Batgung

Cold at Chinese New Year?

Mr Tall — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 08:27:23 +0000

You’ll hear it this week (if you haven’t heard it already): Chinese New Year is coming up, so it’s going to be cold!

The assumption that Chinese New Year (CNY hereafter) invariably brings a cold snap is deeply-ingrained in Hong Kong culture, among natives and expats alike.

But is it true? Yes, it’s winter, so it’s not going to be in 30s, but is Chinese New Year really likely to be colder than normal? My perceptions seem to run the other way: I remember finding any number of CNY’s unpleasant because of the need to wear dress-up clothes in unseasonably warm weather, and ending up uncomfortable and sweaty.

Well, these days, it’s never hard to find an answer to this kind of question, so that’s what I went ahead and did. I looked up the temperatures for the first three days of Chinese New Year for the past 21 years, since that’s how many years I’ve been here for CNY. I averaged out the daily highs and lows for those 63 days.

I then compared my average with the average winter temperatures for January and February in Hong Kong, which should apply quite neatly to Chinese New Year, which falls between mid-January (January temperatures average 14.5-18.6) and mid- to late February (February averages 14.4-18.6).

Let’s just assume the February average, because the two months’ temperatures are nearly identical, and since CNY is slightly more likely to fall in February than January. A table with my results follows.

	Average low	Average high
February normals for Hong Kong	14.4	18.6
Average for first three days of CNY 1991-2011	13.6	17.6

What do you know! I have to admit it: the average temperature for a CNY day over that period really is colder than normal, by a full degree for daily highs, and almost that much for daily lows.

It’s interesting, though, to take a closer look at the actual year-by-year CNY temperatures over that period. A longer table with those follows. Scan through it as you like, but don’t skip down to the next paragraph without having a look at 1996.

Year	Dates of first three days of CNY	Day 1 temperatues		Day 2 temperatures		Day 3 temperatues
		Low	High	Low	High	Low	High
1991	February 15-17	15.8	20.8	15.7	17.9	15.1	18.3
1992	February 4-6	17.8	22.8	15.5	18.0	14.9	16.2
1993	January 23-25	7.9	12.1	7.4	13.2	8.0	15.1
1994	February 10-12	15.4	17.5	16.4	22.3	16.2	20.7
1995	January 31-February 2	9.2	14.3	11.2	15.1	11.9	15.3
1996	February 19-21	6.9	9.3	5.9	8.4	5.8	8.6
1997	February 7-9	12.4	16.8	12.3	16.0	14.1	16.5
1998	January 28-30	13.0	17.8	12.2	14.4	13.9	17.0
1999	February 16-18	18.1	22.5	18.3	21.3	19.1	25.2
2000	February 5-7	14.9	20.6	13.8	18.3	14.3	19.5
2001	January 24-26	17.7	20.2	16.0	21.0	11.4	16.2
2002	February 12-14	15.1	18.6	15.9	20.2	16.7	20.5
2003	February 1-3	17.7	22.2	14.9	17.8	14.7	15.9
2004	January 22-24	9.1	13.7	9.0	13.8	9.0	12.7
2005	February 9-11	17.6	21.2	16.6	24.1	14.8	17.5
2006	January 29-31	15.2	19.9	17.3	21.4	18.3	23.6
2007	February 18-20	21.3	25.3	18.4	21.7	17.9	20.2
2008	February 7-9	8.2	11.2	9.8	14.3	8.1	15.0
2009	January 26-28	12.7	16.3	11.4	13.1	13.1	17.6
2010	February 14-16	14.6	16.3	10.8	15.2	9.1	11.2
2011	February 3-5	13.2	18.6	13.5	20.9	14.6	21.7
	Averages	14.0	18.0	13.4	17.5	13.4	17.4

I remember CNY 1996 with particular clarity. Mrs Tall and I had wed just a couple of months previously, so we were heavily obligated that year to do a full round of bai lin, i.e. the formal visiting of relatives at CNY. So around and around we duly went, in some of the most miserable weather I can ever recall in Hong Kong. Not only was it extremely cold and windy, I recall it being wet as well, with an almost icy-feeling drizzle. My look back at the temperature records confirmed that there was indeed measureable precipitation on all three CNY days that year.

Actually, if you take out 1996, the remaining 20 years in our survey average out at an almost-normal 14.0-18.1. That year really was exceptional, which is ironic since it’s also the latest CNY in the period we surveyed, falling in late February, which is usually when the weather HK starts to warm up a bit.

If you don’t mind, also go back to the table and have a look at the years 2005-2007. I think it’s these years that have fixed in my mind the image of warm CNY weather. Daughter Tall was a kindergartner in that period, and was very excited about wearing her adorable – but also substantial and warm – CNY outfits. I remember her little face all red and sweaty on those days in the 20s, as she begged to keep wearing her quilted jackets while her mother and I tried to pry them off her.

What about this year’s CNY? The forecast from the Hong Kong Observatory is for much cooler-than-normal weather. I guess if I’d just accepted the conventional wisdom, I’d already have known that!

A peaceful walk in Hong Kong

Mr Tall — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 01:00:00 +0000

The research study that I have long awaited has finally been published. An article in the Wall Street Journal summarizes the work of researchers in the USA who have identified and analysed ‘Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome’:

Signs of a sidewalk rager include muttering or bumping into others; uncaringly hogging a walking lane; and acting in a hostile manner by staring, giving a "mean face" or approaching others too closely, says Leon James, a psychology professor at the University of Hawaii who studies pedestrian and driver aggression.

