A Reader's Comment

(Below is a very interesting email from Bert who read my article, "Misinformation on Coal", in the The News Today.)

Dear Mr. Seruelo,

This article solidifies the undeniable concern of the hazards coal power plants could potentially bring to the City of Iloilo. What is baffling is that proponents would use anything and everything to justify something that is horribly wrong. Why can't they just put their time and energy to solicit other environmentally friendly power sources?

- - - -

Kansas Rejects Proposed Coal Plant
October 19, 2007

Because Of CO2 Emissions The Kansas Department of Health and Environment has become the first government agency in the U.S. to cite carbon dioxide emissions as the reason for rejecting an air permit for a coal-fired electricity generating plant, The Washington Post reports. Sunflower Electric Power, a rural electrical cooperative, proposed to build a pair of 700-megawatt, coal-fired plants in Holcomb at a cost of about $3.6 billion.

It may be the first of a series of similar state actions inspired by a Supreme Court decision in April that asserted that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide should be considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act.Air permits have been denied over emissions such as sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and mercury, according to WaPo. But Roderick Bremby, secretary of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, said that “it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing.”

- - - -

Didn't any of the member of the 10 man task force of Mayor Trenas pay attention to this article circulated in one of the local newspaper in Iloilo? One of the panellists is a Professor from UPV and the current Vice Mayor is a UPV alumni - what else can they have missed? Where is the UP spirit of doing what's right vs. what is easier?

Another panel member is a priest who is fond of perpuating that coal plants are acceptable in the United States - doesn't he realize that he is not the only one who have been to the United States? If there is no such concern, why is it then that the US Government is spending a lot of money to clean up the environmental mess brought about by coal powered plants? He is a proponent of the filtration system being offered by the builder! What is his guarantee that the standards would be followed diligently? Unfortunately, he forgot that we are a country who do not have the kind of discipline to implement most standards. We cannot even manage the cleanliness of our streets and rivers!

I do not understand why a certain politician/doctor champions the installation of a coal powered plant in Iloilo when he cannot even convince his constituents to put up one in their own town?

What about the Mayor of Iloilo who is blinded by political paybacks that he is willing to be remembered as the mayor who brought about the environmental doom of Iloilo.

The Liga ng mga Barangay president who arrogantly says "How come the people of Cebu are still alive despite the installation of coal power plants in their city?". Here's your answer based on the article below - it takes years before you will feel the hazardous effects. Who will foot the bill for the clean-up and the medical expenses?

- - - -

US-based Ilongga expert issues word of caution on coal plants
By Ronilo L. Pamonag

A US-based Ilongga expert on coal power plants advised proponents of a coal-fired power plant to look for other alternatives, as she expressed concern over the potential ill effects on the populace.

“We have to look for alternative fuel without the hazardous emissions. Try to think of other alternatives,” chemical engineer Erlinda Palmos, formerly a technical advisor with the US Department of Energy and now the manager of the US Navy’s Environment Safety and Health Management, said during a press conference Monday afternoon.

We have hydro-electric and geothermal sources of energy, why don’t we maximize their potential, she said. Coal, she adds, is a dirty raw material. She stressed though that she is neither for nor against the proposal of Global Business Power Corporation to put up a coal-fired power plant in Brgy. Ingore, Lapaz, Iloilo City, but expressed uneasiness that the proposed site is very near residential communities.

The GBPC has been lobbying for a coal-fired power plant in the City to address what they claim is the predicted power shortage by 2010.

Palmos also advised proponents to look for other sites, and come up with a deeper, more comprehensive, and accurate feasibility study.

In the United States, she said, coal power plants are located away from communities to minimize the effect of emissions on the people caused by changes in the wind pattern.

Moreover, the present trend in the US is against coal plants, and more for nuclear power plants. Many coal plants in the US are closing because they are having a hard time complying with federal and state environmental regulations. “That’s why they’re training their eyes on third world countries,” she said.

In fact, when she was still with the DoE, she ordered the closure of one coal plant for exceeding emission levels, Palmos relates.

The study, she suggested, should include toxicology data, as well as the instrumentation used and the process followed.They are planning to put up a coal-fired power plant but their Environmental Impact Study is about diesel power plants, she noted, referring to GBPC’s EIS.

Coal is different from diesel, she pointed out. She highlighted the need to ensure that environmental laws, especially regulations on emissions and waste disposal, are complied with, and that there is a standard operating procedure governing the regular preventive maintenance of the plant.

“Are they willing to spend huge amounts just to ensure that toxic elements are not released into the environment?” she asked.For the first two years of operation, a coal power plant will not yet experience problems with its emissions. But as years go by, problems regarding toxic emissions would crop up, she said.

- - - -

I applaud your conviction in writing "Misinformation on Coal". I pray that the people of Iloilo would be guided to oppose the installation of the coal powered plant in Iloilo.

