RISE Information Sheet Against Coal-Plants

(This information sheet was prepared by the Responsible Ilonggos for Sustainable Energy (RISE) and the Concerned Physicians of Iloilo.)

Coal-fired power plants (CFPP) emit toxic heavy metals, particulates, radioactive elements and gases which poison the air, water, and soil causing disease and death!

1. CFPP’s and so-called “clean coal” generate mercury which is poisonous.

• Fetuses, infants and children are especially at risk because of their developing minds and bodies.

• Mercury exposure can result in learning difficulties, behavioral problems like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), allergic reactions, tiredness, headaches, sperm damage, birth defects and miscarriages, vision changes, deafness, difficulty in walking and movement, and memory loss.

• No specific therapy is available for chronic mercury poisoning.

• Mercury can travel up to 966 km from the power plant.• Mercury in the environment can make fish and other seafood unsafe to eat.

• Mercury bioaccumulates up the food chain and never disappears in the environment.

2. CFPP’s including so-called “clean coal” emit other poisons like lead, manganese, aluminum, boron and cadmium.

• These poisons can cause miscarriages, weight loss, physical and mental development delays, and problems in the respiratory, circulatory, reproductive, digestive and nervous systems.

3. CFPP’s produce cancer-causing substances.

• Heavy metals like arsenic, hexavalent chromium and cadmium are all associated with the development of cancers of the prostate, bladder and lungs.

• Dioxin in the fly ash can also cause lung cancer.

• Fluidized bed combustion releases polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) of which the most potent carcinogens are benzoanthracene and benzopyrene.

4. Burning of coal release radioactive elements thorium, uranium and radium.

• Both large and small amounts of radiation can damage our genetic material; it can destroy cells or alter its growth or function

• Other effects of large doses of radiation include suppression of the immune system and cataracts.

• Certain tissues of a fetus, particularly the brain, are especially sensitive to radiation at specific stages of development.

• Radiation can also increase the probability of cancer.

5. CFPP’s including “clean coal” still release particulate matter.

• Particulate matter (PM) lodges deeply in the lungs causing heart and lung problems.

• Particulate matter can cause cancers, asthma attacks, chronic bronchitis, strokes, heart attacks, congestive heart failure, hypertension, premature deaths, sleep disturbances, lower birth weights, premature births, intrauterine deaths, birth defects, increased new born deaths due to respiratory causes.

6. CFPP’s contribute to extreme climate change due to carbon dioxide emissions which cannot be controlled by circulating fluidized bed combustion.

• Coal is the most carbon intensive of all the fossil fuels.

• Direct effects are droughts, typhoons, floods and landslides.

• Indirect effects are resurgence of vector and water-borne diseases like dengue, malaria, encephalitis and cholera; changes in food and water supplies; population displacement and economic disruption.

The health risks are greatest for people living closer to the plants. Twenty percent of the total health impact occurs on 8 percent of the population that lives within 48.27 km of the facilities.

REFERENCES :
• Beyond Coal: Power, Public Health and the Environment, Kim Perrotta, Ontario Public Health Association, Nov 2002
• Haddad, Lester, Shannon, Michael, Winchester, James. Clinical Management of Poisoning and Drug Overdose, 3rd ed., 1998
• Handbook on Childhood Poisoning, 1st Ed. Philippine Pediatric Society, Inc. Committee on Therapeutics and Toxicology.
• (Harvard School of Public Health Report 2000)Kaplan and Sadock’s Synopsis of Psychiatry.2007. 10th Ed,
• McMichael, Tony. 2001. Human Frontiers, Environment and Disease.
• Natural Resources Defense Council, September 2007.
• Needleman, Herbert, P. Landrigan. 1994. Raising Children Toxic Free.
• Nelson Textbook of Pediatrics. 15th Ed.
• Wrisley, Jeff. Report on “Adverse Effects of Coal Burning Power Plants in Michigan”.

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

Censored Article

I am dismayed that a significant portion of my article entitled "Misinformation on Coal" was cut and was not published in the The News Today.

Below is the section that was excluded. See previous blog entry for complete article.

- - - -

Shameless

The sad story here is that some media entities are becoming to be part of this misinformation. An example is the shameless practice of this certain news daily in slanting all its news stories for the coal plant and maligning those who opposed the project.

This newspaper, while it proclaims itself as “Western Visayas’ Most Read and Respected,” has a weird concept of balance news. It is balance in a way that it gives good publicity in proportion to the weight of your wallet.

An interesting coincidence is that the publisher/editor of the paper is the paid PR manager of the coal plant proponent.