The article – please read it, and do click on the amusing cartoon illustration showing a ludicrously roomy sidewalk scenario – also has a very helpful sidebar that allows us to evaluate our own sidewalking practices according to a list of signs indicating the presence of Pedestrian Aggressiveness Syndrome. I did just that, to see if I suffered from this worrisome malady:

Having denigrating thoughts about other pedestrians

Well, yes, but this is a given no matter what speed they’re walking at.

Walking by a slower moving pedestrian and cutting back too soon (feels hostile or rude)

Yes, I’m sure that tree sloth I’ve cut off was feeling hostile and rude holding me back the way he did . . .

Feeling competitive with other pedestrians

I suggest you ask the ‘person’ trying to cut ahead of me at the Kowloon Bay MTR escalator yesterday what he thinks of my competitive spirit.

Acting in a hostile manner (staring, presenting a mean face, moving faster or closer than expected)

Given my feelings about my co-pedestrians (see the first item), I’m not likely to try to get any closer to them than is absolutely necessary.

Feeling stress and impatience when walking in a crowded area (crosswalk, staircase, mall, store, airport, street, beach, park, etc.)

Now why would I feel stress about walking in crowded areas? Let’s take a little trip back in time to that same Kowloon Bay MTR station. It’s a night of pouring rain, and the staircase up to the bridge leading into the station is blocked entirely by people who don’t want to go out into the rain, and who have distributed themselves en masse right across the entire stairway. Mr Tall and the other wannabe stair-climbers inch forward in the deluge for 10 minutes to advance the 15 feet needed to reach the staircase. So again, why would I feel stress?

Walking much faster than the rest of the people

The ability to walk efficiently at speed is a gift God has given me, and it would be a sin of omission to leave it unused.

Not yielding when it's the polite thing to do

Sorry, but just what do we mean here by ‘yielding’? Do we mean that, when disembarking from an MTR car, we stand aside as the doors open so the pack of crazed see lai with visions of empty seats in their eyes can barge ahead of those of us exiting the train?

Walking on the left of a crowded passageway where most pedestrians walk on the right

The day when all passageways in Hong Kong are organized according to a definite left/right standard is the day I’ll worry about this one.

Muttering at other pedestrians

Perhaps, but since they’re either on the phone or listening to mobile devices anyway, they can’t hear me, so what does it matter?

Bumping into others

This is a question of simple physics. Newton’s First Law states that a body in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force. So if my crashing into someone who stops dead in the middle of the sidewalk to better concentrate on texting an update to his Facebook page constitutes ‘bumping into’, then I say that every thread of the cosmos cries out in protest at this injustice.

Not apologizing when expected (after bumping by accident or coming very close in attempting to pass)

Since when in Hong Kong are apologies expected?

Making insulting gestures

We all know, of course, that it’s possible to identify and employ gestures that are grounds for pistols at dawn in, say, Slovenia, but that have no meaning whatever in Hong Kong. (Not that I admit having done any research in this area.)

Hogging or blocking the passageway, acting uncaring or unaware

But so many times I am unaware! How can they know when I’m simply acting?

Expressing pedestrian rage against a driver (like insulting or throwing something)

There is no anger more pure, more utterly satisfactory, than the anger directed at a Hong Kong driver who sees a light about to turn red, but never the less pulls into and blocks a pedestrian crossing, well knowing he’ll never make it through in time. As we humble groundlings shamble around his glossy Lexus, should we really be denied the chance of giving him the Mean Face, and maybe just a gesture or two?

Feeling enraged at other pedestrians and enjoying thoughts of violence

Hmmm. I’ve certainly enjoyed the thoughts I’ve experienced while working through this list.

Readers, how about you?

How to start a one-man business in Hong Kong

mrb — Tue, 28 Sep 2010 09:35:33 +0000

I'm just starting on this, so I'll jot down notes as I go along.

There are three options for starting a company in Hong Kong: a sole proprietor, a limited partnership, or a limited liability company (LLC).

There's a summary of the differences between them on this website. Though as you read their final recommendation, keep in mind that their business is to sell you a service to setup a limited company!

In my case I'll be a one-man band, so cross 'partnership' off the list. Then sole-proprietor, or LLC? My business will be small and simple, really just a way to accept payment for occasional projects I run. I'm looking for something very simple to setup and manage, am not over worried about liability, and don't expect to raise capital.

I'll choose to be a 'sole proprietor'.

My next step is to register the company with the Inland Revenue Department. I'll need to fill in a simple form at the Business Registration Office (4/F Revenue Tower, 5 Gloucester Road, Wan Chai), show them my ID card, pay a fee (currently HK$450 for one year), then 30 minutes later I can collect my Business Registration Certificate. More details at the IRD website.

Hong Kong museums

Mr Tall — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:00:00 +0000

Although I've mentioned Hong Kong's museums in an article on things to do for visitors, I thought I'd spend a bit more time discussing their relative merits -- and deficiencies. I feel much more qualified to do so at the moment than I did several years ago, since Daughter Tall is now entering the optimum age range for museum action (she's seven going on eight). So let's take a little tour of our fair city's publicly-funded repositories of history and culture. Note that the name of each is linked to its official site; all have adequate information on exhibits, location, opening hours, transport and so on if you root around their sites a bit.

Hong Kong Science Museum
It was the Science Museum that inspired me to write this article. A couple of weekends ago, Mrs Tall had a business dinner, so Daughter Tall and I took the opportunity to make an evening visit to the Science Museum. First off, if (after reading the remainder of my account) you have the urge to follow suit, might I highly recommend Saturday evening as a good time to go? Unlike the rest of Hong Kong's museums, the Science Museum stays open till 9:00 on each of the six days it's open (it's closed on Thursdays). Saturday afternoons (I can inform you reliably from past experience) at the Science Museum are ugly: it's crowded; you waste lots of time lining up for lame attractions (more on this forthwith); and even the walk-up exhibits can be hard to observe given the milling masses of humanity.

