You said marked bold above and NO I have never wondered that.

Anyway no exaggeration on the numbers. 12 by chance and of that 3 I knew.

Why would I think there was nobody else there during the other hours? I am not that 'Guy Miller'. I suspect probably a representative average no of people per hour on a Sunday afternoon.

pathetic at the very least - you're really struggling.

And as to your assumption - to mis-coin a phrase from Centaur "When you assume something, you make an ASS of U and ME".
Me, for responding to such drivel.

Well yes it is a struggle to have discourse with you, but I am only trying to please cause you love the attention.

But to summarise I think the pavillion is quite a pleasent asset, it keeps the sun off you when enjoying the view and quite alot of people use it. Also they spent some effort to make the steps and railing aesthetically pleasing; might not be to everybodies taste but nice that they tried.

If you reconsider the offer on Shitfer, pass the funds to LG and I will make the necessary transfer arrangements. Sorry, but much as I would like to the personality doesn't come with it.

So finally - and for fear of presuming to "ASS of U and ME".
You wandered all the way the hill, climbed the stairs to the pavilion, enjoyed the scenery, the pleasant breeze, the effort made to make the pavilion aethestically pleasing, and were hoping for a little solitude, otherwise you would have stayed in Main Street.

Now simply because I advocate the same, you're suggesting I'm wrong (at the least).

Now think of that same view in a years time, MST, people, rubbish, etc, and for what?
So HEC can have a redundant flagship to their ECO image?

Not wishing to pick a quarrel, and not wishing to score points, but it does make your previous remarks a little redundant.

Furthermore, as was written in the Lamma-zine, new arrivals comment on the 250m high funnels that are hidden behind a hill as soon as they arrive on Lamma.
HEC are now proposing MST which will be 190m above sea level & supposedly not visible.

HEC state it will be brightly coloured & they claim not visible from YSW - why the emphasis that it will not be visible from YSW if it is such a wonderful sight & asset to Lamma?
We have also heard that they considered a "sight" in Tai Peng - why not TP?
Too many residents might get upset at having to look at a 100m MST everyday?
And all for what - something that has already been discerned as having no purpose beyond ECO publicity for HEC.

They also considered a site in the Power Station - why not?
We already heard from the Power Station chap that the wind strength is a redundant issue.
Not a good spot for ECO publicity.
Why not put it on the Power Station on one of their reclaimed peninsulas & have guided tours.
But no, they want it somewhere where a large segment of HK island can view it and laud HEC's ECO conscience.
At what cost? - only a chunk of lamma where you personally went to enjoy the view, the breeze, and a break away from Main Street.
Where else could you go on a Sunday and experience the same without trekking all the way over to Tung O, Lo So Shing, or Mt Stenhouse? And having to deal with the tourists all the way over there.

May be if I included some instructions of what Shitfer says and doesn't say could address the personality issue for the Shitfer transfer and we can all live happily ever after. Just wondering?

But no, I doubt very much that HEC spindly thingy and the pavillion are connected than anything more than coincidence. Ever watch that film Conspiracy Theory with Mel Gibson?

PS Before you ask I didn't get all excited about Mel and phallic mushrooms.

Nope never met Mel & never watched any movies with him

For the record I am no fan of the spindly thingy either.

Well then, following on to the thread that has wriggled it's way into Spike Magazine chat, with reference to the cost of legal action.

If the HEC proposal does make it's way past the consultation panel, then I would consider it a pleasure to start a legal process against the process - shouldn't be too hard to win:

Simple - apply for a 3 minute hearing to apply for a 2 hour hearing, get given a 1 day hearing with an interim injunction that will stay in place until the 1 day hearing a year later while both sides seek experts documentation;
Cost on my part if I lose (unlikely) - negligible
Cost to HEC - niiiiice PR - being given permission by HK Government to build a brightly coloured 100m high wind turbine for:
Tourist & educational purposes
No economic value - excess power already, higher power cost for power that won't be utilised anyway;
no experimental value because there's not enough wind, & the wind to power ratio data is already available;
and taking out a slice of HK greenbelt for the benefit of squishing an ever diminishing HK bird population.

And all for what? - HEC eco-profile.

Sounds like a doddle to me.

Zep...... you know those solar panels you were talking about - you don't by any chance have the suppliers details..... and anybody know where I can buy a stock lot of candles?

The EIA report (Environmental Impact Analysis) went online this morning (almost a week later than previously announced), in various formats, even a short Executive Summary: www.epd.gov.hk/eia/...

After browsing or reading it, you can click on [Send comment] in the scrolling EIA Reports section on http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia and send in an objection, if you want.

Nothing will be built before this consultation period is over and the EPD has approved this report, probably with some added conditions coming from the comments sent in, among other input. The current work and markers are just a "Site Investigation" and have been separately approved and put on notice boards a few weeks ago.

Have a look at the report and let's continue to discuss it here - in a civilised fashion, please.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

.............

I think Romer's tree frog was first discovered in Lamma - it is the only amphibian endemic to Hong Kong and is protected under the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance, Cap. 170.

So if you want to object you could invoke this, but it didn't stop Chek Lap Kok being built, of course. About 200 tadpoles and frogs were removed from the airport site and have been kept in captivitiy in Hong Kong and Melbourne Zoo and some have been released in suitable wetland sites around Hong Kong.

Going on about Romer's Tree frog could be counter-productive, though, as it could make it sound like something weird and irrelevant, rather like the way anti-Greens in Australia ridiculed those who care for the fate of the small marsupial called the Long-nosed Potoroo

.

I didn't mean to use that as the basis of an objection; the site doesn't seem wet or to have any trees anyway. (They claim that they'll be planting trees there after.) I was just surprised to hear that these frogs were here. The report mentions several species of birds likely to be chopped up though.

..........

Did I read somewhere that 300 Turbines on Lamma would represent 3% of HEC output?

Guy, sounds about right,
according to the figures I've published in the Lamma-zine:
10,000 turbines to replace the power station, 300 for 3%.

It would take 30 turbines just for Lamma's very own power needs.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

So 1 MST represents a usage saving of 240tonnes of coal
And 10,000 turbines a saving of 2,400,000 tonnes/annum to replace the total consumption of HK over to MST's.

According to HEC figures in 2001 the power station consumed about 4,000,000 metric tonnes of coal.
Demand increased at a rate of 3-5%/annum over the past few years (HEC figures) - meaning a coal consumption rate in 2004 of about 4,500,000 tonnes (ie 10,000 MST's)

So does that mean that HEC are lying & that 1 MST would replace 450 tonnes, or that it would take almost 2 MST's to replace the 450 tonnes, in which case, we would need 60 MST's on Lamma & 20,000 in HK.

Therefore an area 50 times that of the Kowloon Peninsula, with new MST's needing to be added every day to keep up with consumer demand.

Making the need for an MST for educational purposes on any chunk of HK Greenbelt anywhere even more redundant.

I wonder what the boundaries of the "study area" mentioned in the report were. Of the birds mentioned, only the black kite and sea eagle would be likely to be flying at the height of the blades. Black kites are common but the white breasted sea eagle is only seen very very occasionally. Both, though, presumably have the visual acuity and general common sense to avoid the blades.

Have seen several of the kites in that specific area but no eagles.
Only eagle-like bird I've seen was 2 days ago, but that was flying at fairly low levels around YSW area.

In the selected area - do HEC mention that there will be a restricted area below & around MST? - Presume there must be to stop "kids" from playing "chicken" by throwing misc objects into the fan blades for fun, and of course to stop tourists getting splattered by squished birds.