Philippirss F F -.--- MONITc,\L O& The World Bank Group 1818 H Street, N.W. Country Office IManila Washington D.C. 20433 U.S.A 23rd Floor,The Taipan Place Tel.: (202) 477-1234 Emerald Avenue, Ortigas Center Fax: (202) 477-6391 Pasig City, Philippines Tel.: (632) 637-5855 to 64 Fax.:(632) 637-5870 November 2002 I The Philippines Environment Monitor 2000 presented the snapshots of the general environmental trends in the country. The Philippines Environment Monitor 2001 focused on solid waste management. The 2003 edition, currently under preparation, will focus on water quality management. This document was prepared by a World Bank Team composed ofMdrnes./Messrs. Anjali Achaiya, Sally Burningham, Jenna Diallo, Surhid Gautam,Bebet Gozzrn,Palchamuthu Illangovan, TanviNagpal, Kevin Rolfe,Anjir Sachdeva, .Jitendra Shah (Task Team Leader), Josefo Ttryou, Maya G. Villal~rz,ancl Hlra Wang.MI:Milchell Lzrs/reandMs. Agatha Anchela ussisted in data collection and analysis. The docunzent was peer reviewed by Messrs. Carter J. Brandon and Konrad % Ritter of The World Bank.Comments and i~zfbrmalior?provided by The World Bank staSf' including Mdmes./Messrs. Bhuvan Bhatnagar; Robert D. Crooks, Zafer Ecevit, Heidi Hennrich-Hanson, Lloyd Mckay, May Olalia, and Roberl VancePulley aregrate/irlly acknowledged. Ms. L~risciSumbeli Espatiola coordinaled the cover design, luyotrl, and production. ME Jeflrey Lecksell prepared the map. ~Mnmes.Leonora Gonzales and Charito Cabalang are respo~isiblefordissenzinalion. The drawing in the cover was a selected entry to the EMB-DENR Billboard Design Contest 2000. Photographsarefrom Banlay Kalikasan, Melropolitan Manila Development Authority, and The World Bank. The views expressed in the Philippines Environment Monitor 2002 are entirely those of the authors and should not be cited without priorpermission. They do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank Group, its Executive D~rectors,or the countries they represent. The material contained herein has been obtained from sources believed reliable but it is not necessarilycomplete andcannot be guaranteed &Prinled on Recycled Paper Preface ........................................................................................................................................ i Abbreviations and Acronyms .......................................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - WANTED: A BREATH OF FRESH AIR! ...................................... 1 AIR QUALITY PRIOFUTIES AT A GLANCE ............................................................................. 2 AIR QUALITY (TSP) HOT SPOTS ............................................................................................. 3 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 4 SOURCES....................................................................................................................................... 5 Mobile Sources:Transport ........................................................................................................ 5 Stationary Sources: Industry ...................................................................................................... 6 Stationary Sources: Power Plants ...............................................................................................7 Area Sources............................................................................................................................... 7 POLLUTANTS .............................................................................................................................. 8 Particulate...................................................................................................................................8 Oxides of Nitrogen ..................................................................................................................... 12 Sulfur Dioxide............................................................................................................................ 13 Carbon Monoxide/Ozone...........................................................................................................14 .................................... .................................................................................................. , 1. Greenhouse Gases..................................................................................................... ..... 16 *I Ozone DepletingSubstances ....................................................................... Public Health ........................................................................................................... Public Perception .................................................................................................... .- . I r 2 RESPONSES ............................................................................................................... MANAGEMENT .......................................................................................................................... 