Now, speaking of lame attractions, please accompany me to my favorite corner of the Hong Kong Science Museum. It's on the upper floor, way in the back on the left. Comprising a projection screen and a fire-engine red automobile chassis, I suppose it could be loosely described as a 'driving simulator'. One's child sits in it, pushes a button to choose a voiceover language, and off it 'goes'. The screen shows a through-the-windshield view of a car traveling from somewhere in Tsim Sha Tsui over to Nathan Road, and then down the latter to its terminus at the tip of the Kowloon peninsula. But why are my directions so vague? It's because the Tsim Sha Tsui depicted has not existed in at least three decades. This exhibit is so old it's of essentially historical interest.

But that's not its worst flaw. No, the real problem is that for reasons unfathomable, it's terribly popular, including with Daughter Tall. So if we visit the Science Museum when it's busy, we inevitably squander at least 15 minutes lining up for this travesty. And as one waits for one teenaged mutant after another to take a turn, it's impossible to avoid watching the simulation video itself and realizing, with increasing horror, that each time it runs the simulator car 'stops' at a traffic light on Nathan Road. That's fine, but then the light doesn't change, and it doesn't change, and it stays the same yet some more, and you're thinking 'Did the simulation designer, recruited as a consultant from Planet Bonehead, not realize that video can be edited so that 37 years later a tall, ruggedly handsome, but terribly impatient gwailouh will not need to stand here chewing the insides of his cheeks while his kid is waiting to 'experience' this stupid attraction?' Or perhaps that is too much to ask.

Anyway, the Science Museum has some amusing exhibits (I like the funhouse mirrors section), kids seem to enjoy it, and it's cheap (just $25, which is far less than science museums in many other cities; its special exhibits usually also require a separate fee that's often more than the admission itself). But it's no shining star in its genre, and if you're from out of town, I wouldn't bother unless you need a rainy-day option.

Hong Kong Museum of Art
Perhaps the outstanding characteristic of the Hong Kong Museum of Art is its location. It's right on the Tsim Sha Tsui waterfront, and there's a fantastic view of the harbor from the lobbies on its upper floors. There are also some decent exhibits. My favorite is the Chinese Antiquities gallery, which features objet such as pottery, seals, statuary, etc. representing most of China's dynasties, although they're in short supply for the earlier eras. There's a gallery of some 19th-century pictures which are of perhaps greater historical than artistic interest, and another with Chinese traditional paintings and calligraphy. There's also a contemporary Hong Kong art exhibit, but I'm not really into that scene, so I shall withhold my judgement, no matter how much I would love to render it . . . . Anyway, the Art Museum is also a good deal on the financial side, as it's one of Hong Kong's $10 museum specials.

Hong Kong History Museum
In years gone by Hong Kong's History Museum was confined to a poky little building in Kowloon Park, and aside from a very handsome clan of stuffed Neanderthals inhabiting a life-sized diorama, it was of limited interest. But then the History Museum was granted new premises in Tsim Sha Tsui East, and it graduated from laugher to legitimate. The current incarnation still follows a rough timeline-based walk through Hong Kong's history, but its exhibits are much more sophisticated and extensive. My favorites are the galleries covering the Opium War, and Hong Kong's folk history and early commercial history (the latter is done via a mocked-up street scene complete with a tram), but there's plenty of interest. Allow at least a couple of hours for this one, and more if you're a history buff. At just $10 for admission, it's a great deal.

Hong Kong Space Museum
What was I saying about lameness? In much the same vein as the Science Museum, Hong Kong's aging Space Museum houses a group of interactive scientific exhibits of varying currency and interest. The main attractions at the Space Museum, however, are the IMAX movies that are projected on to the ceiling of the Space Museum's domed interior. You won't find Avatar playing here, though; it's all hour-long documentary-style programs. Kids like them, mostly, and they do fill up quickly, so a bit of planning is worth it if there's one you'd especially like to see. Admission to the museum only is $10, but the IMAX films cost $24 or $32, depending on your seat.

Hong Kong Museum of Coastal Defence
I've got nothing but praise for the Museum of Coastal Defence. It's an indoor-outdoor museum comprising a number of galleries of military and war photos and memorabilia, plus a walk around the site itself. Lei Yue Mun, the promontory on which the museum is perched, commands the eastern entrance to Hong Kong's harbour, and this site was fortified in the 19th century with the aim of sealing it off. You can visit gun emplacements, munition stores, and even a torpedo launching site. It might just be the best $10 you'll spend at any of Hong Kong's museums.

Hong Kong Heritage Museum
The Heritage Museum, located not far from the Sha Tin MTR station in the New Territories, is neither here nor there. It's part history museum, part art museum, part 'interactive' kids' zone -- but not a huge success at any of the above. Perhaps its singular feature is an exhibit dedicated to Chinese opera, but then I'll leave it up to you to decide whether that's a plus or a minus. This museum's existence seems most likely to be a sop to local interests (i.e. 'Hey, let's have something that will attract tourists to Shatin!') than to any other clear purpose. It's worth a visit if you're in the area, but I would not strain to get to this one until I'd exhausted the possibilities at the History, Art and Coastal Defence museums. Admission is $10.

Dr Sun Yat-sen Museum
I have not visited this museum! Any reader feedback on its merits/demerits would be very welcome. All I know is that Dr Sun did reside in Hong Kong for part of his life, and that this museum occupies an historical building, although not one that he lived in. Admission is $10.

Flagstaff House (Teaware Museum)
Flagstaff House is the pleasant white colonial building you see off to one side in Hong Kong Park. It houses a collection of tea accoutrements that are strangely soothing to behold. Seeing them won't take you long, though; this is a small museum. It's free.

