Peter Wallace on Renewable Energy for the Philippines

Back to school The kids have gone back to school. According to the Department of Education, more than 22 million students trooped to public schools: 1.93 million for kindergarten; 14.25 million for elementary; 5.85 million for high school; and 205,000 for the alternative learning system.

The DepEd estimates that the country lacks 152,569 classrooms based on 1:45 classroom-to-student   ratio. We estimate a backlog of around 220,000 classrooms if we follow the ideal 1:25 classroom-student ratio. Add to that the shortage of 135,847 comfort rooms. So what is DepEd going to do? It’s going to build 12,000 classrooms this year. That’s just 7.9 percent of the current demand for classrooms. Worse,  construction has been stalled due to slow disbursement of infrastructure funds.  DepEd should’ve taken advantage of the good construction weather in the 1st half of the year—it didn’t. On top of that, the country needs 101,612 teachers, they’ll hire 15,000. Reviewing the 2011 budget, it’s good to see that some P1.8 billion has been allocated for the purchase of 32.3 million textbooks, but  there’s a delay in printing. Some won’t be delivered to schools until October—midway through the school year. But credit goes to the government for setting  aside P8.6 billion, an increase of 22.9 percent from P7 billion in 2010, for scholarship grants, training programs, and student loan programs under the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority, Commission on Higher Education, and Department of Science and Technology. What I particularly like (being a man of science myself) is the increased  allocation for the production of science and mathematics equipment, from P500 million in 2010 to P727.5 million this year. The P227.5 million increase will finance science and math infrastructure in schools. This will enable universities to produce more scientists, technologists, and teachers and make the Philippines more globally competitive in industry and manufacturing. A much needed initiative, but still short of desired levels. Results of the 2010-2011 Global Competitiveness Report of the World Economic Forum showed, as so sadly often, the Philippines ranking poorly.  Out of 138 nations surveyed, the Philippines ranked 99th in terms of primary education; 69th in educational system; 76th on Internet access and 112th in science and math. To put that in sharper context, in all indicators the country ranked behind ASEAN neighbors Singapore, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam. Worse, in 1999, the Philippines ranked 36th out of 38 nations in both math  and science proficiency as assessed by the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Four years later the country’s ranking remained dismal as it ranked 41st for Math and 42nd for Science out of 45 countries.  In 2008 Filipino science high school students ranked last in an Advanced Mathematics exam conducted by TIMMS. The Filipinos scored 355 points, way below the international average of 500. Out of 100 primary school entrants, only 14 finish college. Let me repeat what I’ve said so many times before—with little effect it seems (maybe I’m wasting my time). The government should release pork barrel funds to senators and congressmen only for projects related to education. For reasons still unclear to me, President Aquino increased the pork barrel of lawmakers this year but none was specifically allotted for health and education projects. There’s also an urgent need to hire more teachers and pay them well—and properly train them. Also, implementing a merit-based pay scheme should be considered. As I’ve mentioned in previous columns, the Catholic Church should allow its churches to be used as classrooms during weekdays. It would be the most Christian thing to do. I am saddened by the Church’s seeming indifference to educating the children they insist on being born in unlimited numbers. They even charge (high) fees to attend the schools they do run. This is not the Christianity I learned in school. Also needed is  to strengthen the counterpart-funding program with local government units. This means that 50 percent of the cost of building classrooms will come from participating local governments, the balance will come from DepEd. Let’s hope that this results in the construction of more classrooms. Finally, it’s essential that the implementation of the conditional cash transfer Program is strictly monitored to ensure proper implementation of the program. The CCT has an education component—a mother of a  household-beneficiary  must make sure that her children meet the required school attendance rate of at least 85 percent. None of the above is hard to do, all of the above makes great sense. So when will it be done? Will it be done? Sadly I expect,  I know the answer. *** Shifting to renewable energy is a very good idea. Oil and coal are a limited, and pollutive resource. Gas too, to a lesser extent. So the shift makes sense on a worldwide basis. For the Philippines, however, it does not. At least for some of it. Hydroelectric, geothermal and biomass, where the Philippines is already fairly well established, makes great sense. For solar, wind, waves etc, it makes no sense. These are early technologies still yet to be fully developed to be efficient and cheap. The Philippines is a poor country with minimal effect on the world’s environment (less than 1 percent) so it makes no sense to move to more expensive power when Philippine electricity is already the highest cost in Asia, and its GDP/capita of $2,000, one of the lowest.  As the Foundation for Economic Freedom so well says: “We believe that it is more prudent to wait, given advances in technology, until the cost of solar and wind power drops to parity with conventional sources, instead of subsidizing these rich solar and energy producers at the expense of Philippine industry and the Filipino consumer. It is the obligation of rich, developed countries which are major contributors to carbon emission to subsidize these renewable sources of energy, not of the Filipino consumers” Consumers are already subsidizing the poor who get free electricity if they consume less than 100KWH/month, to ask them to also subsidize solar power at a cost of P17.95/kwh when they can get non-renewable power at P5/kwh is cruel. Senator Osmeña is quite right when solar power falls to half the cost it is today, which it will, then is the time for the Philippine to consider shifting to it. *** Don’t the Arroyos realize that everyone they object to immediately becomes a preferred choice. Are they so out of touch with reality that they don’t recognize they must be investigated for at least 16 (that I counted) scandals and unanswered incidents during Mrs. Gloria Arroyo’s term? An Ombudsman who will bring these to the forefront so they can prove their innocence, and put to rest all the suspicions, and accusations once and for all is just what’s needed. The reason Mike Arroyo gives is that Ernesto Francisco has shown prejudice and bias against the Arroyos. But that’s exactly what you want from  an Ombudsman: Suspicion and bias in favor of investigating—anybody. And there’s the key word: Investigating. An Ombudsman is not an impartial, uninvolved judge. That’s who the Ombudsman brings his suspicions and accusations to. It is a fair, impartial judge Mike should be insisting on. And should be granted. The Ombudsman should be into witch hunts. http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/insideOpinion.htm?f=2011%2Fjune%2F17%2Fpeterwallace.isx&d=2011%2Fjune%2F17

