Fact Sheet - NGO Forum On ADB

INDEX I - FDC CEBU STUDY
Fact Sheet
Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

KEPCO-Salcon’s 200MW coal-fired power plant (Naga, Cebu)
(KEPCO- Salcon’s 200MW coal-fired power plant, Naga, Cebu)
This private sector project entitled “Visayas Base-Load Power Development Project” was submitted to
the Asian Development Bank (ADB) by the KEPCO SPC Power Corporation (KSPC) to “finance the
construction, operation, and maintenance of a 200-megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plant in Naga City,
Cebu, in the Visayas region of the Philippines ...”
The project represents the “first collaboration” between the ADB and Korean Export-Import Bank
(KEXIM) “under a memorandum of understanding signed in 2008 by the two institutions.”
The City of Naga already hosts two 50MW coal-fired power plants using the pulverized-coal combustion
technology but the Visayas grid is said to be facing an imminent power crisis. Furthermore,
“overreliance” in geothermal energy from Leyte and “low tariffs...has resulted in underinvestment in the
region's power generation resources.”
Furthermore, the KSPC power plants shall also utilize the circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFBC)
technology, labeled by ADB President Kuroda's report to the Board of Directors as “a more
environmentally-friendly technology.”
The project, therefore, not only intends to address the “much-needed base-load power to the Visayas
grid,” but likewise serves as impetus to the reform agenda envisioned by ADB under the Electric Power
Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA), which it also funded.
The plants were originally set to start commercial operation in December 2008 but “construction was
delayed primarily due to difficulties KSPC encountered in signing power sales contracts (PSCs) with local
distribution utilities.”
The confluence of several factors allowed KSPC to eventually sign nine PSCs, from which seven are with
electric cooperatives: five in the island of Negros (VMC Rural Electric Service Cooperative – VRESCO;
Central Negros Electric Cooperative – Ceneco; Negros Occidental Electric Cooperative – Noceco; Negros
Oriental 1 Electric Cooperative - Noreco 2; Negros Oriental 2 Electric Cooperative - Noreco 2) and two in
Cebu (Cebu 1 Electric Cooperative - Cebeco 1 and Cebu 2 Electric Cooperative - Cebeco 2).
These PSCs, with minimum off take arrangements similar to the controversial “take-or-pay” electricity
contract provisions, later got approval from the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). Thus, while the
project prides itself as a merchant plant with no sovereign guarantees extended, the minimum offtake
arrangements within the 10-year contract period at a contract price based on long-run average cost
adjusted for inflation, the dollar-peso exchange rate, and coal prices, are more than enough to shield
KSPC from normal risks usually associated with private investments.
The nine PSCs represent a total contracted capacity of 171.1MW. This already surpassed KSPC's target of
170MW (more than 91% of its net output). No wonder that bridge loans from KEXIM and Korean
Exchange Bank came in handy after these contracts were signed, which signaled the start of
construction in December 2007.
In December 2008, KSPC approached ADB for assistance, with the latter joining the project's due
diligence process in late January and obtaining concept clearance on 6 March 2009.
By May 2009, “55% of the construction milestones were completed.”
The ADB Board of Directors initially set discussion on the project on 18 August 2009 but controversies
that surrounded that project became a big contributor in the Board's decision to postpone deliberations.
The Board again calendared it for discussion on 10 September 2009, which was again postponed to a
later date.
Finally, the Board of Directors met on 11 December 2009 and, at the height of climate change
negotiations in Copenhagen, approved the $120M financing for the project, with ADB President Kuroda
emphasizing, among others, that the project “will be a model in the application of cleaner technologies
to coal-fired power plants of this size.”
Health risks monitoring
ADB’s “Summary Poverty Reduction and Social Strategy” (SSPRS, undated, 3-pages) includes health
monitoring as a ‘key action': "KSPC through its SDP will conduct regular medical missions to the host
barangay to monitor health conditions and at the same time identify illnesses of local residents including
women and children related to coal-fired power plants, such as severe asthma and allergies, depressed
immune systems, learning disabilities, autism, and behavioral disorder." This is roundabout
acknowledgment of health risks in coal-fired power plants; it is unknown how much monies and for how
long KSPC would "monitor" and "identify" health conditions/illnesses, and if indeed this forms part of
ADB’s own monitoring framework.
Controversial Balili coal ash dumpsite and MOA
In May 2009, the Cebu provincial government signed a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with KPSC
where the Province undertook to allow KEPCO to dump its fly ash into a dumpsite for a term of at least
twenty-five years, subject to extension. Potential revenue from the coal ash arrangement is estimated at
P48 million ($1 million); for each ton of ash dumped by KPSC, the province will be paid $1.
Several issues are being raised:
(a) The coal ash dumpsite, the 25-hectare Balili resort property purchased in 2008 by the Cebu province,
is currently the subject of a pending inquiry by the Visayas Ombudsman; the land classification and
titling of the Balili resort land is being questioned by environmental lawyers.
(b) 80% of the Balili dumpsite property is submerged; contemplating a coal ash dumpsite along the
shores is not only ‘pathetically naïve’ but also ecologically destructive, patently illegal and
‘preposterous’.
(c) The lawyers also asked the Ombudsman to look into the ash dumping deal, calling it an “extremely
hazardous project, considering that coal ash has radioactive elements and contain hazardous substances
harmful to living things and the ecosystem, such as mercury, lead, and arsenic, among others.”
(d) The MOA is a clear conflict of interest. Environmental lawyers claim that by agreeing to host the
dumping of coal ash into the Balili property and assuming KEPCO’s legal responsibility for the proper
handling and disposal of its coal ash, the Province of Cebu has effectively bargained away its power and
authority to, monitor, regulate and keep KEPCO’s activities compliant with legal environmental
standards. Having thus assumed KEPCO’s responsibility for the dumping of its waste, the Province of
Cebu would be powerless to hold KEPCO responsible for violation of the law in regard to the proper
disposal of its coal ash, as KEPCO could easily shift the blame back to the Province, on the strength of
the latter’s undertakings under the MOA.
“If harmful, no permit”
On Dec 14, Naga Mayor Valdemar Chiong said he will not issue a business permit to KSPC for the
operation of its future two 100-megawatt coal-fired power plant joint venture projects if those who
opposed it can prove that it is harmful to the people’s health. Chiong said he needs convincing evidence
from the groups opposing the project to make him decide to reject KSPC’s application for business
permit. “If coal ash caused illnesses like cancer and if there are people who died because of the effect of
coal ash, I will not issue a business permit. But please show me hard evidence as our basis to refuse
them the permit,” Chiong said. Chiong reminded protesting parties that the coal ash from the Napocor
plants cannot be compared to the coal ash of the future power plants because the old plant used the old
technology, while the KSPC plant will use clean coal technology with less carbon dioxide emission. “If
there are no reports of deaths related to the coal ash from the old plants using old technology, how
much more with the new technology and using clean coal?” Chiong asked.
Opposition to the Project
Another round of issues against the project surfaced around July 2009 when environmental lawyers
from the Global Legal Action of Climate Change (GLACC) raised questions against the plan of officials
from the Cebu Province to use its recently purchased property, the Balili beach resort in Tinaan, City of
Naga, as dumpsite for KSPC's coal ash. The lawyers, Attys. Gloria Estenzo-Ramos and Benjamin Cabrido,
warned the Province against such undertaking especially because it is supposed to regulate projects that
are environmentally-critical.
Related to the first issue raised is the legality on the purchase of the beach resort property, because
documents proved that the property is not alienable and disposable and therefore, remains under
public domain.
Based on the information from Violeta Corral of the Public Services International Research Unit (PSIRU)
that ADB is set to approve the proposed KSPC loan, FDC-Cebu established a tactical alliance with GLACC,
and later with local groups in the City of Naga, to sustain opposition against coal-fired power plants and
lobby against ADB financing for the project.
KSPC officials, remain consistent in their stand that they will be using a clean coal technology. FDC-Cebu,
GLACC, KSPC officials and other players, have met in several media forums such as the 888 Forum at
Waterfront Hotel Cebu at the height of the controversies confronting the project.
Later, the Balili controversy forced Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia to issue a public apology.
Investigations ensued at the Provincial Board and the Office of the Visayan Ombudsman.
On the very day (18 August 2009) that the ADB Board was supposed to discussed the KSPC project, a
joint mission of the NGO Forum on ADB and FDC-Cebu in the City of Naga, further ignited the issues, this
time involving the complaints raised by residents against the indiscriminate dumping of coal ash
adjacent to their houses, which resulted to increased incidence of respiratory ailments and the
contamination of drinking water sources.
The findings from said visit and interviews with City of Naga residents led to the sending of a 30-day
Notice to Sue signed by GLACC, FDC Cebu and local groups in Naga such as the Naganhong Parokyano
Alang sa Kaluwasan sa Banay (Nagpakabana) led by retired Napocor engineer Vic Obando. The notice
was sent to ADB, the Cebu Province, officials of the City of Naga, and other officials.
Opposition to the project spread to the neighboring island of Negros. Through FDC-Cebu's linkage with
consumer groups in the power sector, the campaign was able to generate support from the Bacolod
Social Action Center (SAC) and Bacolod Bishop Vicente M. Navarra. On the eve of the scheduled ADB
Board meeting on 10 September 2009, which was again postponed, Bishop Navarra sent a letter through
fax to ADB President Kuroda expressing his reasons for opposing the project.
The said letter generated a reply from the Infrastructure Finance Division 2 of the ADB's Private Sector
Operations Department, sent through fax on 09 December 2009, stating that the main issues in Bishop
Navarra's letter “are best clarified and addressed through CENECO and the ERC under the due processes
prescribed.”
A meeting with ADB personnel led by Mary Abad of the Private Sector Operations Department (PSOD)
was held in Cebu on 12 November 2009. Present were officials of FDC Cebu, lawyers from GLACC, and
two Cebu Province officials. The meeting, however, failed to resolve any issue raised against the project,
and the meeting only became an arena wherein each party reiterated its respective position on the
project.
With that, and despite last ditch efforts of FDC-Cebu, Nagpakabana, and the Neighborhood Association
of Poblacion Naga, Cebu Inc. (NAPNACI) to stop the loan approval by way of sending an urgent letter to
ADB President Kuroda and the Board of Directors on 09 December 2009, the ADB Board proceeded to
approve the US$120 million sought by KSPC during its meeting on 11 December 2009.
On the same day that the ADB Board approved the KSPC loan, Mary Abad made available online to
interested parties the full version of KSPC's Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Only the Summary
Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) dated March 2009 was earlier provided to public interest
organizations engaging ADB on the proposed KSPC loan.
INDEX II - FDC CEBU STUDY
28 March 2010
Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Narrative