Railway Museum
Located appropriately enough in Tai Po, right on the old Kowloon-Canton rail line, this museum comprises the old Tai Po railway station itself, plus a couple of engines and several passenger cars from the historic KCR. It's fun and it's free.

Sheung Yiu Folk Museum and the Sam Tung Uk Museuem are similar, in that they're preserved/restored traditional clan compounds. You can walk through them, see examples of some of the implements of daily life in days gone by, and be very grateful you've got an air conditioner and a fridge. Sheung Yiu is a bit of a hike to get to -- literally -- as it's a few minutes' walk down the Pak Tam Chung Nature Trail in the Sai Kung Country Park. Sam Tung Uk is in a more urban setting, near the Tsuen Wan MTR station. Both are free.

Buying tickets
All of the museums I've listed so far are run by Hong Kong government's Leisure and Cultural Services Department. The LDSD offers a couple of bargain ticket options for its museums:

If you're here as a tourist, a weekly pass to all of the LCSD museums can be had for just $30. You can buy this pass at any of the fee-charging museums.

If you're a Hong Kong resident, an annual pass for individuals ($100) or families ($200 for a family up to four members) provides the best value. The form you need to fill in is provided as a .pdf file here, along with instructions for submitting it.

All LCSD museums also offer half-price concessionary fees to kids, people over 60, and people with disabilities.

Finally, you should note that Hong Kong's museums offer free entry on Wednesdays (although note that this may not apply to special exhibitions, and it definitely doesn't apply to the IMAX movies at the Space Museum).

Now, just before we close, I'll mention one more museum that's not part of the LCSD group.

Hong Kong Maritime Museum
As our faithful reader and commenter Gweipo has mentioned, the Hong Kong Maritime Museum is great. It's also conveniently located in the reconstructed Murray House in Stanley, so a trip to the market there can be spiced up with a fascinating look at ships and shipping both historical and modern. Admission is $20, and again note that this museum is not covered by the LCSD's weekly and yearly membership schemes I've just mentioned above.

Readers, any notes to add? What are your favorites?

How to get rid of mould?

mrb — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 01:00:00 +0000

Oh warm and fertile Spring, new growth bursting out all around.

Which in our flat means mouldy ceilings.

I gaze up at it as I lie in bed each morning. No more peaceful lie-ins, instead I watch it's spidery progress, and plot its demise.

Years past have seen me don the rubber gloves and head into battle with bleach. That brings instant gratification, but no long-term satisfaction. A few weeks later I'll wake up, look up, and there it is again.

So this year is going to be different. First step: off to the internet for a bit of research. Where I find that the mould has been laughing at me, in between burps. Yes, bleach takes away the colour, but behind its cloak of invisibility the mould lies impervious. Worse, it's able to digest the bleach, and so when it gets its colour back it's stronger than ever.

The truth about mould's appetite for bleach comes courtesy of Mycologia's Mistress of Mould, Dr Kemp [1]. She says to put down the bleach and turn to ... vinegar! And not just any vinegar. Apparently the supermarket cheapy won't be any use: "only white fermented vinegar seems to work, as synthetic acetic acid does not appear to be effective". Who'd have guessed?

So, last week I donned the gloves again, but this time set to with cloth and a bottle of the finest white wine vinegar. Initial results were mixed. There's no post-bleach-fumes sore throat, which is a major plus. But on the other hand the house smells like a chip shop. Never mind, the authentic chippy aroma is a small price to pay if the mould stays away.

One week later and there's mould again, but it's mostly in places that didn't get a wipe last week. So, they've been given the vinegar rub-down too. We'll know in a few weeks whether victory is mine.

Readers, any other solutions to suggest?

MrB

[1] - Mycologia Pty Ltd's 'Myths about Mould' page

Hong Kong's Urban Heat Island

Mr Tall — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 01:00:00 +0000

The theme of my first Hong Kong climate change article was simple: average yearly temperatures here have been going up more less steadily since the Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) starting keeping track of them, but they have skyrocketed in recent decades. Yet over the past 60 years, essentially all of this warming has occurred at night, i.e. the average nighttime lows are much higher than those in the past, while daytime highs are just the same.

This pattern is in fact the signature effect of a phenomenon that has been termed the ‘urban heat island’, or UHI, as we’ll call it throughout this article. Simply put, a UHI is a bubble of air over an urban area that’s hotter than the air in the surrounding rural areas. This effect has been identified scientifically for many years, and it’s certainly obvious anecdotally to anyone who’s watched or read a weather forecast in Hong Kong – how many times are the forecast nighttime lows something like ‘17 degrees in the urban areas, and a few degrees lower in the New Territories’?

If you are interested in learning how a UHI forms and looks, resources from the EPA and NASA in the USA provide plenty of clear explanations and visuals.

But if you're happy with a quick overview, then we can just say that a UHI forms when the sun heats up man-made structures such as roads, masonry, buildings, and so on. This heat builds up during the day, and it's then gradually released after the sun goes down. This keeps the surface temperature from dropping as much overnight as it would in an area covered with natural vegetation.

Some scientists who have studied urban heat islands also believe that heat-generating machinery, e.g. vehicles and big air-conditioning units, contribute to higher temperatures in urban areas. It's hard to judge how big an effect this would be, but if it's a real factor, Lord knows Hong Kong is a place it would make plenty of impact.

So the obvious question for us now is, how much of the warming in Hong Kong is due to the heat island effect? And then, if we can identify that number, how much background, or ‘global’, warming has really taken place in Hong Kong?