Fact whispers, fear screams

Published in Manila Standard on 03/25/2011

People don’t understand a lot of things about radiation, so there’s understandable fear. There’s always fear of something you don’t understand—fear of the unknown. It’s a normal human reaction. The solution to it is not to give into that fear. The answer is to understand. I was taught about nuclear power in school, but that was over 50 years ago. Much has changed since and my memory is not what it used to be. So I’ve had to brush up, and do a little research (Google is amazing isn’t it?) Having done so, I’m convinced that the risks are outweighed by the benefits. That belief is supported by what I also do (many seem unable to) and that’s to trust independent technical experts. Note the three words: “independent”, “technical”, “expert”. I will only accept someone who is all three. Independent technical experts have assured us today’s modern designs are safe under almost all conceivable conditions. Not “all”, nothing is totally sure, except death. That is sure to happen somehow, sometime. Ignorance has no place in decision-making.

Let’s look at the safety record in various industries over the past 32 years (since 1979 when the Three Mile Island accident occurred).

More than 25,000 have lost their lives due to maritime accidents, while around 20,000 have died due to aviation-related ones. There have been more than 3,000 deaths recorded due to structural fires and close to 8,000 attributed to train accidents. The World Health Organization, meanwhile, estimates that close to 1.2 million people die of road accidents each year.

Nuclear accidents, on the other hand, have killed 38 people. Here’s a list of them and what happened.

On March 28, 1979 the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant suffered partial breakdown. Around 140,000 people were evacuated after the accident. No deaths or injuries were reported.

Uranium leaked at a nuclear site in Tennessee, United States in August 1979, which resulted in the contamination of more than 1,000 people. There were no deaths.

From January to March 1981, four radioactive leaks were recorded at the Tsuruga facility in Japan. More than 200 people were contaminated. They survived.

On April 26, 1986 an experiment at the Chernobyl nuclear facility in Ukraine went wrong. One of its reactors exploded and this scattered radioactive gases into some parts of Europe. According to reports around 200 people were “seriously contaminated” after the accident. Officials reported 32 deaths. Chernobyl is considered the worst nuclear power facility accident in history. But was caused by an experiment, not through normal operations.

An explosion occurred at a reprocessing plant in Western Siberia in April 1993. The blast resulted in the release of radioactive gas composed of elements such as Uranium-235 and Plutonium-237. There were no casualties.

In November 1995 it was reported that workers trying to remove fuel from 1 of the Chernobyl plant’s reactors got exposed to radioactive gas. No official figure on the number of affected workers was provided.

An explosion occurred at the Tokaimura experimental treatment plant in Tokyo on March 11, 1997. Officials said 37 people were exposed to minimal radiation.

On September 30, 1999 an accident occurred at a uranium reprocessing facility northeast of Tokyo. According to reports some 600 people were exposed to radiation after the incident; 2 workers died.

Non-radioactive steam leaked at a nuclear power plant in Mihama, Japan on August 9, 2004. Four workers reportedly died.

