Cebu plants temporarily disallowed from dumping coal ash

Two companies running two coal power plants in Cebu province have been temporarily disallowed from disposing their waste in areas near their facilities.

This developed after the Mandaue City Regional Trial Court issued a temporary environmental protection order (TEPO) against the both facilities, the Manila-based Ecowaste Coalition said in a statement Monday.

The order, which will remain in effect for three days, was made possible after the Supreme Court during the term of now retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno adopted “Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases,” the coalition added in the same statement.

The order — the second such ever issued since the Supreme Court approved such rules —may be extended or terminated, depending on results of the hearing to be held on August 27, Ecowaste Coalition’s Manny Calonzo told GMANews.TV in an interview.

The two power plants are an 89 megawatt (mW) plant operated by the Toledo Power Corp. in Sangi, Toledo, which is run by Toledo Power Corp., and a 59 mW plant in Colon, Naga City, which is operated by the Salcon Power Corp.

Both facilities “indiscriminately” dumped coal ash, which contain toxic chemicals like mercury, cadmium, and arsenic, Cebu-based organizations — including the Philippine Earth Justice Center Inc. — claimed in a case filed in August 6, 2010 in Mandaue City.

Coal ash worsens asthma, causes lung cancer, and stunts lung development in children, among others, the groups said in the same case.

Since it was established in 1993, Toledo Power “has not built nor set up…an impoundment pond or landfill facility which is enough to sufficiently carry and systematically manage all the coal combustion residuals it generates,” the groups claimed in the case.

As a result, coal ash from the Toledo facility — which in 2007 was allowed to expand its generating capacity to three plants that can produce 84 mWs each — “was and is still being dumped indiscriminately and improperly around the Toledo City’s open spaces and its immediate environs.”

In July 2008, Toledo residents later sent a notice to sue the company, a unit of Global Business Power Corp., and the various officials of the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

However, coal ash dumping remained “unabated,” the case said.

The group also leveled the same accusations against Salcon Power Corp., which has been running the first coal-fired power plant in Colon, Naga City.

The 59-mW plant “has not built up nor set up at the very least an impoundment pond or landfill facility sufficient enough to carry and systematically manage all its generated coal combustion residuals,” the groups said.

As a result, “all coal by-products from its plant operations were and still being dumped indiscriminately and improperly around open spaces in Naga City.”

The situation became pronounced after the company entered into a joint venture with Korea Power Co. (KEPCO) Philippines Holdings to construct and run a 200 mW expansion plant across its plant.

The project’s expansion was funded by a $100 million Korean Export-Import Bank which was approved in June 2008 and a separate $120 million loan from the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

Repeated requests for reactions from executives and company representatives of both Toledo Power and Salcon Power have been made by GMANews.TV but none have made any comments as of posting time.

Triumph of environmental justice

The TEPO decision was considered as “a triumph for environmental health and justice,” the coalition said.

“We commend and congratulate the PEJC and other concerned groups and residents who acted as petitioners for invoking the precautionary principle to uphold the constitutional rights of affected communities from improperly disposed coal ash, which constitutes a public health
hazard,” Rei Panaligan, EcoWaste Coalition coordinator, said in a statement.

“Precaution, a universally-accepted principle, tells us to err on the side of caution if only to ensure the health and safety of our peopleand the environment from toxic risks,” he added.

In a citizen’s suit filed last week, PEJC and other petitioners said that “even in the absence of full scientific certainty as to the how much harm coal ash affects the health of petitioners and the ecosystem, the [Mandaue] court is still required under the rules to exercise and adopt a precautionary attitude.”

As stated in the “Supreme Court Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases,” the following factors may, among others, be considered in applying the precautionary principle: 1) threats to human life or health, 2) inequity to present or future generations, or 3) prejudice to the environment without legal consideration of the environmental rights of those affected. – KBK, GMANews.TV