Fortunately, the busy staff of the HKO have adressed these very questions. A 2006 paper titled 'On Climate Changes Brought About by Urban Living', by C Y Lam, pretty much has the goods we need. He conducts a simple comparison that's typical of attempts to estimate the magnitude of individual UHI effects: he compares the temperatures at the urban station in question, in this case the HKO headquarters (which we'll call 'HKO-HQ' for short) itself, with a nearby location that's still rural. In fact, Lam chooses two such locations, i.e. Lau Fau Shan in the NW New Territories, and Ta Kwu Ling in the far northern NT, very near the border with mainland China. Lam limits his comparisons to the years 1989-2005, which are the years for which data from Ta Kwu Ling are available.

That period is of course also the time in which the HKO-HQ has recorded its sharpest increases in average yearly temperatures: Lam notes that the HKO-HQ's average yearly temperature has risen at a pace of 0.37 degrees C per decade during this time. This is a very steep rise indeed.

So how does that compare with the two non-urban stations? In Lau Fau Shan, from 1989-2005, the temperature increased by 0.25 degrees per decade. That's still very fast. For Ta Kwu Ling, however, the increase is significantly lower, i.e. 0.08 degrees/decade.

What does this tell us about the UHI effect at the HKO-HQ? Keeping the math simple, we can conclude that the UHI effect at the HKO-HQ in recent years is somewhere in the range of 0.12-0.29 degrees/decade: that is, 0.37 - 0.25 = 0.12 for the HKO-HQ/Lau Fau Shan comparison, and 0.37 - 0.08 = 0.29 for the HKO-HQ/Ta Kwu Ling comparison. Lam himself, interestingly, does not derive even this simple range of difference in his paper, nor does he speculate on how great the UHI effect at the HKO-HQ might be. He simply notes:

'That the urban area has been warming up much more rapidly than the "countryside" is thus evident'.

Now the range I came up with range is very large: which end of it is likely to be most accurate? I suspect the UHI effect is at the higher end. For one thing, Lau Fau Shan is not exactly a rural area; it's fairly built-up. Several researchers from the HKO note this themselves a later paper, i.e. 2007's 'Temperature Projections in Hong Kong Based on IPCC Fourth Assessment Report':

At LFS (i.e. Lau Fau Shan), changes in the environment were observed near the site in the past few years. The grassland in the vicinity of LFS was converted into concrete surface for stacking up cargo containers. Also, there had been continuous new town developments at Tin Shui Wai which is about 1 km away.

If you'd like at look at the area, I entered the coordinates for the Lau Fau Shan station provided by the HKO , and you can see where it's situated on Google maps:

View Larger Map

The Ta Kwu Ling station, on the other hand, seems to be near a village, but it's situated in somewhat more open territory:

View Larger Map

The HKO confirm TKL's better fit as a rural comparison to the HKO-HQ in the 2007 temperature projections paper:

There is no significant change in the immediate environment for TKL although the rapid urban development in the nearby city of Shenzhen cannot be completely ignored.

So we've made some progress. It's obvious that the urban areas of Hong Kong comprise a textbook urban heat island. We now also have at least a broad sense of how much effect this may have had on the HKO-HQ's sharply rising temperatures. The HKO, to its credit, does not shy away from discussing the UHI effect, nor does it try to understate its impact on Hong Kong. C Y Lam concludes his paper with a rundown of some the harmful outcomes of a hotter city -- e.g. more very hot nights, stress on people who can't afford air conditioning, etc, -- but he in no way tries to imply this nighttime heating is purely the result of global warming.

Still, it would be nice if we could find way to nail down the scope of the UHI effect in Hong Kong more definitively.

The HKO make their best attempt at estimating the UHI at the HKO-HQ in the 2007 temperatures projection paper I've cited above. The authors first examine the same comparison Lam made in his paper, i.e. between the HKO-HQ and Ta Kwu Ling. They then run a linear regression on the differences recorded (i.e. they attempt a far more sophisticated statistical analysis of the yearly data than the seat-of-the-pants business I did). They reject the trend that they identify as statistically insignificant, however, because the data sample is small (it's not even two decades' worth of readings) and because of large yearly variations.

So the HKO writers then adopt what they call a 'differencing period' approach, which I'm not going recount in detail (it's explained on pages 4-5 of the 2007 paper if you're interested). In brief, they assign the temperatures at the HKO-HQ from 1885-1902 as their 'base', since at that time they claim the HKO-HQ was in an essentially rural setting, i.e. paddyfields, then compare it to the current gap in temperatures derived from the HKO-HQ/TWL comparison. They come up with an 'urbanization' rate of 0.08 degrees/decade, i.e. this means that every decade since 1902 the temperature at the HKO-HQ has risen 0.08 degrees strictly because of urbanization, for a total of 0.81 degrees' worth of UHI.

The HKO authors then compare this number to studies of UHI done in other places: for example, a study in London identified an effect of 0.11 degrees/decade; a study in Beijing 0.16, a study of large cities in China 0.05, and so on. Given this range, their number looks reasonable.

We can now do a very simple comparison to estimate just how much of the warming in Hong Kong is likely due to the UHI effect. We've got our 0.08/decade number, and we can quite easily determine the overall warming the HKO-HQ has recorded over the years. The 2004 'Climate Change in Hong Kong' paper I referenced in my previous article states it clearly on p. 8: temperatures at the HKO-HQ have increased by 0.12 degree/decade over the period their records cover.

So, 0.12 - 0.08 = 0.04.

In other words, by this estimate, Hong Kong has been warming by 0.04 degrees Celsius per decade when we eliminate the UHI effect. Put another way, the UHI effect seems to account for about 2/3 of the warming Hong Kong's urban areas have experienced.

