The scavenger hunt returns this summer! The Airmazing Race , organised by Clean Air Network, comes to its third year. NEW check points and MORE PRIZES are available this year!
Join the race and LIKE our facebook page now!

Our aims：

The Airmazing Race 3 is a scavenger hunt for clean air that’s full of adventure and excitement! Participants must crack clues to find hidden locations and complete the challenges. The team that finishes the race in the shortest amount of time will win.

CAN believes that after greater exposure to air pollution issues and learning about what can be done to solve them, participants will feel empowered to drive change. The Race seeks to accomplish this via a funny, interactive and original approach.  Tasks within The Race range from little games to the more educational, such as  locating air quality monitoring stations and answering air pollution-related questions in a mock-game show.

Date：July 6, 2013
Time：9am – 5:30pm
Location：Chater Garden and Checkpoints all over Hong Kong
Eligibility：Anyone between the ages of 13 to 18
Fee：Free of Charge
Application Deadline: June 14, 2013

Join the Race! Click here.
Become a Volunteer! Click here.
Or go to The Airmazing Race facebook page.

Prizes：
Every participant receives $100 PizzaExpress dining voucher just for taking part !
First prize –         Intercontinental Harbourside buffet (value $7,000)
Second prize –    Intercontinental Lobby Lounge dining (value $3,000)
and MORE PRIZES !

Let’s review the race last year!

Health Assessment:

Participants must ensure that they are medically and physically fit to participate in the race. Clean Air Network reserves the right to disallow / disqualify any person who is known or suspected to be physically unfit to participate in the event.

We will hold a briefing session before The Race, to ensure that all participants know the rules and provide necessary guidelines. The Race will be closely monitored by our staff. Participants can contact our staff by phone.

The Report shows that, last year, the annual average NO2 concentration in the PRD region decreased by 17%, compared to concentration levels in 2006; however, CAN found that NO2 levels in Hong Kong decreased by 2% at general stations and increased by 24% at roadside stations from 2006 to 2012. In fact, in 2011 and 2012, roadside NO2 levels reached record highs (123µg/m3 and 122µg/m3).  In addition, the PRD region’s recorded levels of SO2 and PM10 last year were 62% and 24% lower, respectively, compared to levels recorded in 2006. In comparison, the decrease for the same two pollutants were only 52% and 22% for Hong Kong.

Table 1：Regional vs Hong Kong air quality improvement (2012 vs 2006)

The Chief Executive Officer of CAN, Ms. Kwong Sum Yin, says, “The continuing improvement of regional air quality is a stark contrast to Hong Kong’s deteriorating roadside air pollution, in particular, NO2. As the self-proclaimed ‘Asia’s World City’, our government should put more effort into improving local air quality, particularly with regards to speeding up the pace to phase out old and dirty buses and commercial diesel vehicles, which are the primary sources of roadside pollution in our city. ”

To read the Pearl River Delta Regional Air Quality Monitoring Network report for 2012, click here.

Clean Air Network would like to let you know that we respect and protect your privacy. Clean Air Network has your personal data (including but not limited to: name, telephone number, fax number, email address, address, record of your participation), which we collected from our website or through your application to our programmes previously, and we may use that data for the purposes of communication, feedback collection, programme promotion, conducting surveys, volunteer recruitment, dispatching publicity materials and fundraising. We will not share your personal data with any external parties or use it for any other purposes without your prior consent.

Your personal data will continue to be used in order to keep in communication with you. If you agree to our continued use of your personal data (including subsequent updates of such data), as was provided to us before the revised Ordinance became effective on April 1st, 2013, for the above-mentioned purposes, you do not need to take any further action.

Upon your request at any time and at no charge, we can correct or cease to use all or any part of your personal data. To make such a request, please write to us by post or email.

Address: Flat A, 2/F, 102-106 Queen’s Road West, Sheung Wan, Hong Kong

Email: info@hongkongcan.org

Should you have any inquiries, please do not hesitate to contact us at (852) 3971 0106.

When Environment Secretary Wong Kam-sing unveiled the government’s plan to improve Hong Kong’s air recently, he was joined by representatives from three other bureaus – transport and housing; development; and food and health. The attendance of these other officials was unprecedented and signalled the government’s intention to respond to calls for the departments to work together to tackle air pollution.

The plan’s announcement also marks another first – the link between public health and air pollution has formally been recognised, as evidenced by the presence of a high-ranking health official. This new plan is to be welcomed.