24 Legislation ............................................................................................................................... 24 Institutions............................................................................................................................... 24 Budget.........................................................................................................................................26 SEVEN CHALLENGES ................................................................................................................27 Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................................................... 31 Relevant Websites ........................................................................................................................... 32 Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ 33 Philippines aat a Glance . PREFACE Air quality is the focus of the Philippines Environment Monitor 2002. Initiated in 2000, the Philippines Environment Monitor series presents a snapshot of key environmental trends in the country. Its purpose is to inform stakeholdersof key environmental changesas theyoccur, in an easy-to-understand format. Using charts, graphs, and texts, the 2000 Monitor benchmarked trends in various environmental indicators associated with water and air quality,and natural resources conservation. The2001 Monitor addressed solid waste management. The Monitor is not a strategy document of either the Philippine Government or The World Bank. Since environmentalchangesoccur over the medium- to long-term, theseries is designed to trackgeneral trends every five years. Growinghuman and vehiclepopulationsand increasingindustrial activities are themaincauses ofworseningair quality in the urban centers of the Philippines. Industrial activities, transport sources, and waste burning, cause pollution that may take the form of particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and global greenhouse gases. These pollutants have many economic costs, including increased health costs. Although data are scarce,onestudy estimates that health costsof exposureto PM,, in four urbancenters are over US$400 million. In the lastfew years, efforts by the Government havehelped to reduce and even eliminate some of the pollutants. The most comprehensive government action has been the passage of the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1999. Among the key policy shifts incorporated in CAA are the use of market-based instruments and the increased role of the private sector. On the programmatic side, the phase-out of lead in gasoline by January 2001 has mostly eliminated the lead problem. Sulfur dioxide emissions in Metro Manila have fallen because of theclosure of a few power plants around the metropolis. Selected private sector enterprises have taken steps to help reduce vehicular emissions by allowing only pollution-free vehicles to enter their premises. Similarly, civil society organizations have been very active in promotingawarenessand catalyzingpublic opinion for improvementsin air quality. Despite these positive steps, air quality in tbe country remains poor. The major impediments to alleviating the problem include poorly enforced laws, weak institutional capacity, andinadequate mvcstrnent. By actingnow,thecountry and its peop!e canenhance theirqualityof lifewhileadvancing thegoalsof economic development. ThePhilippines Environment Monitor 2002 includes: 1) an introduction to air pollution; 2) a description of the pollution sources for eight key pollutants and the resulting trends in ambient air; 3) impacts of these pollutants, particularly particulates, on public health and public perception; 4) responses of the Government, civil society, and the private sector; srnd5) a description of the institutional arrangements, legal framework, and budget. The Monitor concludes by identiQing challenges to implementing an integrated air quality management program includinglowcost measures thatcouldyieldsignificantbenefits. The Philippines Environment Monitor 2002 is the result of a joint exercise involving national agencies, academics, civil society, and researchers. A draft of the Monitor was discussed at a consdbtion workshop in May 2002. Information contained in this Monitor has been obtained from published and unpublished data and reports of government agencies, universities, non-governmental organizations, individuals, The World Bank, anditsinternational partners. I RobertVance Puney Zafer Ecevit CountryDikctm Philippines Sector Director, Environment and Socinl Development East Asia andPaaific Region East Asia and Pacific Region TheWorld Bad The World Bank ADB Asian Development Bank NEDA National Economic and Development CAA Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 Authority CAR Cordillera Autonomous Region NGO Non-governmental organization co Carbon monoxide NO, Oxides of nitrogen co2 Carbon dioxide NO2 Nitrogen dioxide COCAP Concerned Citizens Against Pollution Ozone 0 