Climate change in Hong Kong

Mr Tall — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 01:00:00 +0000

The message from the Hong Kong Observatory is unequivocal: global warming is real; it’s affecting Hong Kong’s recent and current weather in obvious ways; and future trends for the world, and perhaps for Hong Kong especially, are ominous.

Climate change pops up in all corners of the HKO's website. From their extensive package of climate change resources for the general public and education, to the HKO Head's blog, there’s a consistent focus on forming public opinion and changing people’s behavior.

Frequent reminders of the implications of climate change also appear in their other publications. Take as a recent example the HKO’s year-end round-up of 2009’s weather. It begins by stating that the World Meteorological Organization expects 2009 to be among the top 10 hottest years on record. And, in line with this, the report notes that Hong Kong’s 2009 temperatures came in at 9^th place in our own list of hottest years, and that 30 very hot days were recorded in 2009, which was the most since 1963.

Next, the 2009 round-up reminds us of Hong Kong’s warming trend by providing a little table highlighting the top 11 hottest years on record here; if you have a look at it (by using the link above), only one of those 11 years precedes the 1990s, and six of them occurred in the 2000s.

So it’s getting hotter, and the HKO sees this as the most salient fact to report about 2009’s weather. But are there any other patterns to note, any other helpful angles we might find in these numbers?

Given the recent dust-ups in the climate change arena (see for example here, here and here , just to get the smallest taste of the vast controversy that is currently roiling the entire ‘science’ of climate change) I decided to launch my own little Hong Kong-specific investigation.

Since I’m no climate scientist – and since I’m pretty lazy – I thought I’d better keep things simple at the outset. So I kicked off by conducting my own informal survey of temperature averages in HK over the past 13 years (mostly since those numbers are so easily available on the HKO website).

I’ve made up a table that sets out the yearly deviations from normal in overall average temperatures, plus the deviations from normal average highs and lows, in the years since 1997. I’ve also highlighted how those years ranked (at the time they were reported) in the all-time records.

	Yearly average vs normal	Nighttime lows vs normal	Daytime highs vs normal	Historical ranking for temperatures (at the time)
1997	+0.4	+0.6	–0.2	4th warmest year
1998	+1.0	+1.2	+0.6	1st warmest year
1999	+0.8	+0.9	+0.5	2nd warmest year
2000	+0.3	+0.6	–0.2	8th warmest year
2001	+0.6	+0.9	+0.1	4th warmest year
2002	+0.9	+1.2	+0.3	2nd warmest year
2003	+0.6	+1.0	+0.1	5th warmest year
2004	+0.4	+0.8	–0.1	9th warmest year
2005	+0.3	+0.5	–0.3
2006	+0.5	+0.8	+0.1	8th warmest year
2007	+0.7	+0.8	+0.7	5th warmest year
2008	0.0	0.0	+0.2
2009	+0.4	+0.5	+0.7	9^th warmest year
Average	+0.53	+0.74	+0.19

Do we learn anything new from this additional data?

Well, the first thing that struck me is that yearly temperatures in HK are remarkably uniform. 1998 averaged just one degree Celsius above normal*, and that's Hong Kong's all-time heat record. A mere 0.4 degrees above normal (as in 2009) merits a spot in the top ten. Many places in the world have much wider yearly variations. So clearly we’ve seen some warming, but we can’t be talking about a big number, at least not yet. But of course it’s the rate of warming that’s important, so we can’t jump to any rash conclusions.

*We do need to keep in mind that the HKO uses a rolling 30-year span to establish their ‘normal’ temperatures. That is, the current ‘normals’ are the averages from 1971-2000. Every decade, therefore, the period for the averages is moved 10 years ahead. And since Hong Kong is getting steadily warmer, the deviations from ‘normal’ in recent years will be smaller than they would be if they were compared to temperatures from the whole span of the HKO’s records. This paper outlines this trend in much more detail. For example, it notes that the 1961-1990 daily average high/low was 25.7/20.9, whereas from 1971-2000 these numbers changed to 25.6/21.1.

Second, you can see that, according to the HKO, all recent years have recorded above-average yearly temperatures – save for 2008, which was right on normal – and that 11 of the past 13 years have been top-10 on record for heat at the time. This is certainly in line with the HKO’s warnings about climate change.

But now let’s look a bit more closely at the average highs/lows.

First, take a peek back at 1997, 2000 and 2004. According to the HKO, these were all among the top ten hottest years in Hong Kong history (and the records go all the way back to 1884). But those three years all recorded average high temperatures that were actually below normal. How can that be?

If you look at the ‘Nighttime lows’ column, you can see that almost all of Hong Kong’s recent heating has been at night. Every year – again, except for 2008 – the average nighttime low has been at least 0.5 degrees above normal, and over the whole period our nighttime lows have averaged close to three-quarters of a degree above normal, which is noteworthy. Hong Kong’s nights are clearly warmer than they used to be.

The daytime highs tell a somewhat different story. In four of the past 13 years the daytime highs have averaged below normal, and over the whole period, our daytime highs have averaged less than two-tenths of a degree above normal. This is a much smaller number, especially since a record El Nino event in the late 1990s pumped up temperatures world-wide.

Never the less, at least at first glance, it looks like Hong Kong is a poster child for climate change, and the HKO is right on in sounding the alarm.

Now, just to prove that I’m not that lazy, and to add a bit of depth to these initial observations, I went and had a look for some more detailed resources on the HKO website.

And I found plenty. In fact, the HKO provides a very accessible and comprehensive set of material on climate change and its implications for Hong Kong. There’s so much that I’ll just get started on working through it in this article.

Let’s first take a look at an HKO paper from 2004 that’s very helpful indeed: HKO Technical Note 107, ‘Climate Change in Hong Kong’.