Narrative on the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) with Naga residents on KSPC’s Compliance with
the EIA Process

Background
By virtue of Presidential Decree (PD) 1586 promulgated in 1978, the Philippine Environmental Impact
Statement System was established. This would be later on be fortified by succeeding legislative and
executive issuances and enactments. Of recent vintage is Department of Environment and Natural
Resources Administrative Order 30 Series of 2003(DENR-AO 30 Series of 2003) which sets forth the
implementing rules and regulations (IRR) of the Philippine EIS (PEIS) system.
Corollary to this, all projects or programs of high potential for significant negative environmental impact
(environmentally critical project [ECP]) or those in areas delineated as environmentally sensitive such
that significant environmental impacts are expected if certain types of proposed projects or programs
are located, developed or implemented in (environmentally critical areas [ECA])1 are required to go
through an assessment process referred to as the EIS system.
The overarching policy of the Philippine Government is to establish a rational balance between
socioeconomic development and environmental protection for the benefit of present and future
generations, in a word, sustainable development.2
Hence, the establishment of the EIS system which is concerned primarily with assessing the direct and
indirect impacts of a project on the bio-physical and human environment and ensuring that these
impacts are addressed by appropriate environmental protection and enhancement measures.3
With the “significant negative environmental impact” posed by the operation of a coal-fired power plant
facility in the City of Naga, Cebu, KEPCO SPC (KSPC), its proponent, is required under law to comply with
the assessment process defined under prevailing EIS laws and rules.
EIA Process
The environmental impact assessment (EIA) process geared towards evaluating and predicting the likely
impacts of a project on the environment in all phases of the project and designing appropriate
preventive, mitigating and enhancement measures to address these consequences4, involves five (5)
stages:
(i) Project screening;

(ii) EIA study scoping;
(iii) Conduct of the EIA study and preparation of the
EIA report for the application for an environmental compliance certificate (ECC) or certificate of non-
coverage (CNC);
(iv) Review and evaluation of ECC/CNC applications; and
(vi) Environmental impact monitoring.
1
DENR Administrative Order No. 2003-30, Environmental Laws in the Philippines, 2005 Third Edition, CBSI Editorial
Staff
2
ibid
3
ibid
4
ibid
The entire process is undertaken by, among others, the project proponent and/or EIA consultant,
Environmental Management Bureau of the DENR, a Review Committee (EIARC), affected communities
and other stakeholders.5
Project screening allows the Proponent to determine if its proposed project is covered or not covered by
the Philippine EIS System. Scoping hopes to achieve the following targets:
(i) identification of the most significant impacts;
(ii) definition of the extent of baseline information necessary to evaluate and mitigate the impacts, and
(iii) determining the need for, and scope of, an environmental risk assessment (ERA)
During EIA report preparation, the participation of stakeholders as resource persons in primary data
collection is encouraged. The concerned LGU has to be consulted and involved particularly in area of
social development, information, education and communication and formulation of the environmental
monitoring plan.
The Proponent’s submitted EIA report shall be reviewed and evaluated by the EMB Office concerned,
guided by three general criteria:
(i) environmental considerations are integrated in the project planning;

(ii) assessment is technically sound and proposed mitigation measures are effective; and
(iii) social acceptability is based on informed public participation.
Public disclosure of the EIA findings is mandatory for ECPs and this can be done through public
consultation and/or public hearing. Public hearing may be waived when requested by the Proponent in
the absence of mounting opposition, or as requested in written form with valid basis.
Environmental monitoring is mainly compliance monitoring, i.e., compliance with the conditions
stipulated in the Environmental Compliance Certificate (ECC) and compliance with the committed
activities set out in the environmental management plan (EMP) that is contained in the EIA document
submitted during ECC application.
Public participation is encouraged in the conduct of any level of EIA and monitoring. For PEIS-/EIS-based
ECC applications, public participation is required during scoping, conduct of EIA, review and evaluation
and monitoring. Information, education and communication (IEC) forms part of the social preparation
process prior to public scoping activity. The IEC identifies the stakeholders and related issues. The
identified stakeholders will be invited to the scoping activity. The EIA findings are disclosed in a public
hearing for all new ECPs for which public scoping was undertaken and PEIS-based applications. 6
5
supra
6
Environmental Assessment and Review Framework, Philippines: Road Sector Institutional Development and
Investment Program 2009
Focus Group Discussion
On March 28, 2010, the Freedom from Debt Coalition-Cebu held a focus group discussion attended by a
select group7 of residents of Naga. Explaining the EIA process, FDC hoped to solicit from the group
information as to the compliance of KSPC with the EIA process and perception as to the possible impact
of the project to the community.
Following a brief presentation on the EIA process and highlights of the environmental report submitted
by KSPC to Asian Development Bank (ADB), the group was asked whether or not the phases outlined in
the EIA system was complied with. The presentation would have confirmed the fulfillment of the
procedural requirements as provided by the EIA system in tandem with the people’s participation in the
process itself. However, participants to the FGD manifested lack of awareness to the process.
A resident of Colon, the situs of the project, disclosed that she was not a party to any consultation
regarding the project, nor was there any information regarding the effects of the project to the
neighborhood, and, as echoed by the other participants, neither was there any consultation on the
construction of the project.
Another participant expressed that where information or education about the KSPC-proposed coal-fired
power plants were a necessity, streamers meant to convey the Naganhons’ reception and approval of
the construction of coal-fired power plants were mounted at the project site instead. It was not
unknown that the local government unit of Naga strongly supported the project, related another
participant.
The general sentiment of the group was the lack of consultation which should have been the proper
gauge for the project’s social acceptability, a crucial component of the EIA process.
Health, environmental risks
A doctor in the group shared that ever since the power plants started operating in Naga, skin and
respiratory illnesses particularly in areas where existing plants are located have been reported. There
have been deaths in Brgy. Colon due to cancer, shared one participant, who had lost a family member to
the disease. She could not, however, categorically link the deaths as among the health risks posed by the
existing coal-fired power plants as she had no knowledge of the hazardous potentials of such power
plants.
Participants observed that coastal barangays which used to benefit from marine resources no longer
sourced food from the adjacent sea as marine life had dwindled since the operation of coal-fired power
plants in Naga. A former foreman of APO Cement Plant revealed that coal ash disposal meant dumping
the said material along the shores of Brgy. Tinaan. This, according to one participant, explains why there
are not any beach resorts in Naga despite its being a city by the sea.
Excess oil and grease in the sea water purportedly from the refuse of the existing coal-fired power plants
in Colon made swimming in the area a real threat to the health of the people. Those who dared later
7
Participants requested for complete anonymity for security reasons.
complained of skin irritations, according to one participant. The former foreman explained that the sea
water was likewise exposed to abrupt temperature changes caused by the water disposed from the
existing coal-fired power plant’s cooling and heating facilities. This contributed to the decimation of the
marine flora and fauna he said.
Focus Group Discussion Attendance:

INDEX III - FDC CEBU STUDY
29 March 2010
Round Table Discussion (RTD) Narrative

Narrative on the Round Table Discussion with panel of experts on
KSPC’s Compliance with the EIA Process

Background
In 2008, KEPCO Philippines Holdings8 entered into a joint venture with Salcon Power forming KEPCO SPC
Power Corp (KSPC) to construct and operate a 200MW9 coal power plant in Naga, Cebu.
In June of the same year, SPC Power Corp obtained a $100M loan from Korean Export-Import Bank
(Korean Eximbank) for the coal-fired project. On 11 December 2009, the Asian Development Bank (ADB)
approved a US$120M loan to KSPC for the construction of the Naga coal-fired plant which will provide
base load power to the Visayas grid as articulated in KSPC’s proposal dubbed as “Visayas Base Load
Power Project”.
Construction commenced in December 2007 and operation is targeted to start in 2011. To date, the City
of Naga hosts two (2) 110 megawatt (MW) coal-fired power plants owned by the National Power
Corporation (NPC) and being operated and maintained by Korean Electric Power Corporation SPC (KSPC)
utilizing pulverized coal technology with a contract to expire in 2013. The coal-fired power plants under
the Visayas Base Load Power project would be in addition to the existing power plants. Unlike the
existing coal-fired power plant, KSPC’s will use circulating fluidized bed combustion (CFBC), which
proponent argue is “clean coal” technology with 1,300 units operating worldwide.
This ADB-funded project, conceptualized under the build-operate-own (BOO) scheme10, is intended to
power six (6) electric cooperatives covered under a total of 120 MW power sales contracts (PSC).
On the basis of a 1500-page Environmental Impact Study (EIS) prepared by SPC consultants in 2005, the
Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) issued an environmental compliance
certificate (ECC) for the project in December of the same year.
Round Table Discussion with Panel of Experts
On March 29, 2010, Freedom from Debt Coalition-Cebu (FDC-Cebu) invited a panel of experts to a round
table discussion (RTD) to discuss the possible environmental, social and economic concerns arising from
the EIS. KSPC’s Summary Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA, March 2009)11 synthesizing the
voluminous EIS prepared by SPC was presented at the RTD, along with the highlights of the EIS itself.
The panel of experts consisted of the following:
Name Field of work