3 DA Department of Agriculture ODs Ozone depleting substance PAGASA Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and DOE Department of Energy Astronomical Services Administration DENR Department of Environment and Natural PCA Partnership for Clean Air Resources PGH Philippine General Hospital DILG Department of Interior and Local PIA Philippine Information Agency Government PhP/P Philippines Peso DOH Department of Health PM Particulate matter DOTC Department of Transportation and PM,, Particulate matter less than 10 microns in Communications diameter DTI Department of Trade and Industry Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in EDSA Epifanio de 10sSantos Avenue diameter EMB Environmental Management Bureau PNRI Philippine Nuclear Research Institute ENRAP Environmental and Natural Resources PUV Public Utility Vehicles Accounting Project SIDA Swedish International Development - ..- 4 ',l G8 Gigagram (10' gram) Cooperation Agency L . . , - GHG Greenhouse gaC San Migucl Corporatior. G.. +"'L+~~ r: . SMC HC Hydrocarbon Sulfir dioxide Science Park of the Philippines, Inc. l1* LGU Local Government Unit LTO Land Transportation 0 Socid Weather Station rng/m3 Milligrams per cubic meter Total suspended particulates Micrograms per deciliter MMAQISDP Metropolitan Mzniln Air Quality pg/m3 Micrograms per cubic meter Improvement Sector Development Project UNFCCC United Nations Framework MMDA Metropolitan Manila Development Convention on Climate Change Authority UP University of the Philippines MP Montreal Protocol VOC Volatile organic compound MVIS Motor Vehicle Inspection System WHO World Health Organization MW Megawatt NCR National Capital Region Exchange Rate: 1 US$=52.71 Pesos NSCB National Statistical Coordination Board (As ofOct 12,2002) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 L WANTED:ABREATHOFFRESHAIR! A Urban smog, smoke-belching buses, and industrial While there is a general perception that poor air quality smokestacks.Theseareprominent and visible reminders negatively impacts health, there is little reliable data on of the need to manage air quality. However, air pollution the health impacts of air pollution in the Philippines. is not just an aesthetic problem; it can also cause acute Despite extensive policies and laws, air quality manage- and long-term health effects- personally and economi- ment in thePhilippines remainsachallenge. cally very damaging. The health cost of air pollution in four cities(MetroManila, Davao, Cebu,and Baguio) has TheClean AirAct(CAA) of1999 aims to providea com- been estimated to be more than US$400 million per year, prehensive air pollution control policy for the country. equivalent to 0.6 percent of the country's national gross However, implementation difficulties point to the com- domestic product (GDP). These four cities represent plexities associated with solving a problem involving many agencies. Inter-agency collaboration remains a morethanaquarter of thePhilippines' urban population. challenge despite many multi-sectoral working According to a perception survey conducted in 2001, committees and memoranda of agreement. Lack of more than 72 percentof Manila's residents were alarmed provincial and localgovernment capacities forairquality by air pollution and 73 percent said they were not aware management will befurther exposed, as theseentities are that the government was doing something to control it. under-prepared to carry out the functions devolved to This public perception is in sharp contrast to the amount them by CAA. Preliminary estimates for implementing of timespentby governmentalagencies and non-govern- parts of CAA indicate that thecountry willneed tospend mentai organizations (NGOs)indiscussingand debating at least PhP25 billion (US$500 million) between 2000 - air pollution issues in recentyears and reflects a genera! and 2010 but the benefits are likely to far exceed these - "- ----.- faiture to convert analysesand discussionsinto effective costs. . . , action. ..'" -,. =Ma :11m ' ,'7'- . -- -.I. I rLLu- - . ctive non-governmental initiatives have raised public ' Reliable monitoring is the foundation for sound policy awarenessand provided examples of possible actions on and needs to be established as a priority. In the Philip- a smallscale. Their effectiveness is limited; yet, comple- pines, only a patchy network of air quality monitoring ments government efforts. They can, however, apply sbtionsprovides limited information on pollutant levels. pressure on the Government to improve its institutional It is estimated that while particulate matter levels have response. decreasedsince 1995, thesestill exceedstandardsatmost Implementationof CAA emergesasa national priority to locations in Manila and in many othercities. The dwihe combatair pollution. Inso doing, the countrywill need to in pollution can largely be attributed to improved auto- addresssevenkeychallenges: motive technology and standards enacted several years ago,andtheswitch tonatural gasusein powerplenfaand > Reducing