This document traces out historical trends in Hong Kong’s weather, with a focus, naturally enough, on temperatures. The HKO’s records go back to the 1880s, so that gives us a pretty good longitudinal sample. Let’s see, in graphical terms, what’s been happening to Hong Kong’s average temperature in the past 125 years:

Yes, just as we might expect, there’s a steady upward trend, with an ominous spike (the red line on the graph) in recent years. The graph ends at 2002, but as we’ve already seen, nothing in the past few years is going to alter these lines by much. But since we noted above that there are big differences in recent years between daytime highs and nighttime lows, let’s see how those numbers look over a longer time frame:

These numbers are only provided post-WWII, but they’re certainly striking in the way they uphold the trends we noted earlier: Hong Kong’s nighttime lows have been increasing sharply, while its daytime highs are flat (they’ve actually declined just the tiniest bit over the past 60 years, although not to a statistically significant degree).

We’ll discuss what reasons might lie behind this discrepancy in the next installment, but for now let’s round things off by looking at temperature trends from one other angle. It’s a tenet of climate change proponents that temperature extremes are on the increase, along with rising average temperatures. Has this been the case in Hong Kong? One way to assess this is by having a look at the HKO’s data on the number of very cold and very hot days each year. They’re set out the next graph, which again covers the years from 1947-2002.

So it’s again a case of ‘yes and no’. Yes, the number of cold days, i.e. with lows of 12 degrees or below, are far less frequent, dropping from an average of about 30 in 1947 to 13 or so in our current decade. But perhaps surprisingly, no, the frequency of very hot days (33 or above) has not risen at all – in fact, it has also dropped, although far less precipitously, from about 13 to 10.

But those numbers are a bit old, and the weather in last few years may be sticking in your mind. It sure was hot late last summer, wasn’t it? And wasn’t there a cold spell in early 2008? Are the ‘extremes’ in Hong Kong getting more extreme this decade – especially the heat?

To answer this final question, I did another little seat-of-the-pants survey of the daily highs and lows over the past few years in order to extend the data in the graph above. (And may I emphasize the extremely casual nature of this survey; I will not guarantee the numbers below, but they should at least be pretty close.

Year	Cold nights	Very hot days
2003	8	14
2004	21	6
2005	27	11
2006	14	3
2007	9	23
2008	32	12
2009	22	30
Average	22.2	14.8

The number of very hot days in Hong Kong – fueled by a truly infernal streak of sweltering days in late August/early September 2009 – has indeed increased a bit, i.e. averaging 14.8.

On the other hand, there has also been a noticeable uptick in the number of cold nights. If you look back at the HKO’s graph, you will see that the last period in which we averaged over 20 cold nights a year was the mid-70s. And it was back in the mid-80s when we last had over 30 cold nights, as 2008 did.

So the last few years were indeed a bit more ‘extreme’ than usual, at least in terms of cold nights and very hot days. But although this may fuel a bit of speculation, remember that a sample size of just six years is not really very significant.

On the whole, therefore, this initial tour through the temps has revealed a couple of salient facts. It has been getting warmer at the HKO for the past 125 years – and this warming is happening because in general (at least until the past few years) it’s not getting as cold at night as it used to. The differences we see between Hong Kong’s daytime and nighttime temperature trends are so obvious that I think they deserve further attention. We’ll give them just that in the next article.

Where do you shop?

mrb — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:00:00 +0000

In particular, where do you go to buy TVs, cameras, computers, mobile phones, etc?

Our suggestions about this on batgung are around six years old. Then we wrote about visiting small stores to get a good deal, but these days I find I'm more likely to go to the big chain stores, especially if shopping with visitors.

I feel the difference in price between them has got much smaller - or maybe I've just got more cranky, and can't be bothered visiting lots of shops. So, cranky or rational - that's the question I hope you'll help answer.

Here's where I bought most recently:

TV: Finally got a flat-screen TV earlier this year. Saw a good offer at Broadway from our credit card, and bought there.
Camera: Last month bought a Panasonic compact. Not much variation from vendor's list price among the shops I checked, and not widely stocked. Annoyed to find that HK list price was 30%+ higher than US list, so bought a grey-market set in Wanchai computer centre at roughly US list.
Desktop PC: Had one built around 2 years ago in Wanchai Computer Centre. For what I do, this is more than fast enough, so it should be fine for a few more years. Then after it dies the next one will likely be an off-the-shelf brand like Dell.
Netbook: Bought one of the first Asus EEE almost two years ago when it first came out. Limited screen & storage, so will very likely buy a new netbook in the next couple of weeks.
Mobile phone: Bought a subsidised Sony Ericsson a couple of years ago at a Smartone shop. Nothing fancy. The rebates finished last month, so I might be tempted to get one with GPS support next year, to help pinpoint locations when I'm out wandering the hillsides.

How about you?

Regards, MrB

Teaching kids about race

Mr Tall — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:00:00 +0000

There’s a remarkable article on kids and race in a recent issue of Newsweek magazine (yes, Newsweek actually still exists). The article’s authors, the novelist Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, have written a book on raising kids they’ve cutely titled NurtureShock. The article is an excerpt.

Bronson and Merryman begin by describing a research study conducted on a group of white children in the super-progressive college town of Austin, Texas. But they wring their metaphorical hands over its unexpected results: the children of good solid White parents (who bend over backwards to convey their multicultural bona fides) never the less think people of their own race are nicer than people from other races.

The authors note that many parents involved in this study dropped out. Why? They were so worried about saying the wrong thing that they couldn’t bring themselves to talk to their children about race at all – after all, their child might make an embarrassing statement in public that could implicate Ma and Pa as potential racists, or at least as insufficiently enthusiastic multiculturalists.