1. Atty. Michael Enriquez *Chemical engineering major,
University of San Carlos (USC)
*President, FDC Cebu
2. Atty. Ben Cabrido *Law Professor, University of San
8
KEPCO Philippines Holdings is wholly-owned subsidiary of Korea Electric Power Co or KEPCO.
9
Consisting of two (2) 100 MW units (SEIA, 2009)
10
The generating company is responsible for the whole construction, operation, and maintenance of the plant,
including fuel supply — without any Philippine government guarantees.
11
The SEIA was submitted by the KSPC to the ADB in March 2009.
Jose Recoletos (USJR) College of Law
*Global Legal Action on Climate
Change (GLACC)
3. Engr. Vic Obando Former NPC Engineer
4. Engr. Perfecto Padilla *Civil Engineer
5. Prof. Glen Martin Green *Professor, Department of Biology,
USC
6. Prof. Elma Villahermosa *Professor, College of Social Sciences,
Cebu Normal University (CNU)
*Psychologist
7. Ms. Cheryl Bevin Lee Tan Economics major, Ateneo de Manila
University (ADMU)
2009 ADB SEIA-a modest summary
FDC earlier on observed that the 2009 ADB SEIA largely glossed over health & environmental risks posed
by the coal-fired plant. As gleaned from the same document, it was apparent that there was lack of
baseline data of any initial studies undertaken.
FDC took note of the project's mitigation plan which failed to incorporate a targeted health program to
monitor health risks related to ash coal residues. Instead, the proponent highlighted corporate social
responsibility-related community work. Likewise, FDC observed that the SEIA was rather modest in its
discussion on the possible impacts of the project on coastal/freshwater fisheries and ecosystems.
Despite various concerns raised, however, ADB maintained that its SEIA “did not require any revisions”.
Round Table Discussion (RTD) Results
1. Economic Viability
Prof. Green pointed out that the while KSPC’s new coal plant facility may be said to bolster the base load
power supply to address the growing electricity needs of the Visayas grid, the same undertaking does
not provide a long term solution to the problems confronting the grid.
FDC12 explained that while at the outset additional generation plants may seem to remedy the power
needs of the grid, the unhampered establishment of power plants in the Visayas will eventually result in
overcapacity even with the current average peak demand of 1200 MW.13 The switching on of a 246-
megawatt (MW), Cebu Energy Development Corp.-owned, coal-fired plant in Toledo City, Cebu has
made the province an exporter of electricity. Despite this, the Cebu Provincial government is “seriously
considering” pushing for nuclear power to generate more electricity.
12
Power Crisis Means EPIRA Failed, March 11, 2010, FDC Cebu Statement
13
FDC likened the situation under the Ramos administration which entered into contracts with Independent Power
Producers (IPPs) assuring the latter, under take or pay provisions, return of investment on top of profits despite
the unused electricity due to the oversupply.
Aside from the CEDC plant, a 100-MW Unit 1 of the Kepco-SPC plant is also targeted to be commissioned
by October 2010.
Meanwhile, Green took note that proponent and the host local government alike argue for the
establishment of a generation facility which taps coal primarily because of its economic viability i.e.
cheaper operational costs. However, Green explained that coal technology is cheaper since the costs are
externalized.
KSPC’s coals will be shipped from Indonesia supplied by PT Kasih Industri and PT Surya Sakti Darma
Kencana14. Qualified local suppliers will also be tapped for the coal requirements needed for the plant
operation. This according to Green presents a more expensive arrangement compared to resorting to
renewable energy sources i.e. wind, solar, hydro among others which unlike coal are infinite.
Green disclosed that a new major study on coal production states that the coal supply is now dwindling
and on a downward trend due to increase in demand in terms of worldwide consumption. The study
reveals that supply would have peaked by 2030 resulting in supply waning into low-grade coal. The
concern added Green not only touches on the sustainability of coal-fired power plants due to the finite
supply, but also the stability of fragile economies powered and dependent on coal technology.
Engr. Padilla echoed Green’s disclosure on the depleting coal supply adding that while the projection
covers a twenty year period when coal supply would have supposedly reached its maximum, export of
coal by Indonesian suppliers may be cut in ten (ten) years time as focus would be shifted into prioritizing
the coal needs of Indonesia’s own coal-fired power plants.
The EIS does not present an alternative source for coal supply having failed to anticipate supply reaching
its peak. There was apprehension among members of the panel that KSPC would flaunt availability of
coal from neighboring Asian countries like China or qualified local suppliers since in contrast to
Indonesian coal, the former are of low grade and quality. This would translate to increased
environmental and health hazards.
According to Atty. Cabrido as high as 90% of the coal will be sourced from Indonesian suppliers. Should
the supply be cut, according to Cabrido, under the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA Act of
2001 otherwise known as Republic Act 9136), profit for KSPC is guaranteed since the Philippine
government shall subsidized coal supply costs. There is in effect a sovereign guarantee extended to KSPC
under the EPIRA.
2. Cooling system
The circulating water system will be a once-through seawater cooling system. It will draw seawater from
the existing intake canal for Naga power plant, with appropriate modifications. The Project’s total
seawater requirement will be about 45,000 cubic meters per hour (m3/hr), including 128 m3/hr
processed through a desalination plant for plant service and potable water and demineralized water for
the boilers.15
14
SEIA,2009
15
supra
Engr. Obando explained that the power plants will suck in sea water at a temperature of 28⁰ C for the
water supply requirements of the plant i.e. cooling purposes. Processed water will be discharged to the
sea at a higher temperature ranging between 45⁰-60⁰ C. The variance in temperature will affect the
coastal ecosystem potentially decimating those which cannot thrive at increased temperature levels.
Aside from the hazards posed by significant heating of the seawater caused by the hot water discharged
from the coal plant facility, chemicals used by KSPC theoretically to treat and neutralize used water
before they are released back into the sea may contaminate the waters adjacent to the facility. The
effect just as that feared from the increase in temperatures would be disastrous to the life forms and
organisms which make up the Naga marine ecosystem.
Obando also added that the indiscriminate process of sucking in water for cooling purposes itself
threatens the marine fauna for while specifications as described in KSPC’s EIS include installation of
screen to control trash and debris16, it is expected that sea creatures would be vulnerable to the vortex
created by the sucking motion thus proving lethal to their existence.
3. Coal Ash Disposal
The ash generated from the system will be from the furnace bottom (bed ash), air preheater hopper,
and electrostatic precipitator (EP) hoppers (fly ash). The collected ash will be transported by pneumatic
conveying system to the bed and fly ash silos. A portion of the bed ash will be reinjected to the furnace
through the bed media regeneration system. During abnormal operations, the bed ash silo will be
unloaded to the truck by a wet unloader and transported to the ash disposal area. The bed and ash silos
each have a 48-hour storage capacity.17
As part of project design, ash generated by the new plant will be recycled as raw material for cement
manufacturing through an agreement with the Cebu Provincial Government. In emergency situations,
ash will be transferred from a silo in a humidified form and stored in the emergency ash pond on-site,
lined with high density polyethylene (HDPE) to ensure there is no ground seepage of the wet ash. The
EIA and SEIA provide details of this plan for ash disposal. In the event that an alternative ash disposal is
needed in the future, any proposed site will be required to meet ADB's environmental and social
safeguards requirements and approval.18
Cabrido calculated that the KSPC power plant will produce 52.4 tons of coal ash per hour19. This means
that coal ash will be loaded inasmuch as 10 metric tons per conveyance in every hour (estimated about
5 dump trucks every hour). Under KSPC’s proposal 60% of the coal ash will be sold to cement
companies while the remaining 40% will be thrown as waste.
Given the volume of coal ash generated on an hourly basis, KSPC’s proposed ash pond, according to
Cabrido would be filled by 3-hour operation’s worth of coal ash.
16
ibid
17
ibid
18
ADB Information Unit correspondence to Violeta Corral
19
Actual coal ash that would be produced would reach 5.45 tons/hour based on the boiler maximum continuous
rating operation. Coal ash handling is designed for a coal consumption of 54.25 tons/hr. Ash will be generated at a
rate of 250 tons/day, comprising 200 tons/day of fly ash and50 tons/day of bed ash.Philippine: Visayas Base
Load Project, March 2009 Prepared by KSPC for ADB.
FDC recalled that the original arrangement was evidenced by a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA)20
between KSPC and the Provincial Government where the Province undertook to allow KEPCO to dump
its fly ash into a dumpsite for a term of at least twenty-five years, subject to extension. Potential
revenue from the coal ash arrangement was estimated at P48 million ($1 million). For each ton of ash
dumped by KPSC, the province will be paid $1. However, the coal ash dumpsite, the 25-hectare Balili
resort property purchased in 2008 by the Cebu province was discovered to be significantly a timberland
area 80% of which is submerged.
Recommendations
The panel of experts agreed that areas which may be possible for intervention concern the following:
(1) Economic viability. Review and scrutiny of the coal supply contracts between KSPC and its
Indonesian suppliers.
(2) Cooling system. Review of the standards adopted by KSPC on the cooling system i.e. water
disposal and treatment and inspection of the site to where the used plant water would be
disposed as well as the area where sea water would be sucked in for the cooling mechanism and
(3) Coal Ash Disposal. Review of existing contracts with cement manufacturers and KSPC as to the
volume of coal ash subject to sale and arrangements made by KSPC as regards the disposal of
the coal ash not covered by the sale contracts including but limited to contracts entered with
local government units to accommodate coal ash (similar to the Balili MOA).
20
The MOA was penned and signed in May 2009.
INDEX IV - FDC CEBU STUDY
14-16 April 2010
Survey Results
Perception of Nagahanons on KEPCO SPC’s (Korean Electrical Power Corporation – Salcon
Power Corporation) Coal-fired Power Plants