Some critics, however, have said that it is just old wine in a new bottle. It may be true that many of the measures mentioned in the plan have been brought up in the past, time and again, but the point to focus on is whether these measures can and will be implemented soon.

Take, for example, the retirement of old commercial diesel vehicles. This action has been talked about repeatedly over the past eight years, but little has been done. Chief Executive Leung Chun-ying this year earmarked HK$10 billion to phase them out and discussions between stakeholders are happening in earnest. The success of this measure will be critical in determining whether we will soon see a significant improvement in our roadside air.

This measure could potentially create a domino effect for clean air, but, should it fail to take off, the road ahead for government planners could be an uphill climb, because any policy that follows will have a lower chance of success.

Another key measure to reduce pollution is the proposed requirement for ocean-going vessels to switch to low-sulphur fuel at berth in Hong Kong. The government is currently negotiating with various industry parties to effect it. A five-year study has attributed 519 deaths in the Pearl River Delta region – including 385 in Hong Kong – to the ill-effects of sulphur dioxide from ship emissions. If all ocean-going vessels were to switch to using low- sulphur fuel while at berth, the number of Hong Kong deaths could drop by half.

To succeed, both these measures require all of Hong Kong’s citizens to change from thinking only of the present to carefully considering our longer-term well-being. Clean air must be a key element in this future.

This may mean we each pay a little more out of our pockets now to reap the benefits in the future. This applies particularly to polluters. They should take responsibility for the public health burden they create and pay what is necessary to lessen that burden so that everyone can breathe easier.

Past attitudes have meant that the environmental and public health consequences of our decisions are often not considered beforehand and, instead, are merely dealt with as an afterthought: a mess can be made and the clean-up can come later.

For a long time, Hongkongers have had to suffer the damage inflicted on them by polluters – the premature deaths, the hospital days, the doctor visits and the hours of lost productivity – and the amount grows year by year. These external costs should no longer be hidden away and ignored.

This new way of thinking must extend to the furthest reaches of the government. The new plan assumes that the number of private cars here will continue to grow, but if the air quality is to improve in the coming years, the use of vehicles ought to be curbed. This falls under the oversight of the Transport and Housing Bureau and it is up to officials there to exercise a fresh mindset and shift from simply meeting demand to controlling it.

The same applies to the Development Bureau. When it comes to new construction projects, are officials ready to bring the environment into the equation and not simply prioritise economic considerations? As the Kai Tak cruise terminal continues to develop, will they have the foresight to create a low-emission zone within the surrounding roads and install onshore power facilities for ships? To do so would demonstrate their commitment to people over cars and to citizens’ quality of life over tourism.

The government’s new plan outlines the actions we must take if we genuinely want clean air. And this must include tackling the problem at its source. We should ask ourselves: are we ready for this new attitude? Are we ready to sacrifice a little convenience? Are we ready to stop prioritising economic growth at the cost of everything else?

In addition, it should be clear that action from the Environment Bureau alone is not enough. The bureaus for transport and development must take on bigger roles for the effective implementation of policies to improve our air quality.

To win this fight, the whole of society – individuals, industries and government departments – must begin thinking in a new way and work to benefit all in the long term.

In addition, the attendance of the Development Bureau and the Transport and Housing Bureau should be highlighted, as it is a sign of the Government’s intention to engage in interdepartmental cooperation to tackle air pollution. This would be significant as it could mean the formation of a comprehensive and strategic plan to reduce air pollution, instead of the fragmented stop-gap measures that have been the norm until now.

Clean Air Network CEO Sum Yin Kwong said, “In the past, measures to tackle air pollution have been focused on end-of-pipe solutions. From the new blueprint, we can see that the focus has now turned to acting on sources, e.g. controlling the increase of cars or urban planning of new developments, such as Kowloon East. These areas of focus are the responsibility of the Transport and Housing Bureau and the Development Bureau. To bring Hong Kong’s air to a new level, the Environment Bureau can no longer be a lone soldier in dealing with air pollution. ”

Traditionally, transport policy, public health and urban planning have been overseen by separate government departments, but CAN believes that these areas are closely related issues, over which the responsible departments should be coming together to have cooperative discussions, and even now, it is not too late for them to work together to affect significant change.

“We hope to see this kind of high-level collaboration as a regular function of air quality policy creation and look forward to seeing the efforts of all involved departments translated into real action. Doing such would be a great achievement for public health that would reap immeasurable benefits for every Hong Kong citizen and clearly demonstrate the Government’s ability to think ahead for the future of our city,” she said.