As to earthquakes, this one was of unique intensity.

Since 1980, there have been around 38 major earthquakes recorded by the United States Geological Survey in the world. Two were with magnitude between 5 and 6, claiming around 3,300 lives. Eighteen earthquakes with magnitude between 6 and 7 recorded by the agency during the period caused some 320,000 deaths; 13 with magnitude ranging from 7 to 8 killed an estimated 270,000 people; 4 recorded earthquakes with strength between 8-9 claimed 20,000 lives while a lone 9.1 earthquake that struck Sumatra in 2004 caused around 230,000 deaths. There is now one more at 9, but just look at deaths, about 10,000 so far with a likely 20,000-25,000 in total expected. One tenth of the number of people killed in Indonesia. It shows how being prepared can save lives (Oh there were other factors too, but this was certainly one of the reasons fatalities were so low).

When you realize that each additional point is 10 times the intensity then going from 7 to 9 results in an earthquake that is 100 times stronger. Nuclear plants are designed to withstand a 7-8 intensity earthquake, not a 9. But, no doubt, now they will be. This is another reason why Bataan needs to be looked at carefully not just by nuclear scientists and structural engineers, but also by geologists. A new plant design needs to be equally carefully considered.

What the Fukushima disaster shows is not that nuclear power is unsafe, but that nuclear plants must be modern and fully protected with two (not just one) standby systems. Reviving Bataan is still a possibility, but it is 20 years old so would need expert assessment and an analysis as to which makes the best—and safest—sense, BNPP or a new one. Whichever is the cheapest shouldn’t even be considered, commercial factors have no role in choosing nuclear plants. One thing you don’t do is award the contract to the lowest bidder, maybe the highest. There can be no compromise on nuclear power. You limit the bidding process to only the very top names in the industry. From them and them only, you can perhaps choose the lowest cost.

Where I do have genuine concern though for a nuclear power plant in the Philippines is whether we can be 100 percent (not 99) assured operating and maintenance codes will be followed to the absolute letter. If a bolt is to be tightened to 50 ft.-lbs. will a torque wrench be used, or a guesstimate of the mechanic? This is where I’d have the real fear, the too-casual approach to maintenance in the Philippines. Will the torque wrench even be there? I can’t list the tools I’ve had stolen by people working for me, or the power tools broken by careless handling. A casual approach to operation and maintenance can’t be tolerated; everything must be done absolutely to the letter. That dedication is rare here.

Nuclear power is clean energy, it’s lower cost than other sources, it has almost unlimited raw material, it makes good sense from a factual point of view. I want cheaper, reliable power. Nuclear can give it. Thirty-eight people dead in 30 years—it’s safe.

Time to face facts, not fears.

***

Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez is partially correct when she says “my conscience is clear; I’ve done nothing wrong”. She just added one word at the end that she shouldn’t have.

One columnist, in trying to defend Gutierrez cited the large number of cases she’d handled and successfully resolved. It’s a non-sequitur, the correct analysis is: what action did she take on some (in)famous controversial cases? And there the answer is: NONE. And that’s what it’s all about.

Here’s some of the top ones that were filed in her office, and the result as of now:

Bolante fertilizer scam (amount involved: P728 million, funds earmarked for fertilizer but used instead to allegedly finance Gloria Arroyo’s candidacy in 2004 elections)—no case has been filed against Bolante despite the Senate finding fraud and recommending filing of cases against Bolante and other Agriculture officials.

NBN-ZTE Deal (amount involved: $329M, an overpriced deal entered into by the government that GMA made a special trip to China to sign. It allegedly involved P200M grease money offered to Romulo Neri that he reported to Arroyo)—yet to be acted upon.

Megapacific—Comelec contract (Amount involved: P1.3 billion, poll modernization contract with Megapacific tainted with fraud and legal infirmities)—nothing has happened.

The Ombudsman has also failed to act on the case of slain Navy ensign Philip Pestaño and the euro generals scandal. These are just a few, but it’s enough because you’ll note a common thread through it all that many believe explains the lack of action.

Whatever the final outcome is, the exposes during the Senate inquiry should be most interesting.

The President wants to cleanse this nation of the high level of corruption it achieved under Arroyo (that’s not some biased assessment by a disillusioned analyst, that’s the independent comparative assessment by a well-regarded body with no axe to grind, Transparency International) you don’t do it with an Ombudsman that sits on cases reeking corruption. You investigate them as deeply and rapidly as you can.

Copyright Manila Standard Today 2005-2009