Rationale
The City of Naga in Cebu province is home to several industries and coal fired power plants. The
APO Cement Plant in Tina-an, is utilizing cement technology for quality product formulation. The
KYOCERA Kinseki Philippines Incorporated in Cantao-an produces high quality semi-conductors and
crystals for use in mobile phone equipment. The SME (Small Medium Enterprise) industrial park also in
Cantao-an houses a variety of medium sized companies. Rikio, RSA (Rikio Southeast Asia) produces
shoes in Inayagan. Manila Sawmill (lumber) in Langtad. Cebu Marble Industry in Pangdan. The SPC
(Salcon Power Corporation) power plant is also situated on a 30 hectare site in Colon, Naga.
Now under construction is the KEPCO SPC power plant corporation that will be fully operational
in 2011. KEPCO (Korean Electrical Power Corporation). KEPCO SPC is a joint venture between Korea and
the Philippines. The new power station will be a coal-fired power plant.
But knowing the identified hazards and harmful effects of coal, are the people of Naga
amenable to the construction of another power plant in the vicinity? Are residents and other stake
holders consulted by the local government? Was there public hearing and information dissemination
activities conducted?
Before any further development of coal fired power plants in the country is undertaken, the cost
of existing coal-fired power plants should be quantified. Social effects to the community should also be
identified to prevent further environmental disasters like the Calaca Coal Fired Power Plant.
This study had been conducted to determine the perceptions of the residents in Naga City, Cebu
on the establishment of KEPCO SPC Coal Fired Power Plant in the hope of generating conclusions as to
the public opinion of the residents as basis for local policy formulation.
Research Methodology
Multi stage is a type of Probability Sampling usually done in big community based studies in
which selection of the sampling units is done by stages. The type of sampling used in the different
stages varies according to the distribution of the population.
For this study, West Poblacion, out of 28 Barangays was selected based on the list of barangays
earlier identified as proximate/near the operation of the coal-fired power plants or have been
reportedly affected by coal ash dumping as revealed at the first focused group discussion held last Mach
2010. Since the population in West Poblacion is quite large, the second stage was to determine the
clusters (sitios). One out of seven Sitios was randomly selected. The inclusion of Sitio Happy Valley was
based on lottery method giving all of the 7 sitios equal opportunity of being chosen.
On the third stage, the samples (sitio residents) are identified employing the Slovin’s formula.
This scientific method determined 122 samples needed based on the number of household in Sitio
Happy Valley .
Once again, simple random sampling was employed to determine the 122 samples making sure
that all residents are given equal opportunity of being chosen, at the same time, assuring that the
samples taken represents the population of the said research locale.
The researchers made sure that data are gathered from respondents in an uncontrolled setting
to generate empirical results.
Instrument
A Likert Scale researcher – made tool was utilized to determine the perceptions of Naga
residents on the establishment of a new coal fired power plant specifically the KEPCO – SPC plant
expected to be complete by 2011. Part 1 included the preliminary questions answered by YES or NO.
Part 2 and 3 comprised 20 item questions that determined their perceptions as to their knowledge of
the establishment, social and health effects of coal fired power plants and their opinions on its
establishment. To determine the validity of the researcher – made questionnaires, tools were pre –
tested and validated by an expert before distribution. The said instrument was also translated to the
vernacular for easier comprehension of the respondents.
Treatment of Data
Slovin’s formula was employed to determine the number of samples were needed;
To determine the profile of respondents as to gender, civil status, religion, and educational
attainment, the Simple Percentage was used.
Weighted Mean was utilized to determine the level of perceptions of Naga residents as to the
installation of another coal fired power plant. Their responses were quantified based on the range:
Hypotheical Mean Range Rating Description

1.00 - 1.79 5 Strongly Agree
1.80 - 2.59 4 Agree
2.60 - 3.39 3 Moderately Agree
3.40 - 4.19 2 Disagree
4.20 - 5.00 1 Strongly Disagree
To determine the significant relationship of the respondent’ profile and their level of perception,
the Chi Square method was employed. This test will justify whether their perceptions have been
affected by their profile or not.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Profile of Respondents
Table 1 presents profile of the residents in Naga City. As to gender, a big margin (63 %) of the
randomly selected respondents were females while there 45 (37 %) were males. It was noted that when
the data was gathered to residents, those who were present in the housel holds are normally the
housewives as the husbands are out to work while their children are in school. As to civil status,
majority (70 %) are married while 28 (23 %) are single).
On religious affiliation, 116 (95%) are Roman Catholics, while 2 (2%) are Born Again Christians, 3
UCCP members and 1 (1%) belonged to the Seventh Day Adventist church. A greater bulk of the
respondents are Roman Catholics, which can be attributed to the Spanish dominance over the Filipinos
over a hundred years ago. Of which, they become instrument for the introduction of Christianity to the
Filipino society.
As to educational attainment, majority (49 %) of the respondents only finished until the high
school level while there are 31 (28 %) college graduates. Although higher educational attainment is
given preference by Filipinos, socio-economic status often is a main factor on the low educational
attainment of respondents. Most of the respondents identified also are working in blue collar jobs and
agricultural lands.
Table 1
Profile of Respondents
INDICATOR F %
GENDER
Male 45 37%
Female 77 63%
TOTAL 122 100 %
CIVIL STATUS
Single 28 23%
Married 85 70%
Widow 8 7%
Separated 1 1%
TOTAL 122 100 %
RELIGION
Roman Catholic 116 95%
Iglesia ni Kristo 0 0%
Born Again 2 2%
th
7 Day Adventist 1 1%
UCCP 3 2%
TOTAL 122 100 %
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Elementary 19 17%
Highschool 55 49%
College 31 28%
Post Graduate 7 6%
TOTAL 122 100 %
Awareness of the Nagahanons on KEPCO’s Special Coal Fired Power Plant
Table 2 revealed the awareness of Naga residents as to the existence of a coal fired power plant.
One hundred fifteen (94.3 %) respondents believed that they are aware of the existence of the power
plant. Ninety nine (81.2%) are aware of the plan to put up additional coal-fired plants in the city. This
implies that that majority of the people in the City of Naga are aware of the plan of constructing a new
power plant. But they claimed that the information was simply based on what they see in the location of
the construction and the hearsays of other people.
Unfortunately, also a big bulk of respondents (82.8 %) claimed that they have not been asked by
the local government unit or the proponent of the new coal-fired power plant if they are in favor of its
construction.
Ninety seven (79.1 %) respondents even claimed that there have not been discussions
conducted in their Barangay regarding its construction. There were also 25 (20.5 %) residents who
claimed that discussions were conducted by the Barangay Captains and other barangay officials. Others
claimed that there was a public hearing but only for a few people who were "privileged" to be there and
that it was a very one sided discussion. When asked why, the respondents believed that the local
government wanted the project to be realized and to assure that there will not be any opposition to the
public hearing, only the selected few are invited.
It is understandable that the respondents have a negative perception to their local government
heads. To claim that the LGUs manipulated the said public hearings would denote that the people do
not trust their local administrators.
Table 2
Awareness of the Nagahanons on KEPCO’s Special Coal Fired Power Plant
YES NO TOTAL
INDICATOR F % F %
1. Are you aware of the existence of coal-fired power plant/s
in the City of Naga? 115 94.3 % 7 5.7 % 122
(Nasayod ba ka nga adunay planta sa kuryente ginamit ang
coal sa Syudad sa Naga?)
2. Are you aware of the plan to put up additional coal-fired 99 81.2 % 23 18.9 %
plans in the city?
3. Have you been asked by the local government unit or the
proponent of the new coal-fired power plant if you are in 21 17.2 % 101 82.8 % 122
favor or not?
(Gipangutana ba ka sa lokal nga mga opisyales o kaha sa
midumala sa planta sa kuryente ginamit ang coal kong uyon
ba ka o dili?)
4. Have there been discussions conducted in your barangay
regarding the construction of a new coal-fired power 25 20.5 % 97 79.5 % 122
plants? If yes, please indicate who conducted the discussion.
(Aduna bay mga panagtapok nga diskorso gipatigayon sa
barangay kabahin sa planta sa kuryente ginamit ang coal?
Kung aduna man, palihug isulti kung kinsa ang namuno sa
gipatigayon nga panagtapok nga diskorso?)
Perceptions of Nagahanons on the Effect of New Coal Fired Power Plants in Naga
Revealed in table 3 is the level of perceptions of Nagahanons as to the effect of an

establishment of a new Coal Fired Power Plants in Naga. Findings showed that Nagahanons agreed
(1.98) on the health and environmental hazards of the said plant. They are aware that a new coal fired
power plant in Naga will result in more coal ash dumping around the city (2.15, Agree) and will cause
skin problems (i.e. irritations) to the people (2.07, Agree).
It is understandable that the residents also agree (1.93) that these power plants can cause
respiratory illnesses to the people especially in the respiratory system. In some places where power
plants are located, there are cases of people died with respiratory illness. Worse is that the companies
concerned are not doing anything about it. A resident told the researcher that, "Makadaot man jud kini
sa lawas sa tawo. Sa uban parte diri sa Naga nga nagbarog jud ang planta, daghan sa mga silinganan
didtu ang nangamatay na tungodsa sakit sa baga. bisan suroyon pa na ninyo, inyo jud mahibaw-an."
(This the power plant can harm the human body. You can see in the neighboring area where a power
plant is located, several people in there died because of lung cancer or lung infections).
A respondent also added that they are not given monthly medical check ups and/or medicines,
"Wala gayud kami nakasuway nga gi-check up mi diri sa amung kondisyon sa panglawas. Ang katu ra
siguro sa mga balay-balay sa dapit jud kung asa nagtukod ang planta mao ray murag naa check up. Dili
ra bya sila lang ang maapektohan, kami pud biya." (We never experienced being checked up by doctors
pertaining to our health conditions. Only those who are near the location of the power plants have that
medical privilege. But they are not the only ones who are affected the harmful air pollution also reached
neighboring barangays).
The residents are sure that this new coal fired power plant, just like the previously built power
plants just across it, will destroy the marine life forms (1.91, Agree). Fishermen claimed that: "Naa juy
dakong kausaban ang amung pagkinabuhi karon ug niadtung sa una. Sa una bangkat-bangkat amung
pagkuha ug isda uy! Pero karon wa na jud Unsaon man tawn pagkabuhi sa mga isda ug uban pang
nagpuyo sa dagat kung naay init kaau nga tubig nga ibuga kanila ang planta!" (There is really a big
difference with our livelihood back when Naga has no power plants compared to now. Today, our
livelihood in Naga faced a bleak future. In the past, we have loads of fish caught. But often times now,
we go home with our boats empty. This is because the plants discharge their hot solid wastes directly to
the seas. No fish could survive in a warm polluted sea). A marine sample to determine toxicity of the
waters should be conducted to evaluate status of marine resources in Naga.
A mother also claimed that she will no longer allow her children to swim in Naga beaches. She
noticed her kids when swimming once had skin irritations and rashes. She affirmed that when Naga
residents would go to a beach, they normally prefer inland pools or travel to neighboring municipalities
to enjoy swimming.
On the basis of these findings, a new coal fired power plant would be a health hazard and could
generate negative effects to the community in the future. Just like the existing power plants in Naga,
Nagahanons believe that the new plant will worsen the scenario and will result in more coal ash
dumping in the city. Try walking along the beachfronts of Naga near the power plant. The sand is so hot
you cannot walk bare foot anymore.
Over-all mean for table 3 which is rated 1.97 interpreted as Disagree denotes a strong negative
perception of Nagahanons on the establishment of a new coal fired power plant. The residents do not
believe that a new plant will generate jobs. “Di mi uyon nga kini makahatag ug dugang trabaho kanamu
kay kadaghanan namu wa jud mataga-i sa maong trabaho. Ang maka benepisyo lamang niini kay
kadtong duol sa administration sa taga KEPCO ug sa LGU sa Naga”. They further believed that those
who have relatives working in the plants or in local governments can be given jobs. This implies that the
old padrino system or patronage politics is evident in Naga. They further believed that Nagahanons if
given jobs will only be employed upon construction of the plant. When construction is done, they will
hire experts from Luzon or from Korea. This means that jobs generated will not be sustainable for the
residents.
Only a few residents agreed on the statement that city revenues will rise (1.90, Disagree). They
are promised of a better quality of life if KEPCO SPC will be established due to economic benefits.
Residents claimed that there are a number of plants existing in Naga city already but their low standard
of living never changed. This means that residents have not benefited much of the economic
contributions of Naga industries.
“Dili na (the power plant) maka contribute sa pag uswag sa siudad oi!”, said the respondents.
They do not believe that this power plant will contribute to the development of the city. They claimed
that their lives even have not improved. This means that residents do not find their city progressive.
They also perceive negatively on the future of the city if these power plants are left unchecked.
They also believed that power plant exhaust smokes are very harmful to residents.
Implication
It is alarming to note that City Health records (Appendix A) showed skin disease as a top 2 cause
of morbidity rate in 2009. It also follows that skin diseases is within the top 5 leading causes of
morbidity among Naga residents from the last 5 years (2005-2009).
Respondents sternly noted that "Uyon kaayo mi nga ang kana ng planta makahatag ug dugang
pulusyon sa atong gihanggap nga hangin tungod sa mga kemikals nga gibuga niini." (We really agree
that the power plant can worsen the pollution problem with the air that we breathe because of the
chemicals that it exhausts).
Records show that Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URTI) has been the number 1 leading
cause of morbidity among Naga residents from 2005 to 2008. In 2009 alone, cough and colds had been
the leading cause of morbidity (see Appendix A).
A respondent told the researchers that the power plants in Naga, particularly the one located in
Poblacion exhaust dark smokes at night time so that no one can detect the bulk of waste that harms the
air. They further claimed that dust in the air can be felt by the residents that are big enough to be seen.
Others claimed it like sand.
A related finding of Greenpeace Southeast Asia Report (2001) on Calaca Power Plant showed
that residents of villages surrounding the coal plant are still subjected to regular blasts of ash carried by
winds. Blowing air to clear tubes and smokestacks occurs “once every quarter, the effects of which are
painful to the nostrils and to the throat." Gusts of ash are strong during the period of northeasterly
winds (called amihan in Filipino, the period generally covers the months from October to February).
Respiratory afflictions have reportedly become "part of the daily lives" of many residents in the Calaca
coal plant communities since the power station started operating in 1984. Yet, no medical evaluation
has been undertaken among neighboring Calaca barangays based on neurological illnesses and
developmental abnormalities traceable to exposure to the heavy metal byproducts of the coal plant. For
that matter, no Filipino communities living close to any existing Philippine coal plant have been tested
for possible mercury poisoning.
Table 3
Level of Perception of Nagahanons on the Effect of New Coal Fired Power Plants in Naga
ITEM (Negative Statemtns) MEAN INTERPRETATION