Clean Air Network would also like to see the new air quality health index implemented as soon as possible, so that members of the public can gain a better understanding of how air pollution affects their health. To leverage this opportunity to educate and engage citizens, Clean Air Network will be launching a smartphone app that incorporates the new index later this year.

Government urged to curb vehicle emissions as calm weather lets exhaust gases linger.

In Causeway Bay, the air pollution index (API) hit 198, the third-highest level since recording began 18 years ago. Central’s highest reading was 187.

Those levels are described as “very high” under the city’s pollution forecast and warning system. People with respiratory or heart disease were advised to stay indoors.

The dominant pollutant in yesterday’s air was nitrogen dioxide, which comes from vehicle exhausts or reactions among various pollutants.

Nitrogen dioxide reached 291 micrograms per cubic metre of air at 3pm in Causeway Bay – nearly 50 per cent more than the World Health Organisation safety guideline of 200.

The level of PM2.5 – also known as fine particule matter – was 72.4 micrograms at 3pm. The WHO’s recommended safety level is 25 micrograms, on average, over 24 hours. The city’s worst recorded roadside pollution was a “severe” API reading of 212 in Central last August.

To read the full article on South China Morning Post, click here.

Members of the public who supported the action stuck a black balloon on to a giant set of red cardboard lungs to signify the deterioration of public health that will occur should ocean-going vessels continue to use the fuels they use now. The collected signatures will be presented to various cruise lines and to the incoming Chairman of the Hong Kong Tourism board, Peter Lam, in hopes of encouraging them to take action on this issue and help Hong Kong become Asia’s foremost environmentally-friendly port.

Ships became the most significant source of respirable suspended particulates, nitrogen oxides and sulphur dioxide in Hong Kong in 2011. Cruise ships, in particular, are the biggest polluters of all ocean-going vessels, accounting for approximately ten per cent of total marine vessel emissions of the aforementioned pollutants. According to figures from think tank Civic Exchange, Ocean Terminal in Tsim Sha Tsui, used primarily by cruise ships, puts out 458 tons of sulfur dioxide emissions each year; this is compared with Hong Kong’s total road transport emissions, which is 474 tons annually. The reason for this is that cruise ships use bunker fuel with very high sulphur content. Compared to the low sulphur diesel fuel used by on-road vehicles, cruise ships emit up to 80 per cent more sulphur dioxide. This has serious impacts on the health of both residents and visitors within the Tsim Sha Tsui area.

As stated in the 2013 Policy Address, the Government is preparing legislation that would require marine vessels to switch to ultra-low sulphur diesel while at berth and aims to submit the proposal to the Legislative Council next year. However, legislation takes time – if cruise lines and other ocean-going vessels were to, instead of waiting, switch immediately to using fuel with 0.5 per cent sulphur content, the number of resulting deaths from marine vessel emissions would drop from 385 to 197.

Clean Air Network CEO Sum Yin Kwong says, “Any impression one might have that the tourism industry does not create air pollution is very inaccurate! Cruise lines are, in fact, a “smokestack industry” that asks the public to pay with their health. CAN hopes that the industry will fulfill their social responsibility and switch to cleaner fuels while at berth as soon as possible. CAN also hopes that the incoming Hong Kong Tourism Board Chairman Peter Lam, not only addresses the economic aspects of this industry, but actively works to build and promote an environmentally-friendly port to protect the health of Hong Kong’s citizens and tourists alike.”

1) within the starting area, abnormally high levels of PM2.5 were recorded. The runners suspect that this had to do with the generator being used to power the inflatable gate;

2) following the start of the race, levels dropped and remained largely unchanged near the Eastern Harbor Crossing until the runners reached the typhoon shelter and Victoria Park Road. With westbound traffic coming on Tsing Fung Street, a sharp upward spike was seen;

3) a significant increase in pollutant levels was seen when the runners reached the Causeway Bay Flyover and Gloucester Road.

The air along the 10K route was cleaner than that along the Full Marathon route, particularly because the 10K route did not pass through pollution hotspots – the Western Harbor Tunnel and the Cheung Tsing Tunnel – the Full Marathon did.

We would like to thank our runners Billy and KL, Cissy, Jonathan!

To get first-hand air pollution information along the race route of this year’s Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon, Clean Air Network (CAN) invited four volunteer runners (two running the Full Marathon and two running the 10 KM) to carry portable PM2.5 monitors Note 1 to measure air pollution levels during the race.