Sincerely,

Bert Rosal

Big Flaws in Fr. Celis’ Pro-Coal Arguments (# 1)

“A small rock holds back a great wave.”
- The Odyssey by Homer

Corruption in government and in Philippine society happen everyday. This culture of corruption envelopes the whole system as if it is a malignant tumor. The main beneficiaries of this sick system are big time corrupt politicians who regularly rake in millions of pesos in kickbacks from multi-million projects.

Now, why will you scold the lowly barangay captain from pocketing one thousand pesos intended for a barangay project? In proportion, a thousand pesos is an insignificant “candlelight” in the hellfire of muliti-million kickbacks.

The management of solid wastes is a global concern. These wastes pollute the earth’s water, air and land resources in such disturbing rate. Industrialized countries such as the US are the leading generators of solid waste as they churn out millions of tons of solid waste per day such as tin cans, tires, plastics, styrofoam and bottles that end up in land fills and don’t get recycled.

So why will you scold Juan who tossed his garbage over the bridge and into the river? In proportion, a bagful of garbage is an insignificant “candlelight” in the hellfire of millions of tons of solid wastes.

Fraud is rampant every time we hold our elections. Vote rigging seems to be a given, an accepted feature in our electoral exercise. Wholesale cheating is done by “operators” the likes of Garci and also with the aid of military officers. Thousands if not millions of votes get padded up to the trapo (traditional politician) with the highest bid.

Now why will you scold the one flying voter who cheated by voting twice thereby adding just one fraudulent vote? In proportion, one vote is like an insignificant “candlelight” in the hellfire of millions of fraudulent votes.

The examples I have given above utilize the same argument Fr. Espiridion Celis is using in support for the proposed construction of a coal plant in Iloilo City.

"China definitely will open two coal-fired power plants every week for the next three and half years. It is like opening a very, very big oven for global warming. Will you scold Iloilo for lighting a candle because it will heat the world? I don't think we are proportion here. There are 24 coal-fired power plants in the Philippines, why Iloilo should have not one? I do not understand," he was quoted by the local media.

Celis also added, “I'm sure that Iloilo will not contribute one-twentieth of China's (emission)”.

We human beings are supposed to be stewards of the planet we live in – a planet, which in Christian teaching, is god’s creation. So priests I suppose would be in the front line of these efforts. I also suppose that religious leaders would have higher standards than say an economist or a capitalist or a politician when it comes to the protection of mother earth.

It is simply hard to believe that a church leader will say that it is okay to pollute a little and not mind the bigger global picture. It is hard to believe that a spiritual leader will say something that is tantamount to declaring that small actions do not affect the bigger world.

Asserting that the act of putting up one more coal plant could not possibly factor materially to the planet’s pollution and contribute to global warming is exactly the kind of mindset that is worsening a lot of the world’s ills.

Simply go back to my earlier examples on corruption, solid waste problem and electoral fraud. One thousand pesos, one bagful of garbage and one fraudulent vote are certainly not in proportion to the totality of the respective problem. But can we really dismiss them as insignificant?

Corollary to this, history has proven that small actions have caused both uplifting and devastating impacts to the world.

If Mahatma Gandhi has the same mindset as articulated by Fr. Celis, then the struggle for India’s independence could have been longer and violent. Apartheid in South Africa would not have been abolished sooner if Nelson Mandela did not believe in small actions.

The end of the horrible racial segregation in the US could not have been expedited if Rosa Parks gave her bus seat up to a white person, thereby giving no spark for Martin Luther King to initiate small protest demonstrations.

Our own Andres Bonifacio could not have inspired a revolution if he did not believe that his small band of katipuneros could one day defeat the mighty Spanish military.

On the opposite side, Adolf Hitler could not have brought mayhem to the whole world if he was stopped initiating his small propaganda about his superior race that placed him on the leadership of his nation.

Now, if the quote attributed to Fr. Celis came from the prospective investor or their paid consultants, I would understand as many of them think only of the benefits to their bank accounts with little consideration to the impact to the environment and society as a whole.

Coming from a priest however makes it different as you anticipate a more insightful opinion, a profound reasoning, a moral stand. Obviously, with all due respect to the parish priest of Mandurriao, I think he has not realized the true meaning of the dictum: “think globally, act locally.”

(Send your comments and reactions to: for text messages to 0919-348-6337; for e-mails to ianseruelo@gmail.com.)

Opinions and Opinions

“An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.”
- by Jef Mallett

There are opinions that you can easily laugh off. These are the kind of opinions that are not supported by facts or worse run counter to established facts. Worst, these opinions are sometimes being passed off as truths.

An example of this is the opinion of Iloilo City Mayor Treñas and other coal plant pushers when they claim that coal plants are environmentally safe as their emissions are “odorless, colorless and tasteless”. Well, the last time I checked the Mayor does not have a degree in chemistry, medicine, environmental science or any related field. Further, in the absence of expertise, the Mayor should at least cite some credible studies and not simply believe the opinion of fellow coal plant pushers in Taiwan.