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)

Irony of all ironies!

“It’s a black fly on your Chardonnay
It’s a death row pardon two minutes too late…”
- from “Ironic” by Alanis Morissette

I read in a previous issue of this paper that Mayor Treñas is leaving for Korea. Treñas will attend a three-day meeting of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI). I did a research on this initiative and this particular meeting and I found out some interesting information.

According to its web site ICLEI “is an international association of local governments and national and regional local government organizations that have made a commitment to sustainable development.” I would like to highlight “sustainable development” which our mayor seems not to understand very well.

ICLEI partners with United Nations in different programs and was actually founded in the UN headquarters in New York. This group supports the environmental initiatives of the UN and the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). IPCC, composed of scientists from all over the world, declared in a recent conference that human activity is the main cause of global warming and highlighted fossil burning activities (coal plants) among others.

I commend ICLEI for its laudable objectives and its global efforts to tackle global environmental issues particularly global warming to the level of local governments. In fact, this meeting in Jeju, Korea will “address the future role of local governments in the international effort to tackle climate change.”

The website http://www.iclei.org/ is indeed very impressive and informative. It features efforts of local governments from different cities to combat global warming, stories about renewable sources of energy and conferences on this and that environmentally-sound alternatives.

Of course here in Iloilo City, our local government’s effort is promoting the construction of a coal plant! And by the way, Treñas is a current member of ICLEI’s Executive Committee “that oversee the implementation of the Strategic Plan and ICLEI operations”. Tsk ,tsk, now you understand why I have that title in this article.

* * * * *

By the way I prepared a short speech for Treñas to deliver in the ICLEI meeting. Please read below.

Today we have gathered here as members of the Executive Committee of ICLEI to tackle our role as local government executives in the issue of climate change. Indeed we have a big role as we are the grassroots leaders in our communities.

We should continue to promote sustainable development. The development that can sustain our political careers and our pockets. What use is development if we are without power?” (Big smile)

That is why in my beloved city, the City of Iloilo, I am supporting the building of a coal fired power plant. And yes this proposed coal plant will be very clean as it will utilize what the proponents say as the “clean coal technology”. Sounds hi-tech, right?

I really believe them because they are my friends. In fact they even gave me a nice treat – an all-expense paid trip to Taiwan, among other gifts! (Wink, wink...) But of course it was to view a coal plant, a study trip. And my, oh my, I loved the beaches in Taiwan. But then again it was a study trip and yes I learned a lot about coal plants!

Despite of volumes of studies that document the hazards of coal plants, I now believe the proponents when they say coal plants are clean. Why? Because they are my friends! And we should trust our friends, right?

Further, when I went to Taiwan, the coal plant emissions are colorless, odorless, and tasteless. Yes I went up the plant’s smoke stack, smelled and tasted the emissions. It was fun climbing up and down the ladder, by the way.

Anyway, what I am trying to point out here is that what you cannot see, smell or taste could not possibly hurt you. Right? How scientific could you get? I actually failed in my high school chemistry class (if my memory serves me right) but heck, I am the mayor now and mayors don’t need chemistry.

And when I was there I never heard anybody cough or I never saw a sickly person. So I declare that coal plant emissions cannot cause asthma or cancer. I’m very observant, right? I knew it I could have been a good scientist.

Now, I appeal to you in behalf of my coal plant friends. Let us declare the building of coal plants as sustainable development projects.

Let us ignore the opinion of the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration, the studies by Harvard School of Public Health and many other institutions that detail the hazards of coal plants to the environment and to people’s health.

Let us ignore the declaration of UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that point to burning fossil fuels, majority of which from coal plants, as the culprit in climate change.

As a member of this executive committee, I move that we declare all those scientists to be anti-development and adopt my scientific methods as the new standards.

This is, ladies and gentlemen, our role as local government executives in the issue of climate change. I, thank you. (Bow!)

Of Coal Plants and Junkets

“Integrity has no need of rules.”
– Albert Camus

If your bathroom were sparkling and spotless would you clean it? Would you wash the dishes when you know they are already clean?

If the current technology used in coal plants is “clean” why is it that up to now there are ongoing technological researches on how to make the same technology become environmentally friendly?

In the global scene, why is the power industry talking about burying coal plants emissions and implement what they call the CCS or the carbon (CO2) capture and storage?

Among other mitigating efforts to ease environmental impact, why is it that options including gasification of coal are now being laid on the table on coal power plant designs?

Simply put, if “clean coal” is indeed “clean” why the need to make it clean?

Well, coal plant proponents will say: “Current coal technology is clean and ongoing studies are geared towards making it more environment friendly.