Measurement results

CAN analyzed the PM2.5 monitoring data and found:

1) For the 42-km Full Marathon – average PM2.5 concentration Note 2 was 30 microgram/cubic meter, higher than the WHO Air Quality Guideline (AQG) of 25 microgram/cubic meter for 24-hr PM2.5Note 3. (Refer to Figure 1 and Table 1 for detailed measurement results).

2) “Three tunnels and three bridges” are what the Hong Kong Marathon is known for, the hosting organization also emphasizes on the ventilation system in the tunnel. However, our results show that the average PM2.5 concentrations in the Western Harbour Tunnel (35 microgram/cubic meter) and Cheung Tsing Tunnel (34 microgram/cubic meter) were higher than the average PM2.5 levels measured during the course of the whole Marathon race. Nam Wan Tunnel recorded an average of 28 microgram/cubic meter.

3) For the 10-km Marathon – average PM2.5 concentration was 28 microgram/cubic meter, slightly higher than the WHO 24-hr standard.

4) In addition, one minute average of PM2.5 concentration reached 36 microgram/cubic meter at a certain point on West Kowloon Highway, according to two Full Marathon runner’s monitors. Based on the runner’s observation, we estimate that this might have been caused by emissions from passing by vehicles.

5) According to data from EPD’s monitoring stations and our monitoring results at the Tsing Ma Bridge turning point, the background PM2.5 level this morning was around 30 microgram per cubic meter.

Figure 1. PM2.5 concentration measured along the 42-km Full Marathon race route

Sum Yin Kwong, CEO of CAN, said, “This February’s air quality is better compared to last year, which is also reflected by our monitoring results. Although the race was held at the wee hours of a Sunday morning and roads were closed off, concentrations higher than the WHO’s 24-hr PM2.5 standard were still measured along the race route, especially at the Western Harbour Tunnel and Cheung Tsing Tunnel. Marathon hosting organizations may consider routes other than tunnels for better air quality, besides; running in tunnels is also quite boring.”

In addition, she points out that roads are only sealed off once a year for marathon, but runners are trained under normal traffic conditions, given the amount of air inhaled and exhaled by a person when exercising is ten times higher than normal, runners running near the roadside would be ‘human vacuum cleaners’.

Air pollution’s health impacts

U.S. research has shown that the amount of air inhaled and exhaled by a marathon participant equals the amount of air inhaled and exhaled in 48 hours by a sedentary person. Therefore, compared with a regular person, participants have higher breathing rates and suffer higher exposure to air pollutants.

Athletes have pulmonary ventilation rates that are 10 to 16 times higher than that of a resting person and, therefore, can potentially suffer up to 10 times the health impacts of air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Training outdoors can lead to health consequences that include lung irritation, chest pain and decreased lung capacity.

In 2006, two athletes died prematurely while participating in the Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon; the suspected cause was air pollution. In 2008, the two-time Olympic champion from Ethiopia, Haile Gebrselassie, withdrew from the Olympic marathon in Beijing, citing air pollution as the reason for his pulling out.

Below is data for the first twenty one days of February 2013 from the Environmental Protection Department’s three roadside monitoring stations; CAN found that over half the recorded days had pollutant levels that exceeded the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommended average 24-hr air quality standards for PM2.5. In particular, Causeway Bay, the area where the finishing point of this year’s marathon is located, had the highest number of exceedances.

• Causeway Bay, 20 days with exceedances out of 21 days
• Central, 13 days with exceedances out of 21 days
• Mong Kok, 14 days with exceedances out of 21 days

Table 1. The average concentrations of each section of the Hong Kong Marathon (WHO recommended level: 25 micrograms /cubic meter)

Measured Average Concentration of PM2.5 (microgram/cubic meter)

Note 1: CAN used the U.S. TSI model SidePak AM510 portable air quality monitor, which is widely recommended by university researchers, to monitoring air quality.

Note 2: PM2.5 measurement was recorded every second, and the average concentration was calculated by averaging all data points during the whole race.

Note 3: There is no hourly WHO standard for PM2.5, therefore the 24-hr WHO standard was used for reference only.

To get first-hand air pollution information along the race route of this year’s Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon, Clean Air Network (CAN) invited four volunteer runners (two running the Full Marathon and two running the 10 KM) to carry portable PM2.5 monitors Note 1 to measure air pollution levels during the race.