The new coal-fired power plants in Naga
1. Will pollute the air that we breathe. 1.83 Agree
2. Will cause respiratory illnesses on the people. 1.93 Agree
3. Will contaminate the marine life forms and the sea by the city. 1.91 Agree
4. Will cause skin problems (i.e. irritations) to the people. 2.07 Agree
5. Will result in more coal ash dumping around the city. 2.15 Agree
GRAND MEAN 1.98 AGREE
ITEM (Positive Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

The new coal-fired power plants in Naga
6. Will give more jobs to the residents of Naga. 1.86 Disagree
7. Will raise the revenues of the city. 1.90 Disagree
8. Will not affect the air that we breathe. 2.31 Disagree
9. Will contribute to the development of the city. 1.94 Disagree
10. Will ensure ample electric supply to the city. 1.83 Disagree
GRAND MEAN 1.97 DISAGREE
Legend:
4.20 - 5.00 Strongly Agree
3.40 - 4.19 Agree
2.60 - 3.39 Moderately Agree
1.80 - 2.59 Disagree
1.00 - 1.79 Strongly Disagree
Level of Perception of Nagahanons on Having New Coal Fired Power Plants in Naga
Revealed in table 4 is the level of perception of Nagahanons on having a new coal fired power
plants in Naga. Findings showed that respondents were not consulted on the plan to put up new coal-
fired power plants (2.18, Agree). They claimed that “There was a consultation but, kato rang duol sa
luwag ang gi consult ug gi briefing na sila daan aron mo uyon sa maong powerplan”. There was
consultation but only close allies who approve the plant establishment are invited. This means that
when a public hearing was conducted by the LGUs, there was no proper representation of Nagahanons.
Residents claimed a biased public hearing. According to a resident, Barangay Captains formed a
group of 10 members per barangay to be representatives of the hearing. These members as alleged, are
already briefed by the Barangay Captains so that in the public hearing, no one will oppose.
Respondents claimed that KEPCO SPC will not properly dispose of the waste generated by the
plant/s i.e. coal ash (2.57, Agree).
“Halos tanan reesidente nga ako nahibaw-an wala mouyon sa pagtukod ug mga planta. Pero wala may
ni konsulta namo bisag usa ka representante lang” (Almost all of the residents I know are against the
installation of a new power plant. But because nobody informed and consulted us, we were not given
any avenue to air our opinions and concerns). The residents of Naga therefore, were not properly
represented when the public hearings were conducted.
Implication
Results of the survey further revealed that the Nagahanons are not in favor of putting up a
new coal-fired power plant in the city. This means that they are aware of the harmful effect to residents
particularly to their health. They are also not happy with the operation of the power plant (2.40,
Disagree) as they believe that local governments do not have a strong political will to regulate the solid
wastes of these plants and provide medical evaluations to residents.
It was noted that local government of Naga only focused on the economic benefit without
thinking of its long time repercussions and expensive costs to the community. They did not even bother
to consult the residents curtailing their constitutional right to live safely, free from dangers and hazards.
Ironically, the government who is supposed to safeguard such right is the one who promoted
degradation of Naga residents standard of living. Residents when interviewed alleged that these power
plants do not even comply with environmental requirements. Unfortunately, the government as
observed lacks teeth on strict implementations.
In the scientific world, it is a common fact that the burning of coal produces cadmium, a toxin
classified by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) as a probable human carcinogen, lead, a
deadly heavy metal, and hexavalent chromium or chromium VI. Cadmium, for example, is a soft silvery
metal that sticks to fly ash and is associated with heart, kidney, lung and liver disease. Chromium VI on
the other hand is a major air pollutant whose toxicity is second only to benzene. Chromium VI is among
the strongest known causes of lung cancer and can produce internal hemorrhaging and liver, kidney and
respiratory damage. Exposure to chromium VI comes from coal plant cooling towers.
The health and environmental risks posed by coal fired power plants are just another addition to
the litany of social burdens imposed by coal plants on host communities. Lives change in communities
living with coal plants, often for the worse. Accounts of diminishing family incomes due to declines in
fish catches and farming productivity are common among such communities. Instead of the oft
promised abundance of jobs and new sources of income that coal plant proponents regularly pledge in
order to gain social acceptance, what the communities get are diminishing sources of livelihood and
increasing hardships. Along with the clear drop in the self-sufficiency capacities of formerly self-reliant
agricultural and fishing communities, jobs associated with the tourism industry have also drastically
dwindled among host communities. Few families would desire, after all, to travel hours and bathe in
formerly pristine areas where massive smokestacks loom and where ash mixes intermittently with
previously unsoiled elements like rainwater, beaches, greenery and the cool sea breeze (Greenpeace,
2001).
Table 4
Level of Perception of Nagahanons on Having New Coal Fired Power Plants in Naga
ITEM (Negative Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

The people of Naga
1. Were not consulted with the plan to put up new coal-fired 2.18 Agree
power plants.
2. Believe KEPCO SPC will not properly dispose of the waste 2.57 Agree
generated by the plant/s i.e. coal ash.
3. Do not approve of the construction of additional coal-fired 2.76 Moderately Agree
power plants.
4. Will result in more coal ash dumping around the city. 2.50 Agree
GRAND MEAN 2.50 AGREE
ITEM (Positive Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

The people of Naga
6. Are happy with the operation of new coal-fired plants in Naga. 2.40 Disagree
7. Are in favor of putting up new coal-fired power plants in the 2.44 Disagree
city.
8. Have been informed of the consequences of the operation of 2.72 Moderately Agree
a coal fired power plant.
9. Were consulted by KEPCO SPC on the plan to put up new coal- 2.31 Disagree
fired power plants.
10. Were consulted by city government to put up a new coal fired 1.78 Strongly Disagree
power plant.
11. Believe that KEPCO-SPC will properly dispose of the wastes 2.73 Moderately Agree
(coal ash, etc.) produced by the new coal fired power plants.
GRAND MEAN 2.40 DISAGREE
Legend:
4.20 - 5.00 Strongly Agree
3.40 - 4.19 Agree
2.60 - 3.39 Moderately Agree
1.80 - 2.59 Disagree
1.00 - 1.79 Strongly Disagree
Relationship between the Profile of Respondents and their Perception on a New Coal Fired Power
Plant in Naga
Findings revealed that there was no relationship between the profile and perception of the
respondents on the effect of Coal Fired power plant in Naga. This means that the variables gender
(x2=5.59), educational attainment (x2=30.63), and income (x2=18.29) does not affect nor influence their
perceptions. On the other hand, age (x2=15.60) and religion (x2=52.42) has a degree of influence on the
respondent. It was noted that an older resident who had lived longer in Naga is more sensitive to the
negative effects of coal plants than the younger residents.
Religion in Philippine society has always played a critical role in shaping public opinion. This
strong religious influence affected the respondent’s negative perception on the establishment of
another power plant.
Table 5-A
Relationship Between the Profile of Respondents and their Perception on the Effect of New Coal Fired
Power Plant in Naga
Variables Correlated Computed Critical Decision on Ho Interpretation

