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)