Another study the authors recount sounds even worse: children who attend ‘diverse’ schools are at least as likely to develop negative stereotypes of people from other races as do kids who attend monocultural schools.

So what’s the solution to all this racial angst? Do the authors entertain the possibility that intensive anti-racist, pro-multiculturalist, pro-diversity educational efforts actually heighten racial tensions rather than improve them?

Uh, no. Instead, they suggest that more explicit anti-racist guidance is required, starting as young as possible. Age three is suggested as a good place to get started teaching kids about race, since it’s before the ‘developmental window’ in which they’re easily malleable closes:

Small corrections in our thinking today could alter the character of society long term, one future citizen at a time. The way white families introduce the concept of race to their children is a prime example.

Another study quoted advocates teaching kids about race by packing some ideological punch:

White children who got the full story about historical discrimination had significantly better attitudes toward blacks than those who got the neutered version. Explicitness works. "It also made them feel some guilt," Bigler adds. "It knocked down their glorified view of white people."

But note the catch in both of the previous quotations: the ‘full story about historical discrimination’ has a big ‘Whites Only’ sign on the door. Children of other races are routinely taught ‘ethnic pride’, and that’s fine. So, as the authors admit:

That leads to the question that everyone wonders but rarely dares to ask. If "black pride" is good for African-American children, where does that leave white children? It's horrifying to imagine kids being "proud to be white." Yet many scholars argue that's exactly what children's brains are already computing. Just as minority children are aware that they belong to an ethnic group with less status and wealth, most white children naturally decipher that they belong to the race that has more power, wealth, and control in society; this provides security, if not confidence. So a pride message would not just be abhorrent—it'd be redundant.

****

What would happen if I tried to apply Bronson and Merryman’s approach to my mixed-race daughter here in Hong Kong? Is it ‘horrifying’ if I try to teach her to be proud of her white (i.e. European-American) heritage? And should Hong Kong schools teach local kids that it’s ‘abhorrent’ if they feel proud to be Chinese, because Chinese people hold the ‘power, wealth and control’ in Hong Kong society?

In fact, if we carry out the authors’ assumptions to their logical conclusions, Daughter Tall should feel doubly guilty: one of her parents is a white American, and the other is a member of a dominant majority culture. I guess Mrs Tall and I have a whole lot of ‘knocking down’ of Daughter Tall’s ‘glorified views’ of her heritage on our agenda!

Is this really what Bronson and Merryman have in mind? I find that hard to believe.

****

I find the Bronson and Merryman article particularly frustrating because I agree with Bronson on several other controversial issues raised in the book, parts of which are based on a series of articles he wrote for New York Magazine:

Bronson shoots down the theory of self-esteem being based on how much kids are praised, i.e. ‘How not to talk to your kids’. This is a superb article, and I can’t recommend it highly enough, in fact.
He makes a convincing case for nipping lying in the bud when kids are young in ‘Learning to lie’. I was also very favorably impressed with this article, since I knew in my heart that a certain daughter of mine was perfectly capable of telling lies at a very young age – much earlier than any baby books or developmental theories I’d encountered suggested was possible.
Bronson also argues very convincingly how important enough sleep is, especially to adolescents in ‘Snooze or lose’.

****

Bronson and Merryman are right, I think, in pointing out that kids are not simply going to benefit in some amorphous, mystical way just by being physically present in ‘diverse’ settings. Children inevitably notice racial differences and will at some point start to wonder about them. And I think there’s little doubt kids are drawn to people who look like themselves.

This is bad news for concerned parents who have assumed that dropping Junior off each day at Highly Diverse Multicultural School ensures that he’ll turn out to be a sensitive, tolerant, polished PC product. It means that the burden of teaching Junior about race has to fall on someone, and that as parents they can either trust his school to do a good job of it (and many people do not trust schools to this degree), or they have to take on the task themselves. Bronson and Merryman are right in that this issue can’t simply be sidestepped.

But if they get the form right, I believe they get the content wrong. They are too quick to accede to the prevailing conventional wisdom (at least in the USA) that posits that some races or cultures can be labeled as worthy of pride or celebration, while others must be subject to self-denunciation and apologies. This demeans all parties involved: it implies that members of some races are guilty by dint of their birth, and that members of others can only be held to lower standards. After all, which race (or ethnic group of any sort) is either an unqualified success, or an irredeemable disaster?

The content of what you teach your children about race is crucial. The messages we pass on to our children about race have to be more balanced and truthful than the politically-correct platitudes Bronson and Merryman quote in their article.

****

Although the issue of race is not an overweening presence in Hong Kong, it’s also never quite absent if you’re an expat, your spouse is local, and your children are mixed.

So what are the best ways to teach such children about their racial and cultural heritage, while avoiding both jingoistic cheerleading and self-indulgent (and ultimately self-congratulatory) guilt-wallowing and breast-beating?

I’m looking forward to responses.

Twenty years in Hong Kong

mrb — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 01:00:00 +0000

20 Oct 1989. That's the first Hong Kong stamp in my passport.

Twenty years already? That's gone past quickly. Will I be here for another twenty?

Our younger daughter is only three, and we want her to grow up reading and writing Chinese. That means another ten years at least. Then even if we did move, where would we go?

Somewhere with cleaner air and more space and greenery, maybe? I still get occasional daydreams about that. Those daydreams are related to homesickness in a way, but as this is my home now, I don't take them very seriously.

So yes, assuming I don't get knocked down by a tram, or succumb to the next lethal combination of H's and N's, another twenty years here looks likely.

How about you? Any plans to leave, or are you staying on too?

MrB

Why Hong Kong? MrB recalls his first few months here.
Homesick in Hong Kong. Mr Tall suffers a bout of homesickness.