particulate matter in Metro Manila industries. Other pollutants such as ozone and nitrogen through improved maintenance for high use oxides are on the rise. Although extensive information commercial vehicles, improved fuel qudity, and regarding indoor air pollution is not yet available, preli- shiftingtofour-stroke motorcycles; minary results indicate thatthisisaproblem. P Requiringcatalyticconvertersingasolinevehicles; > Lmprovingpublictransportandtrafficmanagement; Diesel emissions h r n buses, jeepneys, utility vehicles, and trucks are recognized as causing cancer, and are P Implementation of CAA withadequate institutio- estimated to be tbe largestcontributor to urbanair poilu- nalcapacity,funding,asdpoliticalcommitment; tion. Inspite of many anti-smoke-belching campaigns 9 Strengtheningenforcementwithincentivesand and programs, busesand utility vehiclesemittingvisible penalties; smoke are a common sire in Metro Manila and other 9 Improvingairqualitymanagemmtbyintegrating urbancenters. monitoring and analytical capacity with decision- making;and Movingfrompublicawareness toparticipation. PHILIPPINESAIR QUALITY AT A GLANCE - Sources Vehicle ownership is rising rapidly (from 1.2 million jn 1983 to 3.9 milllon in 2001). Diesel vehicles: Over 65% of the fleet are high mileage vehicles; suspected of contributing - Transport to majority of urban exposure and health impacts. Motorcycles:75% are two-stroke engines whose exhaust contains high levels of unburned fuel and lubrication causing PM emissionsand HC emissions. Total contributionis not available and should be quantified. Contributionto PM,, may Resuspension .I, be small. and construction Controllingthese sources is the most cost-effective way to reduce pollution load and dust. Burning of agriculturalwaste and refuse is widely practiced. It contributessignificantly Wa * to particujatematter and should be quantifiqil, , . Indoorair '7 An emerging problem in Metm Manila. pollution @M ' a Industryand Not a maNr sourcein Metro Manila or across the Philippinesfor urban air pollution but power has localized impacts and needs to be controlled. 1 Responses I I Analysis and Lack of data and systematicanalysesare mjor impediments toward the formulation of I actions effectiveaction plans and their implementation. I, - 7 Inter-agency Air quality management requires all agencies to cooperate, which has not been easy cooperation across sectors and governmentdepartments. Enforcementand institutional Enforcement of legislationand regulationsis weak including thmwndy enacted CAA. capacity Need to smgthentheinstitutionalcapacityto eafOrcethesedu 4m~dntions. .C3(Medium 0Low A i AIR QUALITY (TSP) HOT SPOTS'7 A IBRD 32029 PHILIPPINES AIR POLLUTION EXPOSURE I 1. Concentrat~on HIGH, PopulohonHIGH ConcentreironHIGH, Populahon COW ConcentrahonLOW, Population HIGH Concenkotan LOW, Populat~onLOW REGION CAPmLS NATIONAL CAPIRL -14 p.w- !k 1- -12 S o h China sea EL ' INTRODUCTION ,7 i AirPollution Guidelines An air pollutant is any substance in air that could, in In 1999, the Government approved CAA, which is the sufficient concentration, harm humans, animals, most comprehensive legislation enacted to address air vegetation, or material. Air pollutants may occur in the pollution. It proposes limits for ambient levels of major form of solid particles, liquid droplets, and/or gases. pollutants(Table 1).These limits areset to protect public They are generally grouped into two main classes: i) health and the environment. r primary pollutants,which are those emitted directly from I sources, and ii) secondary pollutants, which are those Table 1. Philippines, US-EPA and WHO ambient air produced in theair by an interaction between twoormore quality guidelines for common pollutants, 1999 primary pollutants, with or without sunlight. There are over 100 identified air pollutants. They fall into the I ~ a ~ ~ ~ nI v(wrn)l I ~ US-EPA PHILIPPINE! POLLUT*NT (pg/rn? following major categories: particulate (various sizes), oxides of sulfur and nitrogen, volatile organic suspended compounds (VOCs), and ozone (0,). Noise and odor are particulates(TSP) alsoconsidered pollutants. less than Air pollution is not limited to the visible smoky auto- 10 microns (PM,,) mobile exhaust or the plume from an industrial chimney. Such emissions invoke public concern because of the annual health hazards and odor nuisance these present. However, several pollutants, such as carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NO,), sulfur dioxide (SO,), and &+''fine particles, are not visiblebutareequallyoreven more 1 damagingforhuman healthand theenvironment. . rn m - - , Sources and Impactsof Air Pollution Sources of air pollution in and around the population centers in the Philippines include emissions from (i) mobilesources-vehicles;(ii)stationarysources-power plants and factories; and (iii) area sources - refuse S m e :CleanAirActof1999sndwHWSDE/OEH/00.02,Genew2000. Notes burning, road dust, open cooking. Burning of agricultu- '* WHO no longer