2 2
x value x value
Age and Perception 15.60 15.51 Reject Ho Significant Relationship
Gender and Perception 5.59 9.49 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
Education and Perception 30.63 31.41 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
Income and Perception 18.29 21.03 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
Religion and Perception 52.42 26.30 Reject Ho Significant Relationship
As to the perception on having a new coal fired power plant, findings showed that the
respondent’s age (x2=12.48), income (x2=9.68) and religion (x2=14.11) does not affect their views. This
means that regardless whether they are young or old, have diverse income and religious affiliations,
these variables does not influence their negative views on establishing a new power plant.
On the other hand, gender (x2=11.52) and education (x2=36.33) affects their perceptions. This
means that their sensitivity to local government consensus (public hearing) and the mother’s worries on
coal ash health hazards was influenced by the respondent’s age and gender.
Table 5-B
Relationship Between the Profile of Respondents and their Perception on Having a New Coal Fired
Power Plant in Naga
Variables Correlated Computed Critical Decision on Ho Interpretation

x2 value x2 value
Age and Perception 12.48 15.51 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
Gender and Perception 11.52 9.49 Reject Ho Significant Relationship
Education and Perception 36.33 31.41 Reject Ho Significant Relationship
Income and Perception 9.68 21.03 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
Religion and Perception 14.11 26.30 Accept Ho No Significant Relationship
CONCLUSION
Anchored of the findings of the survey, it has been concluded that the Naga residents are not in favor of
the installation of another coal fired power plant with the belief that it provides more harmful effects to
health and the environment more than its economic benefits. With huge virtually untapped new
renewable resources, there is clearly no need to build - or expand new coal-fired power capacity in Naga
City.
References
Altheide, D.L. and Johnson J.M. (1998). Criteria for assessing interpretive validity in qualitative research. (In N.
Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, Eds.). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials. London: SAGE.
Atkinson, Rita L. et.al., Introduction to Psychology. Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich Publishers. California. 1983.
Carlson, John G. and Elaine Hatfield. The Psychology of Emotion.
Holt. Rinehart and Winston, Inc. United States.1992.
Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) (2003). Turning points in qualitative research: Tying knots in a handkerchief.
CA: AltaMira Press.
Lincoln, Y.S. and Guba, E.G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences. (In N.K.
Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, Eds.). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. CA: SAGE.
Punch, Keith F. (1998). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: SAGE
Publications.
Internet Sources
Bringing Calamities to Communities:Coal-fired power plants and Mirant A Greenpeace Southeast Asia report
October 20, 2005
Coal-Fired Power Plants and the Menace of Mercury Emissions A Greenpeace Southeast Asia Report August 2001
External Costs, Research Results on Socio-Environmental Damages Due to Electricity and Transport, European
Commission.
See: http://www.externe.info/externpr.pdf
"Is the UN wrong about climate change leaving billions to starve?" New Scientist, Nicola Jones, November 17, 2001.
Reports from AP, AFP and Reuters based on figures released by the Thai Agriculture ministry, March 15, 2005.
Greenpeace first exposed the risks faced by the country and local communities due to toxic releases from coal-
fired power plants in May 2001
Greenpeace released another report demonstrating the unabated emission of hazardous substances coming from
other coal-fired power plants operating in Sual, Pangasinan (1200-MWl; Mirant), Mauban, Quezon (40-MW; QPL)
and Masinloc, Zambales (600-MW; Napocor).2002.
APPENDIX A
10 LEADING CAUSES OF MORBIDITY IN NAGA CITY FOR THE PAST 5 YEARS
City Health Unit II of Naga City consists of 13 barangays:

1. East Poblacion 2. North Poblacion 3. Tanke 4. Tuyan
5. Inayagan 6. Cantao-an 7. Cogon 8. Colon
9. Naalad 10. Mainit 11. Pangdan 12. Jaguimit
13. Patag
Below are 10 leading causes of morbidity for the past 5 years:
2009 2008 ` 2007

1. Cough and colds 1. Upper Respiratory Tract Infection (URTI) 1. URTI
2. Skin Diseases 2. Hypertension 2. Hypertension
3. Diarrhea 3. Diarrhea 3. Diarrhea
4. Eye problem 4. Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) 4.Dengue
5. Pneumonia 5. Skin Diseases 5. Eye Disorder
6. Kidney Infection 6. TB Respiratory 6. UTI
7. URTI 7. Eye Disorder 7. TB Respiratory
8. Ear Problem 8. Ear infection 8. Skin Diseases
9. Chicken Pox 9. Pneumonia 9. Disease of the Heart
10. (********) 10. Dengue 10. TB other forms
2006 2005
1. URTI 6. Gas Pain 1. URTI 6. TB Respiratory
2. Diarrhea 7. Hypertension 2. Diarrhea 7. Kidney
Infection
3. Pneumonia 8. Ear Disease 3. Pneumonia 8. Ear Infection
4. Cough and Colds 9. Skin Diseases 4. Hypertension 9. Disease of the
Heart
5. TB Respiratory 10. Asthma 5. Skin Diseases 10. Dengue Fever
NOTE: The City Health Unit II has not submitted list of 10 leading causes of mortality but perhaps we could finalize
the interpretation of our research without it by just basing from our available researched data conducted during
the survey.
City Health Unit I of Naga City consists of 15 barangays:

1. South Poblacion 2. Central Poblacion 3. West Poblacion 4. Tinaan
5. Inoburan 6. Cabungahan 7. Langtad 8. Bairan
9. Lutac 10. Balirong 11. Alpaco 12. Lanas
13. ULing 14. Taghaguimit 15. Mayana
Below are 10 leading causes of morbidity for the past 5 years:
2009 2008 2007

1. URTI 1. Diarrheas (All forms) 1. Diarrheas (All forms)
2.UTI Cystitis 2. Chicken Pox 2. Pneumonia
3. Diarrheas (All forms) 3. Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 3. TB Respiratory
4. Acute Tonsilitis 4. Viral Hepatitis 4. Hypertension
5. Arthritis 5. Dengue Fever 5. Chicken Pox
6. Allergy 6. (*****) 6. Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis
7. Impetigo 7. (*****) 7. (*****)
8. Otitis Media 8. (*****) 8. (*****)
9. Dyspepsia 9. (*****) 9. (*****)
10. Lymphodinitis 10.(*****) 10.(*****)
2006 2005
1. Diarrheas (All forms) 1. Diarrheas (All forms)
2. Pneumonias 2. Pneumonias
3. Chicken Pox 3. Chicken Pox
4. Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 4. Diseases of the Heart
5. Hypertension 5. Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis
6. Viral Hepatitis 6. Measles
7. Influenza 7. Dengue Fever
8. (*****) 8. Viral Hepatitis
9.(*****) 9. (*****)
10. (*****) 10. (*****)
NOTE: The data submitted is incomplete. There are years that did not actually reach 10 leading causes of morbidity.
I have not read it completely when this data was handed to me. I just observed it right now while encoding. Please
give an advice if it is necessary to have it complete so I would go back to Naga City.
The target date for the evaluation and the interpretation with the group of experts is moved from the 24th
th
to 29 of this month. However I will communicate with you once the schedule is ironed out.
INDEX V - FDC CEBU STUDY
2005 - 2009
Morbidity and Mortality Data

Naga City Health Unit 1 and 2

Naga City Health Unit 1 – Morbidity and Mortality Data 2005-2009
Disease Number of Cases Disease Number of Cases

Morbidity 2009 Mortality 2009
URTI 2490 Gen. Arteriosclerosis 36
UTI Cystitis 179 Hypertension 32
Diarrheas (All forms) 120 Pneumonia 18
Acute Tonsillitis 101 Cancer (All origin) 15
Arthritis 97 Acute Myocardial 15
Allergy 93 Diabetes 11
Impetigo 76 Renal Failure 10
Otitis Media 75 COPD 5
Dyspepsia 59 CHF 5
LLymphadenitis 53 Sepsis 5
Morbidity 2008 Mortality 2008
Diarrheas (All forms) 239 CVA 30
Chicken Pox 36 Cancer (All origin) 29
Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 29 Gen. Arteriosclerosis 28
Viral Hepatitis 3 Acute Myocardial 12
Dengue Fever 2 Pneumonia 11
Morbidity 2007 Accidents 8
Diarrheas (All forms) 461 Congestive Heart Failure 7
Pneumonias 338 Renal Failure 7
TB Respiratory 77 Liver Cirrhosis 6
Hypertension 27 Diabetes Mellitus 5
Chicken Pox 18 Mortality 2007
Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 9 CVA 18
Morbidity 2006 Cancer (All origin) 17
Diarrheas (All forms) 272 Gen. Arteriosclerosis 15
Pneumonias 54 Bronchopneumonia 9
Chicken Pox 38 Diabetes Mellitus 9
Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 30 Acute Myocardial 7
Hypertension 19 COPD 6
Viral Hepatitis 11 Renal Failure 4
Influenza 1 Accidents 4
Morbidity 2005 Liver Cirrhosis 3
Diarrheas (All forms) 269 Mortality 2006
Pneumonias 149 CVA 19
Chicken Pox 34 Gen. Arteriosclerosis 17
Diseases of the Heart 27 Acute Bronchi 6
Bronchitis/Bronchiolitis 23 Liver Cirrhosis 6
Measles 13 Cancer (All origin) 5
Dengue Fever 12 Congestive Heart Failure 3
Viral Hepatitis 9 Fetal Anoxia 2
List of Barangays (Unit 1) Severe Malnutrition 2
Congenital Anomaly 2
Barangay Population Acute Myocardial 1
South Poblacion 4358 Mortality 2005
Central Poblacion 1228 Gen. Arteriosclerosis 18
West Poblacion 2815 CVA 18
Tinaan 7114 Cancer (All origin) 9
Inoburan 5132 Acute Myocardial 9
Cabungahan 1294 Liver Cirrhosis 6
Langtad 6603 Bronchopneumonia 3
Bairan 2200 Acute Renal Failure 3
Lutac 4095 Congenital Heart 3
Balirong 3795 Fetal Anoxia 3
Alpaco 3103 Pneumonia 3
Lanas 2776
Uling 4834
Taghaguimit 2930
Mayana 1076
TOTAL 53353
Naga City Health Unit 2 – Morbidity and Mortality Data 2005-2009
Disease Number of Cases

