could some parts of Hong Kong be under water within 15 to 20 years? Could this really happen? What will it do to our Economy?
Think of what kind of life it will be if we can no longer see across the harbour due to smog, that the morning and evening sky will be lit up in an eerie shade of yellow everyday. All this will happen within our lifetime if we don’t start making a stand.
Think of our children, as parents we spend time, effort and money getting them through school, making sure they are healthy, spending our best effort for their well being, to hopefully ensure they have a bright future. But have we missed anything?
My work takes me all across China and to date we have significantly reduced construction waste for over 200 projects that we do across Greater China,
As a father, I do the best for my family to make sure we have a secure and comfortable life and that they are well cared for. As a citizen, I pledge to do my bit, my small effort, for a greener society.
I sincerely hope that as Surveyors, Planners and Architects you share this concern for our environment, who ever you decide to vote for. The message for sustainable development is one, which will be heard, loudly in the new Legislative Council.
Best Regards
David Chan
陳贊輝 (Candidate No G4)
Architectural, Surveying and Planning Functional Constituency
http://davidchanlegco.blogspot.com/
Tel. (+852) 6198–4853
Email. dtfchan@gmail.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.jpg){kind=link}