recommendsair qualily guidehe for PM because ralwaste inruralareasahocauses airpothttion. thereisnosafelowerIlmit. -ValuesofUS-EPAareforprimarystandards. -Annualaverage is an averageof daily measurements taken during a Increased levels of ahpollution are threatening the well periodofoneyear. beingofcitydwellers,andimposing notjustadirecteco- -yq/m3 isaunitof measmementandreferstoonemilienthofa gramof apollutantinacubicmeterofair. nomic cost by impacting human health but alsothreate- -Guidelinerefers to the safelevelof a pollutant,for the giveneveraging ning long-term productivity (material and vegetation time,toprotectthepublictromacutehealtheffects. damage, quality of life, reduced t o ~ s mto the country, discourage foreign investment, etc.). In rceent years, MonitoringAir Poliur~on health studies in various counties have elrtablisbed a Ambient monitoring is essential to evaluate compliance direct relatianship between daily concentrations of with standards and the need for action. It provides particuiatc matter and premature deaths and excess primary data to estimate damage to human health, eco- morbidity.Someof these can bequantified, while others systems, and material infrastructure. Human exposure is can only be expressed qualitatively. For example, preli- calculated by multiplying the ambient concentration minary estimates carried out by World Bank staff for the with the populationexposed. This information forms the Philippinesshow health costs in four urban centers to be basis for analyzing the costs and benefits of control overUS$400million peryear. options,publicparticipation, andpolicyresponse. In the Philippines, air pollution is caused by transport, industries, power plants, and area sources such as road Figure 1. Registeredmotor vehiclesin dust, construction, and waste burning. National level the Philippines,1983-2001 source inventories are not available. There are estimates for Metro Manila but they contain significant discrepan- cies. Area sources are either not accounted for or their contribution is underrepresented. MobileSources: Transport Transport is a significant contributor. In 2001, there were 3.9 million registered vehicles in the country - a threefold increase within thepast twodecades (Figure 1). Of these vehicles, 70 percent are gasoline-fueled and 30 percent are diesel-fueled. Nationally, utility vehicles' outnumber cars, with a 2:1 ratio. Beginning in 1994, motorcycles and tricycles have surpassed cars as the - I I second largest group ofvehicles. InMetroManila, utility Source:Land TrimportalionO h (LTO),Central Olfice, QyezonW vehicles marginally outnumber cars (44 percent to 36 percent) and motorcycles/tricycles account for only 14 percent of the 1.3 million vehicles fFigure 2). Judging from the experience of other Asian countries, personal Figure2. Vehiclecomp,,,.ion, nationwide vehicle ownership will rise as individual incomes and in Metro Manila, 2001 increase in tbc Philippines. Despite advances in control J I I technology for newer vehicles, a high growth in vehicle Nationwide(3.9million) ownership, combined with low turnover, contributes significantlytoairpollution. Utility vehicles- 39% , Diesel-powered vehicles emit~~ignificantamount 4 jitzeparticles. The number of diesel-powered vehicles )as grown rapidly in recent years, and these account for lses & nearly a third of all vehicles. Of the 1.2 million diesel- trucks 7% fueled vehicles, over 65 percent are high mileage (utility vehicles, buses, and trucks). Repeated anti-smoke belching campaigns carried out by local governments and the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) over the last decade have reduced the number Metro Manila (1.3 million) I of smoky vehicles in the main roads. In Metro Manila, pollution caused byjeepneys may havedeclined because Cars,, MW 1 of the use of larger and cleaner second-hand engines by the manufacturers; however, introduction of van-type "FX-taxis"mayhavenegatedthisgain. I Sounu,:Land Transportation Oflice,2002. 'Utility vehicles include taxis, jeepneys,and vans. SOURCES L Two-strokeengines dominate the motorcycle market. pollution control devices installed in the remaining one- Two-stroke engines power more than 75 percent of third are not operational because companies believe motorcycles and tricycles.Their exhaust contains a high theseareveryexpensive tooperate. level of fine particles, unburned fuel and lubricants as compared to four-stroke engines. The motorcycle industry is beginning to use fuel-efficient and less Figure 3. Motorized trips in MetroManila,1996 - polluting four-stroke engines in their production. The 5% 2% cost of four-stroke motorcycles is similar to that of two- 13%, 41% strokes. Furthermore, other countries in the region have alreadymoved tofour-stroke engineproduction. Jeepneys remain the popularchoicefordailytransport in Metro Manila. According to a survey taken in 1996, 2 Jeepney 1Cars&u l ivehllcles the 10 million residents of Metro Manila took over 23 Tncyle 1Bus Taxi D Lightrailtransit million trips daily, withjeepneys accounting for over 40 percent of thesetrips. Of these trips, 80 percent were by I Source: MetroManila Tmnspodationand Tmfi SitualionSU@ 1996. 