Morbidity 2009
Coughs and Colds 2892
Skin Diseases 723
Diarrhea 286
Eye Problem 152
Pneumonia 77
Kidney Infection 76
URTI 70
Ear Problem 33
Chicken Pox 1
Morbidity 2008
Upper Respiratory Tract Infection 1171
Hypertension 200
Diarrhea 104
Urinary Tract Infection 77
Skin Diseases 65
TB Respiratory 64
Eye Disorder 54
Ear Infection 50
Pneumonia 14
Dengue Fever 2
Morbidity 2007
Hypertension 189
Diarrhea 181
Dengue Fever 116
Eye Disorder 96
Urinary Tract Infection 70
TB Respiratory 62
Skin Diseases 55
Disease of the Heart 14
TB other forms 5
Morbidity 2006
Diarrhea 158
Pneumonia 74
Cough/Colds 63
TB Respiratory 47
Gas Pain 31
Hypertension 25
Ear Disease 21
Skin Disease 18
Flu 18
Asthma 14
Morbidity 2005
Diarrhea 349
Pneumonia 240
Hypertension 153
Skin Diseases 121
TB Respiratory 51
Kidney Infection 23
Ear Infection 16
Disease of the Heart 14
Dengue Fever 11
Mortality 2009
Cardiovascular Disease 29
Senility 25
Multiple Organ Failure 13
Acute Respiratory Failure 10
Hypertension 9
Myocardial Infarction 8
Congestive Heart Failure 7
Pulmonary Tuberculosis 7
Acute Renal Failure 6
Cardiovascular Accident 6
Breast Cancer 4
Generalized Arteriosclerosis 4
Pneumonia 4
Bronchopneumonia 3
Liver Cirrhosis 3
Mortality 2008
Cardio Pulmonary Arrest due to 28
Cerebro Vascular Disease 24
Pneumonia 11
Renal Failure 6
Myocardial Infraction 6
Peptic Ulcer 6
Cerebro Vascular Accident 5
Multiple Organ Failure 4
Diabetes Mellitus 4
Hypertension 4
Cardio Pulmonary Arrest 3
Liver Cirrhosis 3
Acute Hemorrhage Pancreatitis 3
Hypertension 3
Brain Tumor 2
Uterine Malignancy 2
Drowning 2
Cancer of the Blood 2
Referable to Rabies 1
Asphyxia by Hanging 1
Electrocution 1
Prostatic Malignancy 1
Ovarian Malignancy 1
Breast CA 1
Oral Cavity Malignancy 1
Cerebral Congenital Malignancy 1
Mortality 2007
Hypertensive Vascular Disease 29
Cerebo Vascular Accident 8
Accident/Medico Legal 5
Lung Cancer 4
Liver Cancer 3
Diabetes Mellitus 3
Pneumonia 3
Congenital Anomalies 2
Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever 2
Lupus Erythematous 1
Breast Cancer 1
Myosarcoma Right Thigh 1
Bronchopneumonia 1
Severe Dehydration due to 1
Thyroid Cancer 1
Squalors Cell Cancer 1
Intestinal Cancer 1
Pulmonary Emphysema 1
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary 1
Mortality 2006
Cardio Respiratory Arrest 26
Hypertensive Vascular Disease 11
Liver Cirrhosis 6
Cardiac Arrest 5
Diabetes Mellitus 4
Bronchopneumonia 4
Septicemia 4
Accident/Medico Legal 2
Pneumonia 1
Status Asthmatics 1
Uterine Cancer 1
Lupus Erythematous 1
Breast Cancer 1
Severe Dehydration 1
Hypovolemic Shock 1
Mortality 2005
Hypertension 9
Pneumonia 7
Cerebro Vascular Accident 6
Bleeding Peptic Ulcer 4
Diabetes Mellitus 3
Liver Cancer 3
Drowning 2
Medico Legal 2
Severe Dehydration 2
Bronchogenic Cancer 2
Uterine Cancer 2
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary 2
Cardio Respiratory Arrest 2
Breast Cancer 1
Pharyngeal Cancer 1
Colon Cancer 1
Acute Pancreatitis 1
Bronchial Asthma 1
Symic Lupus Erythematous 1
Septicemia secondary to tongue 1
Barangay Unit 2
East Poblacion
North Poblacion
Tangke
Tuyan
Inayagan
Cantao-an
Cogon
Colon
Naalad
Mainit
Pangdan
Jaguimit
INDEX VI - FDC CEBU STUDY
03 August 2010
Validation with LGU

A validation with Naga Association of Barangay Captains on the Effects of Coal-fired Power
Plant and KSPC compliance on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process

Validation Consultation with Naga Barangay Chairpersons
Re KSPC Coal-Fired Power Plant and Compliance with EIA Process
Session Hall, Sangguniang Panglunsod, City of Naga, Cebu
August 3, 2010 9:30 AM – 12:00 NN
PROGRAM
Registration
Invocation
National Anthem
Welcome Remarks Hon. Paul Emerson Abangan

VEEP ABC Federation, City of Naga
Rationale Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

Secretary-General, FDC-Cebu
Orientation and Review on the EIA Process Neil Thompson-Turner

Program Support Staff on Climate Change, FDC
Cebu
Validation Moderator: Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.
Understanding Coal Mark Aethen Agana

Program Support Staff on Climate Change, FDC
Cebu
Break
Presentation of FGD and Survey Results

on the Perception of Naganhons on
KSPC’s Coal-fired Power Plant Neil Thompson-Turner
Presentation of the Result of Panel of

Experts Round Table Discussion on
KSPC’s EIA Compliance Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

ABC Consultation and Validation
ABC Session Hall, City Hall of Naga
10:30 – 12:15, August 03, 2010
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process

Facilitated by: Aaron Pedrosa
 All leaders were called for public consultations. No participation of the entire
community/residents.
 There was a consultation conducted but limited
 On water disposal: the stream of water disposed from the plant is diverted to Brgy.
Tuyan; They were able to identify that the water came from the plant because of the
color of water (murky and foul-smelling)
 *switchyard
 The session’s purpose is to report the evaluation to ADB if the project complied with the
EIA process
 What transpired during public consultation?
- Barangay chairmen suggested to review the minutes of the previous ABC
consultation for details
- Newly elected barangay officials (even local residents were not invited)
- There was only public consultation of selected public leaders, DENR, KEPCO, Church
people
- Naga , DENR, KEPCO has “gaps” in the information dissemination
- People refuses and were not interested to attend the public consultation
Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

 Health
- They have not heard of any reported and recorded cases of health problems
(specifically coal plant-related health problem); health cases are isolated according
to the barangay chairperson
- illnesses, may nagconduct ng medical mission but not all can avail of the medicines
- KEPCO and SALCON medical missions and benefits were only for to limited number
of residents (<> 50 persons) – very limited medicines
- “walang naririnig na ganyan” re: cancer patient and death cases
- Document and record health cases
 Marine life and Environmental risks
- “daghan pa gihapon pasayan (prawns)”
- Observation of fishermen: fewer catch –explanation of one Brgy. Capt., “diba halos
lahat ng dagat ay ganun na ngayon, commercial area na ang coastal area”
- KEPCO has not yet operated, so wala pang effect
- One Brgy. Captain is apprehensive that KEPCO will operate in the same way as
SALCON but may be the volume of waste will be much lesser.
- Observation: “When SALCON was still maintained by NPC, I was swimming and got
drenched in oil which was scattered in the seawater; old way of disposal-
indiscriminate. Point-proper waste disposal dapat sundin.”
- A former consultant experienced and witnessed the environmental effect of the
plant. He shared how proper management and disposal of waste should be
implemented for environmental measures. He confirmed that the plant was
releasing grease and oil in the seawater.
- Excess oil and grease in the sea water purportedly from the refuse of the existing
coal-fired power plants in Colon made swimming in the area a real threat to the
health of the people.
- Reaffirmed by another Brgy. Chairman, that coastal barangays which used to benefit
from marine resources no longer sourced food from the adjacent sea as marine life.
- Comparing before the plant was established the fishermen are harvesting less now.
Thus, livelihood is affected.
 Education
- Information through streamers, maraming ininvite – Church even against, in fact,
CFPP was invited.
- Respondent from interview with residents testify real health problems
- Information campaign was limited and message was not conveyed properly
- More residents, church people, and concern individuals are against the coal-fired
power plant
- Awareness campaign is not effective because people are not interested to attend
the session and not helping with the effort to inform community members about the
plant.
- Who should be consulted? Define the “invited public”.
o KEPCO is always in the news may it be on print, tv, and radio. Also public
consultation is open to everyone.
o KEPCO project was a headliner those days, you cannot expect the whole of
90k to attend.
o People are informed but they don’t have knowledge about the project.
o Even before the project is implemented, there was large number of people
against it. One Brgy. Chairman believes that the project has economic
benefits and will give enough electrical power to the community.
o They mentioned Greenpeace campaign against coal-fired power plant.
- As to public not being informed; people should be involved whether or not he or she
is a leader.
- The City officials have exerted efforts to inform the public, but people are not as
participative as we like it.
- What is meant by public consultation? “Lahat ba dapat ng population i-consult? 90 k
ba dapat i-consult?”
 Other concerns
- Compare the situation of the power plant in Iligan to Naga. (better story of coal-fired
power plant)
- Before, their some negatives comments on the project
- “Power is the important source”
- There are lot people who are negative –like green peace – negative thinkers
- ECC should laid the cards- pro and against. They the right people to explain to the
community.
- Presentation of survey questionnaire.
Survey and questionnaire design

- The questioner was examined and scrutinized for validity.