There are also opinions that you need to take seriously. These opinions are backed up by data and scientific evidence. And most often this opinion comes from somebody who has expertise and experience on the subject matter.

A good example of this is an opinion from a Physician who heads the National Poison Management and Control Center on the same subject – coal plants. Dr. Lynn R. Panganiban, an Ilonggo, is also a Professor of the UP College of Medicine Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, FPSCOT-Fellow of the Philippine Society of Clinical and Occupational Toxicology, and DPAFP-Diplomate of the Phil. Academy of Family Physicians.

Now, this column is featuring below an excerpt from Dr. Lynn’s email. Please compare her point by point assertions to the “intelligent” opinion of coal plant pushers – Treñas, Mabilog, et al.
* * * * *

Dear Colleagues in the health profession and concerned Ilonggos/Ilonggas,

Greetings!

Two weeks ago, it was brought to my attention that there is a plan to set up a coal-fired power plant in the City of Iloilo. This news came as a surprise to me since I have the belief that this source of electrical power was no longer an option considering that a few years back, similar proposals were resisted and rejected by the Municipalities of Banate and Concepcion.

As an Ilongga who remains to be appreciative and proud of the City and as a physician-toxicologist who understands the impact of hazardous chemicals on health and environment, I am deeply concerned and saddened about the proposed setting up of the said coal-fired power plant.

It is a general knowledge that coal-fired power plants have been the major source of air pollution all over the world. In fact, their emissions have been major contributors to the global warming phenomenon we are currently experiencing. Although there have been attempts in addressing the toxic discharges with introduction of new technologies, we are still in the stage of merely reducing these emissions and have no methods of totally eliminating them.

My concern and apprehension with the establishment of the coal-fired power plant is based on the following:

1. Emissions from coal-fired power plants are composed of pollutants such as oxides of sulfur, mainly sulfur dioxide; nitrogen oxides; polynuclear hydrocarbons; total gaseous hydrocarbons; solid particulates, especially PM 10; formaldehyde; carbon monoxide, metals such as mercury and arsenic.

2. The above substances carry with them intrinsic toxic effects. In combination, these effects can be magnified because of chemical-chemical interactions that produce synergistic effects. For instance, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides and particulate matter have common target organs - the respiratory and cardiovascular systems. The combined effects of these substances can be more than the sum of the individual effects on these organ systems.

3. There are members, in the community situated near coal-fired power plants, who are vulnerable to even low concentrations of the above substances. For instance, children may be exposed to more of these substances than adults because they breathe more air for their size than adults do. For sulfur dioxide, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (1999) reports that “Long term studies surveying large numbers of children indicate that children who have breathed sulfur dioxide pollution may develop more breathing problems as they grow older, may make more emergency room visits for treatment of wheezing fits, and may get more respiratory illnesses than other children. Children with asthma may be especially sensitive even to low concentrations of sulfur dioxide.” A recent study published in the Environmental Research in January 2007 showed that “air pollution from coal-fired power station, although not exceeding local pollution standards, had a negative effect in children’s lung function development.”

4. The presence of heavy metals in the emissions of coal-fired power plant should be taken into consideration. Mercury has been identified as one of the metals released in coal combustion. Globally, this toxic metal has caused significant adverse impacts such that in 2005, the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Governing Council arrived at the decision that “urges governments, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations and the private sector to develop and implement partnerships in a clear, transparent and accountable manner, as one approach to reducing the risks to human health and the environment the release of mercury and its compounds to the environment.”

With regards the health effects, it has been found that organic mercury is a potent teratogen and reproductive poison. Its worst effects involve the central nervous system and the onset can be insidious and compose of dysarthria, ataxia, mental retardation, among others.

5. The establishment of the coal-fired power plant is not an economically-efficient way of sourcing energy if we include in the total cost of operation the health and environmental impacts. The increased hospital visits, the prescribed medications, the man-hour productive losses because of sickness carry with them monetary equivalents. For an individual who develops mercury poisoning, the cost of the chelating agent alone for a 19-day course is P136, 095.00. The big question is: Who will shoulder these health costs? Have these been taken into consideration?

6. Establishment of a hazardous industry such as the coal-fired power generation will require stringent and efficient monitoring of its impact on health and environment. Monitoring does not just mean merely using our sense of smell or sight. This monitoring system means setting up of a scientifically sound technology for measuring pollutant levels in the environment and biologic fluids, their periodic evaluation and provision of appropriate interventions. This system entails money as well when done in an honest to goodness manner. Current cost for each environmental sample runs from P1,200.00-P5,000.00. This cost is also the same for biologic samples. Again, has this kind of monitoring system been considered and who will shoulder the cost?

In my 17 years of work as a toxicologist, I still have to see an efficiently operating monitoring system that seriously looks into health and environmental impacts of pollutants in the country.

Very truly yours,

Lynn R. Panganiban, MD, FPSCOT, DPAFP
Mandaluyong City

* * * * *

(Send your comments and reactions to: for text messages to 0919-348-6337; for e-mails to ianseruelo@gmail.com)