Waste+Burning=Waste? Communal Incinerator to Reinvent Waste
|
Sze Nga Ting Fiona 2005994244
2013-2014 March Thesis Proposal 3 min presentation 1st November Communal Incinerator to reinvent waste
Thesis Statement Similar to many affluence cities found elsewhere in the world, Hong Kong is currently facing a severe waste problem. Although patchwork of disposal and recycling schemes have been implemented over the years, making our recycling levels to 48%, that has not stopped Hong Kong from earning a reputation as being Asia’s most wasteful city (SCMP, 2013). On average, we each generate 1.36kg of trash daily compared to 1kg in Taipei, 0.95 in Seoul and 0.77 in Tokyo.
All of the generated waste are transporting to three different landfills located at Ta Kwu Ling, Tuen Mun and Tseung Kwan O, in which they are expected to hit capacity by 2019 (EPD, 2006). To solve this problem, Hong Kong government has resubmitted landfill expansion plans to Legco this year (EPD, 2013). However, this is merely a temporary remediation.
With soaring tourist numbers skewing the figures, we should brook no delay in putting forward a long-term solution on this issue. Incineration seems to be one of the common practices widely used elsewhere. However, is incineration a feasible mean to tackle Hong Kong waste treatment problem? Like landfills, incineration has in the past been scorned for the same “not in my backyard” (NIMBY) reason (Hsu, 2006). Noxious infrastructures such as incinerators are normally seen as “others”, in which they do not receive much attention in our “everyday life” (Foucault & Miskowiec, 1986). However, in the 21st century, we could no longer neglect the existence of some social problems and their affiliations – waste problem and landfills, recycle structure and incinerator. Instead of pure negation, this project aims to explore the possibility of politically and aesthetically establish an incinerator within a community.
Project description
Hong Kong is small and the landfill dilemma has been going on for years. On one hand we understand using incinerator is one of the most effective way to handle our waste problem, on the other hand, incinerator has been abhorred due to NIMBY reason. Since residences usually oppose to noxious infrastructural development in most NIMBY cases, minimising its negative image seems to be the most effective ways. That is exactly this thesis’s aim – to find an environmental, sustainable, yet public acceptable solution for Hong Kong waste problem.
In this regard, psychological obstacle is the major barrier to overcome. As we do not have much alternative in Hong Kong at the meantime, it is a crucial moment to consider the integration of technology and social value of incinerator, so that the new waste treatment strategy is a feasible and adoptable one. Osaka City Environmental Management Bureau’s Maishima Incineration and Water Treatment Plant is an excellent demonstration as our counterpart (Osaka City Environment Bureau, 2010). Besides being a piece of art, it also functions as a community centre, city attraction and energy generator. An incineration is no longer an infrastructure that city abhor.
Methodology
The project will then take the advantage of Hong Kong acute waste treatment and social dispute against noxious infrastructure problem – to propose a community friendly composite building which infusing different programmes with the proposed incinerator. From community/ sports centre, multifunctional hall to retail shops might then juxtapose with one another forming a neo-complex. Function, technology, communal needs and site location will act as the indicators to facilitate and determine the arrangement and programme of the complex. It is hoped that any consequential disturbances or difficulties arisen will be minimized and concurrently acting as a beneficial architecture to the community concerned.
Research Analysis:
Annotated bibliography “The “ordinary” becomes a rationalisation for market forces and passive consumption; “common sense” becomes a mean to avoid the rigors of ideological critique.” (McLeod, 1996, p. 25) “Are there politically and aesthetically constructive positions beyond pure negation? Can buildings and urban space also be seen in terms of pleasure, comfort, humour and emotion? Are there “other” architectures to explore – ones that are less hermetic and more engaged in individuals’ emotional and physical lives?” (McLeod, 1996, p. 27) Project reference: 川口市リサイクルプラザ Kawagichishi recycle plaza Osaka City Environmental Management Bureau’s Maishima Incineration and Water Treatment Plants
The Spittelau Waste Incineration Plant (Vienna)
The Waste Treatment Facility (CTRV, in Spanish)
References EPD, E. P. D. (2006). Waste problems and solutions Retrieved 28 September, 2013, from http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/prob_solutions/wrfp_summary.html EPD, E. P. D. (2013). 立法會：環境局局長就新界東北堆填區及新界西堆填區擴建計劃撥款申請的總結發言全文 Retrieved 28 September, 2013, from http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201307/12/P201307120706.htm Foucault, M., & Miskowiec, J. (1986). Of other spaces. Diacritics, 16(1), 22-27. Hsu, S.-H. (2006). NIMBY opposition and solid waste incinerator siting in democratizing Taiwan. The Social Science Journal, 43(3), 453-459. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2006.04.018 McLeod, M. (Ed.). (1996). Everyday and “other” spaces New York: Princeton Architectural Press. Osaka City Environment Bureau. (2010). Incineration Plant Retrieved 28 September, 2013, from http://www.city.osaka.lg.jp/contents/wdu020/kankyo/english/others/others03.html SCMP. (2013). Time to stop talking rubbish Retrieved 28 September, 2013, from http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1249271/time-hong-kong-stop-talking-rubbish
|