- They thought that the survey conducted is biased because of negative statements
against power plant
- Survey questions should be operational according to the former administrative
KEPCO employee
- Survey was designed to report feedback from respondents in the community; FDC
stands not conclude and make decision
- No power plant that will generate pollution ; we should observe and study their EIA
compliance
- What is your reason in conducting the survey
o Social acceptability
o Existing operation
o Project commissioned by the ADB
o Is the ECC asked the same questions to the residents of what is in the survey..?
o Authority to conduct the survey was questioned.
Round Table Discussion (RTD)
- Some of the panel of experts was employed at SALCON and they enjoyed the
benefits of working with the power plant. But they became against the plant’s
operation after end of their contract with the company.
- As to the group of experts, they question the conclusion as there were
representative from GLAC.
- Engr. Obando worked in SALCON before but now he is against the coal plant as he is
no longer working in the SALCON.
- Before the plants were established, other renewable source of energy were studied
and assessed.
- Suggestion: Involved experts from the company (plant) for discussion and
evaluation.
- Suggestion from the Brgy. Captains that the FDC should ask same question to the
pros of the project.
- The plant were approved considering that they were assured that the plant would
be very strict as regards to the compliance of the environment
- On cooling system: DENR and marines are consulted before with this problem. It has
been addressed by or thru LGU.
- On Coal Ash Disposal: They agree to FDC recommendation.
o As to the dumping of the coal ash, their position is that the KEPCO cannot get
the permit without finding way where to dump the coal ash and that maybe
the (ABC) will make resolutions with regards to their dumping and that will
be up to the executive.
- On Balili Resort Property: This can be resolved thru Supreme Court. Executive
decision because it’s a business resolution.
- Recommendations are for and to verify if the project complied to EIA standards.
- DENR should be responsible with the inspection and verifying the plant compliance.
- LGU supported the project because of the economic benefits.
- The ABC decided to consult panel of experts who are not against the project
- “Let’s think of today, not of the future”
ABC Validation Attendance:
INDEX VII - FDC CEBU STUDY
August – September 2010
Academic Validation Forum Series

A validation-forum series with the academe on the Effects of Coal-fired Power Plant and KSPC
compliance on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process

Coal or Not Cool?
A validation-forum series with the academe on the Effects of Coal-fired Power Plant and KSPC
compliance on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process
Partner Schools:
University of San Carlos – Main Campus, August 12, 2010

University of the Philippines – Cebu, August 23, 2010
Cebu Normal University, September 2, 2010
Objectives:
The overall objectives of the Forum are the following:

1. To solicit impressions, ideas, and insights on KSPC coal-fired plant, specifically:
a. Its effect on Environment and Economy
b. KSPC compliance on Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process
Using as platform the three-pronged research methodology adopted by FDC.
2. To locate the KSPC coal-fired power plant project in the context of prospective
mining application in concerned areas in Cebu (i.e. Carcar, and Sibonga).
3. To develop a network involving the academe that can pursue the discourse on
affordable, economically viable, socially acceptable and environmentally sound
alternative source of power and energy in Cebu vis-à-vis actual power demand
and supply.
Form Session Plan
Activity
Mark Aethen Agana

Why Coal or Not Cool?
Program Support Staff on
(Introduction of FDC / Objectives of the Forum) Climate Change, Freedom
from Debt Coalition –Cebu
Atty. Gloria Estenzo-Ramos

Cebu Environmental Situation IBP NEAT, Global Legal Action
on Climate Change (GLACC)
Fired-up: A Video Presentation (A short video documentary on the

coal-fired power plant in Naga)
Aaron Jose Pedrosa, Jr.
General Secretary, Freedom

FDC study on KSPC coal-fired power plant
(Summary of the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and Round Table
Discussion (RTD) conducted on KSPC compliance on Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) processs and the survey results; Its effect on
the Environment and Economy )
Panel of Reactors
Please see details of forum
(Each reactors will be given 5mins to speak in response on the topic
transcription.
presented)
Open Forum
Neil James Thomson-Turner
Resolutions Program Support Staff on

Climate Change, Freedom
Academic Validation: University of San Carlos – Main Campus
9:00-12:00nn, August 12, 2010
Buttenbruch Audio Visual Room, USC
Participants:
 183 political and environmental science and college of law students.
Panel of Reactors:
Engr. Vic Obando

Former NPC Engineer
Atty. Michael Enriquez

Chemical Engineering Major – USC
President, FDC Cebu
Prof. Al McWalter Lim

Faculty, Biology Department, USC
Transcription to follow.
Academic Validation: University of the Philippines - Cebu
8:00AM, August 23, 2010
Conference Hall, UP-Cebu
Participants:
 220 political and environmental science students and other student-leaders from other
Universities in Cebu.
Panel Reactors:
Prof. Henry Espiritu
1. Cultural ethos factor

2. Policy factor
3. Involvement of the citizens in the
Transformation – need a paradigm shift to attain wholism holistic transformation
Prof. Cherry Ballescas
1. What have we done?

 used the Ang Bayan Ko as a reaction
2. Sustainable development – we love ourselves
3. We turn to indigenous peoples for sustainable.
4. All the other man-made wonders were made for the leaders, dead etc. but our rice
terraces have been made for the future generations.
Prof .Mary Joy Flores
1. Wholistic part and looking at our cultures

2. PA 21 – been revived, there was a memo issued for its implementation at the local
level; as of executive order to incorporate environment in the curriculum
3. Classic example going sustainable; look into the treatment of the water disposal;
people are aware that companies should comply or that government have been
remiss.
Open Forum:
 Establish trend in the mortality and morbidity, not only 5 years, expand pa
 More data on the effects of coal to health i.e. radioactive materials
 We become old although we are chronologically young if we continue with the past.
Academic Validation: Cebu Normal University
8:30AM, 2nd of September, 2010
Convention Hall, CNU
Participants:
 283 political and environmental science students and other student-leaders from other
Universities in Cebu.
Panel Reactors:
Dr.Porponio B. Lapa Jr.

Executive Assistant in Planning
1. He’s for Pro-development and is pro-active

 We should safeguard and protect our environment
 Government agency concerned should be responsible for inspection and
reviewing compliance of industries on environmental policy/ies
 Benchmark and learn from experience and experts
2. He’s for economic development and environmental protection
Prof. Elma Villahermosa

Faculty, Behavioral and Political Science Department
1. “Naga is a hopeless case”, but there so much we can do

 How can we address environmental and economic development?
 We are direct beneficiaries of development; we should be responsible in
contributing to it.
2. Talks about “Victims of so called Victim theory”
 All sectors of the community should work hand in hand in building the
nation. The academe should lead the educating and promoting conscious
awareness.
3. She visited Naga and observed that people are suffering the effects of operation of
the plant – “people are affected but keep them silent because they were bribe. “
4. Academe should take responsibility in educating and building awareness re: coal-
fired power plant.
5. Globalization: “While we are undergoing the phase of industrialization, we should
not forsake to take care our environment”
6. Challenge: We are just again a dot, but that dot means a lot.
 Extend our help! “Our voice might not be heard by everyone but I hope we
still do our own share before it’s too late.
Mr. Francisco Escalante
EMB Representative, DENR VII
1. He represents the Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of

Environment and Natural Resources – Region VII. This agency of DENR issues ECC to
industries like KEPCO and SALCON.
2. He has no questions regarding the methodology and process of the FDC study. He
agreed to most of the things present by FDC.
3. Understand role of different government agency (BFAR, DoE, LGUs, etc). Look and
review structure of the government agencies.
4. He believes that public consultation happened.
5. DENR is monitoring the project thru multi-partite parties. DENR focuses on
Environmental effects – assess mitigating measures (to lower the damaging impact
in acceptable level)
6. Economic viability: depends on proponent’s side (e.g. coal supply)
7. Health: Illness can be attributed to coal but also to smoking and other external
factors.
8. Public consultation: questioned the behavior of the community to attend the
consultation.
9. Re: social acceptability, do we (DENR) agree for the plant to operate if they don’t
have a dumpsite? How do you consider coal? Is it an industrial waste, hazardous or
solid waste?
10. Balance development and environment. We need to make sustainable contribution.
Open Forum:
 KPSC is still following EIC policy. (50,000 pesos is fine for every condition violated on the
EIA policy)
 ECC was issued by Manila office. EIA should be reviewed.
 Public consultation: Social acceptability.
 Aaron presented the EIA reports.
 Discussed another installation and application of cement plant (Benedicto) – Mabuhay
Pilipinas.
 DENR establish a multi-partite team to monitor the plant’s operation.
 ECC can be void? Yes! Without ECC, industries can operate. ECC expires 5-year validity.
INDEX VIII - FDC CEBU STUDY
Photos

Conducting survey at Sitio Happy Valley, Naga City, April 14-16, 2010
Coal Or Not Cool? Academic Validation Forum at University of San Carlos – Main Campus, August 12,
2010
Press conference on the filing of petition against coal ash dumping in Toledo and Naga, FDC-Cebu joins
Philippine Earth Justice Center by presenting their study to media, August 12, 2010.
Coal Or Not Cool? Academic Validation Forum at University of the Philippines - Cebu, August 23, 2010
Coal Or Not Cool? Academic Validation Forum at Cebu Normal University, September 02, 2010
KSPC new coal-fired power plant under construction
Coal ash dumping in Poblacion, Naga City.

Fact Sheet - NGO Forum On ADB

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fact Sheet - NGO Forum On ADB

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INDEX I - FDC CEBU STUDY

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

(KEPCO- Salcon’s 200MW coal-fired power plant, Naga, Cebu)

By May 2009, “55% of the construction milestones were completed.”

Health risks monitoring

Controversial Balili coal ash dumpsite and MOA

“If harmful, no permit”

Opposition to the Project

Focus Group Discussion (FGD) Narrative

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

(i) Project screening;

(i) environmental considerations are integrated in the project planning;

Health, environmental risks

Focus Group Discussion Attendance:

Round Table Discussion (RTD) Narrative

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

Round Table Discussion with Panel of Experts

Name Field of work

2009 ADB SEIA-a modest summary

Round Table Discussion (RTD) Results

3. Coal Ash Disposal

14-16 April 2010

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

Hypotheical Mean Range Rating Description

Revealed in table 3 is the level of perceptions of Nagahanons as to the effect of an

ITEM (Negative Statemtns) MEAN INTERPRETATION

ITEM (Positive Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

ITEM (Negative Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

ITEM (Positive Statements) MEAN INTERPRETATION

Variables Correlated Computed Critical Decision on Ho Interpretation

Variables Correlated Computed Critical Decision on Ho Interpretation

City Health Unit II of Naga City consists of 13 barangays:

Below are 10 leading causes of morbidity for the past 5 years:

2009 2008 ` 2007

City Health Unit I of Naga City consists of 15 barangays:

2009 2008 2007

Morbidity and Mortality Data

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

Disease Number of Cases Disease Number of Cases

Naga City Health Unit 2 – Morbidity and Mortality Data 2005-2009

Disease Number of Cases

Validation with LGU

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

Welcome Remarks Hon. Paul Emerson Abangan

Rationale Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

Orientation and Review on the EIA Process Neil Thompson-Turner

Validation Moderator: Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

Understanding Coal Mark Aethen Agana

Presentation of FGD and Survey Results

Validation Moderator: Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

Presentation of the Result of Panel of

Validation Moderator: Jose Aaron Pedrosa, Jr.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Process

Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

Survey and questionnaire design

- The questioner was examined and scrutinized for validity.

August – September 2010

Academic Validation Forum Series

Freedom from Debt Coalition – Cebu

University of San Carlos – Main Campus, August 12, 2010

The overall objectives of the Forum are the following:

Using as platform the three-pronged research methodology adopted by FDC.