Measurement results

CAN analyzed the PM2.5 monitoring data and found:

1) For the 42-km Full Marathon – average PM2.5 concentration Note 2 was 30 microgram/cubic meter, higher than the WHO Air Quality Guideline (AQG) of 25 microgram/cubic meter for 24-hr PM2.5Note 3. (Refer to Figure 1 and Table 1 for detailed measurement results).
2) “Three tunnels and three bridges” are what the Hong Kong Marathon is known for, the hosting organization also emphasizes on the ventilation system in the tunnel. However, our results show that the average PM2.5 concentrations in the Western Harbour Tunnel (35 microgram/cubic meter) and Cheung Tsing Tunnel (34 microgram/cubic meter) were higher than the average PM2.5 levels measured during the course of the whole Marathon race. Nam Wan Tunnel recorded an average of 28 microgram/cubic meter.
3) For the 10-km Marathon – average PM2.5 concentration was 28 microgram/cubic meter, slightly higher than the WHO 24-hr standard.
4) In addition, one minute average of PM2.5 concentration reached 36 microgram/cubic meter at a certain point on West Kowloon Highway, according to two Full Marathon runner’s monitors. Based on the runner’s observation, we estimate that this might have been caused by emissions from passing by vehicles.
5) According to data from EPD’s monitoring stations and our monitoring results at the Tsing Ma Bridge turning point, the background PM2.5 level this morning was around 30 microgram per cubic meter.
Sum Yin Kwong, CEO of CAN, said, “This February’s air quality is better compared to last year, which is also reflected by our monitoring results. Although the race was held at the wee hours of a Sunday morning and roads were closed off, concentrations higher than the WHO’s 24-hr PM2.5 standard were still measured along the race route, especially at the Western Harbour Tunnel and Cheung Tsing Tunnel. Marathon hosting organizations may consider routes other than tunnels for better air quality, besides; running in tunnels is also quite boring.”

In addition, she points out that roads are only sealed off once a year for marathon, but runners are trained under normal traffic conditions, given the amount of air inhaled and exhaled by a person when exercising is ten times higher than normal, runners running near the roadside would be ‘human vacuum cleaners’.

Air pollution’s health impacts

U.S. research has shown that the amount of air inhaled and exhaled by a marathon participant equals the amount of air inhaled and exhaled in 48 hours by a sedentary person. Therefore, compared with a regular person, participants have higher breathing rates and suffer higher exposure to air pollutants.

Athletes have pulmonary ventilation rates that are 10 to 16 times higher than that of a resting person and, therefore, can potentially suffer up to 10 times the health impacts of air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide and ozone. Training outdoors can lead to health consequences that include lung irritation, chest pain and decreased lung capacity.

In 2006, two athletes died prematurely while participating in the Standard Chartered Hong Kong Marathon; the suspected cause was air pollution. In 2008, the two-time Olympic champion from Ethiopia, Haile Gebrselassie, withdrew from the Olympic marathon in Beijing, citing air pollution as the reason for his pulling out.

Below is data for the first twenty one days of February 2013 from the Environmental Protection Department’s three roadside monitoring stations; CAN found that over half the recorded days had pollutant levels that exceeded the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommended average 24-hr air quality standards for PM2.5. In particular, Causeway Bay, the area where the finishing point of this year’s marathon is located, had the highest number of exceedances.

• Causeway Bay, 20 days with exceedances out of 21 days
• Central, 13 days with exceedances out of 21 days
• Mong Kok, 14 days with exceedances out of 21 days

Figure 1. PM2.5 concentration measured along the 42-km Full Marathon race route

Table 1. The average concentrations of each section of the Hong Kong Marathon (WHO recommended level: 25 micrograms /cubic meter)

Measured Average Concentration of PM2.5 (microgram/cubic meter)
42 Kilometer (Full Marathon) Race 30
10 Kilometer Race 28
Western Harbour Tunnel 35
Cheung Tsing Tunnel 34
Nam Wan Tunnel 28
Tsing Ma Bridge Turning Point (stationary monitoring for background PM2.5 levels) 30

Note 1: CAN used the U.S. TSI model SidePak AM510 portable air quality monitor, which is widely recommended by university researchers, to monitoring air quality.

Note 2: PM2.5 measurement was recorded every second, and the average concentration was calculated by averaging all data points during the whole race.

Note 3: There is no hourly WHO standard for PM2.5, therefore the 24-hr WHO standard was used for reference only.

For media enquiries, please contact:

Sum Yin Kwong
Clean Air Network CEO
Tel: 66025041 / 3971 0106
Email：sum@hongkongcan.org