Feasible green stack number: 28 kWh per day per person
The above figure shows the realistic future energy capacity for renewable sources in Hong Kong. These results are only 3 kWh per day per person less than the analysis performed prior. This is in large part because the first analysis performed was a drastically more realistic approach than the one first employed by McKay for the United Kingdom. Each renewable energy source in this green stack analysis is analyzed below.
Ideally, geothermal and hydroelectric power are great sources that are sustainable and economically sound. However, in Hong Kong, these two sources do not possess a future and any chance of prosperity for these industries is unrealistic. For geothermal, the land is just not suitable for drawing geothermal energy out of the Earth. Therefore, spending the large sums of money to purchase the capital for geothermal energy does not make sense. For hydroelectric, currently there is no energy production from this source in Hong Kong due to the rivers having insufficient flow and height. Once again, the high capital costs to create hydroelectric power plants would be a pointless task due to the lack of energy created.
Tidal and wave energy sources haven't been looked too far into yet for Hong Kong. These could be viable sources for small-scale energy production due to the large coast of Hong Kong. In our original analysis, tidal and wave future capacity was fairly generous in the approximation, with 3.3 kWh per day per person. This is fairly reasonable and acts as a good approximation for the potential future usage for Hong Kong.
Like tidal and wave energy sources, the total future wind capacity was generous in nature; the total for wind power is 12.5 kWh per day per person. Although the calculations and analysis performed originally was generous, the general trends of wind power need to be taken into account. For one, popularity of wind power is growing each year. Also, China's wind capacity is increasing exponentially every year. Thus, it is reasonable that Hong Kong's wind capacity does increase up to the point of 12.5 kWh per day per person.
The result of biomass (0.0002 kWh per day per person) did not change from the original analysis to the realistic analysis. This is because biomass will never be an integral part of the Hong Kong society. The land is mostly mountainous with limited flat lands, forestry, and crop plantations. Biomass is only used for municipal organic waste.
In terms of solar energy, McKay was very unrealistic in his initial approach by giving everyone in the United Kingdom 10 meters squared of PV panels for solar farming and solar heating. For the initial approach in the Hong Kong investigation, it was assumed that 7 meters squared was given to each person in Hong Kong. However, this is not even realistic due to political and economical restraints. Thus, for the realistic approach, giving everyone in the country 5 meters squared was used. As a result, solar heating could provide 7 kWh per day per person, while both solar farming and solar PV could provide 2 kWh per day per person each.
Overall, this green stack number of 28 kWh per day per person seems very low when taken under consideration with other regions and countries. However, it has to be realized that Hong Kong imports most of their energy from China and other countries. The energy production that Hong Kong does produce for its own citizens stems mainly from coal. Therefore, for renewable energy to become an integral part of Hong Kong, not only does the whole energy production structure need to change within Hong Kong. Countries that are nearby Hong Kong need to also have a strong renewable energy foundation so that Hong Kong can receive this energy. It is also concluded that the land terrain also limits the growth of renewable energy sources in this region.