That does not make sense! Why make it more environment friendly if it is already clean? If you say you want it to be “MORE environment friendly”, then you are claiming that it is already “environment friendly”. But is it?

If the technology is environment friendly then there should be no talk on how to mitigate the harmful emissions and noxious hazards of coal plants. But the fact that they cannot deny is – there is!

“Clean Coal” – revoltingly contradictory

Now, why call it “clean” when in actuality it is not? Why are they not accepting in public that indeed coal plants harm the environment and human health?

Why is there no admission from proponents that coal plants, including those using circulating fluidized bed (CFB), account for the biggest toxic emissions (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide, mercury, etc.) in the planet?

Now, coal plant proponents will say: “Well one more coal plant here in Iloilo will not really make things worse. Further, it is only one additional plant and the impact may be negligible. And after all we need more power for the region’s development.

To the question: “Is ‘clean coal technology’ really clean?” does it really matter if the percent of additional pollution is small compared to the whole? Does it really matter if the hazards will be felt in 1 year, in 10 years or in 50 years?

The answer is “NO”. This technology that they are pushing is plainly NOT CLEAN – that is the simple message, no matter how they distort the facts. The term “clean coal technology” is a misnomer – grossly misleading and revoltingly contradictory.

Further, apart from it being a contributor to the planetary scourge of global warming, this coal plant will be a threat in the smaller regional scale. This coal plant, CFB or otherwise, that they want to build here in Iloilo poses serious hazards to our environment and to the population’s health.

On the need for additional power, many studies have shown superior renewable alternatives – options that embody the concept of sustainable development that this column has covered in the past.

Study trips or disguised bribe?

This leads me now to a separate but related issue – the question of legality and propriety of the “study trips” of our “honorable” city officials that were sponsored by the very proponent of a coal plant project in the City of Iloilo.

Mayor Treñas, Vice Mayor Mabilog and several City Councilors went to Taiwan allegedly to visit coal plants as arranged by the proponent. The trip and all expenses were shouldered by Global Business Power Corp. (GBPC), owner of Panay Power Corporation (PPC) whose proposing a 100 MW coal plant in Lapaz, Iloilo City.

In the legal front, RISE or the Responsible Ilonggos for Renewable Energy, through FDC chairperson Roming Gerochi is right on target in filing charges against Mayor Treñas for accepting this sponsored junket.
In the RISE complaint filed before the Office of the Ombudsman, Treñas is accused of violating Republic Act 6713 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. Section 7 (d) of the Act stipulates the following:

“Solicitation or acceptance of gifts. - Public officials and employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of monetary value from any person in the course of their official duties or in connection with any operation being regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office.”

Clearly, Treñas (and the others) violated this provision. What’s funny is that in news reports this supposedly lawyer Mayor justifies his action by saying that “the proponents are not contractors or suppliers for projects of the city government”.

Further he said “his trip cannot be covered by prohibitions of the law because the coal-plant project does not need the approval of the city government”.

Nowhere in RA 6713 exempts a public official under the circumstances mentioned by Treñas. The actual quote of Section 7 (d) of the law above is very clear and is to be applied in a general manner as stressed in the phrase “in connection with…any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office”.

Is it not that making the city and its environment safe a function of their office? Is it not that the health of Iloilo City residents a part of the function of their office? Is issuing a business permit to PPC and ensuring that PPC is operating with the best interest of the City not a part of the function of their office?

Is it not their function to objectively study and make a stand on such important issue as the building of a coal plant right in the middle of the city? So how can Iloilo City residents now expect that their City officials will be objective and be on the side of the City’s environment and people’s health when it comes to the issue of the building of a coal plant?

What happened to integrity?

Treñas, Mabilog and these councilors should know better. As public officials, they should ensure that their actions and position on issues is beyond reproach. They should not allow their office to be tarnished by such mindless action.

To remind our “honorable” public officials, below is the “Declaration of Policies” of RA 6713:

“It is the policy of the State to promote a high standard of ethics in public service. Public officials and employees shall at all times be accountable to the people and shall discharge their duties with utmost responsibility, integrity…”

Actually, even without RA 6713 or any law, common sense will tell you that as public officials, accepting this junket is plainly inappropriate. This is in fact not only a question of law but more so a question of integrity.

But well maybe I am expecting so much from our public officials. Maybe common sense and integrity are characteristics that are really not that common among these politicians.

* * * * * *
Happy 30th Anniversary to UP in the Visayas’ Validus Amicitia Brotherhood! Congratulations for thirty years of powerful friendship. More power, amigos!