1 public transport, while 20 percent was made by cars and utility vehicles (Figure 3).The survey also indicated that only 20 percent of householdsowned cars, far fewer than many large cities in the region. A third of the trips in Table 2. Compositionof industrialair pollution sources Metro Manila covered a distance of less than two kilo- - - -- meters, which may contribute substantially to both Industry National MM Airshed congestion and pollution. Tricycles, cars, and jeepneys are responsible for 95 percent of such short-distance Cement 8 (42%) trips. 011Refining 3 3(-100%) StationarySources:Industry Others (air polluting) 21800 737 (28%) MostindustrialsourcesarelocatedintheMetroManila Note: Metro Ma& Cgumare brLeairshed,which includegeographical I airshed3The major types of industry contributing to air areasauisideofNCR Soum:EMBIDENR, 2001. pollution are thermal power stations, cement manufac- turing plants, and oil refineries (Table 2). The Table 3. EstimatedernisslansIn the industrial sector, mostlylocated withintheMetro ~ a n i l a airs he^^^ ,\ TI--. Metro Manila, 1997 (in metric tons) ..lo - An initial attempt at constructing a souri%'ffi% indicates that food products, textiles, and iron and ste industriesmostlikely accountfor nearly80 percent ofthe particulate emissions fiom theindustrial sector(Table3). ~ 7 y Of the737establishments, nearly two-thirds do nothave I1 the necessary air pollution control facilities The air a1Wrl! The Metro Manila Transportation and T r a c Siruation Study of 1996 included a household survey that interviewed 235,000 residents from50,000households (about 2.5 percent sample size). Sourn: lbpamentof Energy,E N W 1997. EMB has designated the area between Batangas to the South and Bataan to the North as the Metro Manila Airshed, as required by the CAA. 4DENR, 1W8. StationarySources:PowerPlants Figure 4. Sources of power generation,2000 Two-thirds of the country's electricity is supplied by (total45,290 Gwh) thermal sources. In 2000, the Philippines had a total installed (as opposed to actual production Figure 4) - generation capacity of 13,264 MW, of which 66 percent HYdm 17% is thermal, 19 percent hydro, and 14 percent geothermal. About 2,000 MW of the oil-fired generation capacity, located in the two highly populated regions - the National Capital Region (NCR) and the Southern Tagalog Region (Region IV) - are scheduled for decommissioningby 2005. The Rockwell Power Station 0 Coal Geothermal 37% in Makati and the Manila Power Station in Isla de 26% Provisorhave beenshutdown. Power generation is a major source of sulfur-dioxide. Note: Th~scomposit~on1s d~fferentfrom the installed capacity Based on recent estimates , oil and coal-fired power 5 Source, PhlllppinesEnergy Plan 2002-2011. Deparlment of Eneqy plants emit 223,000 metric tons (MT) of SO,, annually. However, recent plant closings and the proposed shut down of other power plants are expected to reduce these Local and transboundary haze pollution arising from emissions substantially. land and forest &s has been an increasingly significant sue for Southeast Asian countries. Regional haze , Existing pollution control measures in power plants prablems became acute dwiag the 1997 Indonesian target mainly particulate matter. To minimize SO, fmestfires in which about 4.5 million hectares of Indo- emissions, fuel with lower sulfur content is used. Only n W e national forests were scorched. An estimated 20 the latestcd-fired power plants me equippedwithflue million people inhregionwere exposedto high levels gas desulfurization {FGD) systems to control SO, ofpollutants overseveral months. missions. The shift to the use of natural gas will elimi- ndteSO, emissiorrskomhpowergeneration&r, . Natural sources also contribute to the bwkground level Hair pollution and need to be better accounted for. The reaSources eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 199 1 created a vast amount of pollution including particulates thatcovered a Incompleteinventories. Area sources of pollution are wide landarea. widespread, difficult to estimate in inventories, and generallyoverlooked.Importdareasource%include the resuspended roaddust; rcfust,forestand rtacultur~lburning; and opencookingfiresusingfossilfircle. Unpavedroadsand pavements, building activity, and - traffic are the main contributars to resuspended (or p::,Z reentrained) dust. The contribution of refuse burning to local air pollution has not yet been well quantified even a:? - r-7 p ;..,,:*- forcities like Bangkok. _ ---..- m . -.=: . . I ,*-, - !,\ :- I , r.- , D I a ' I ;:' .*.;? 'ENRAP. YVLLUIAN 13 I I Particulate matter (PM) is a complex mixture of dust, Table 4. PM control options and their use in the Philippines dirt, smoke, and liquid droplets, varying in size and composition. which are emitted into the air. These I Mobile I particles are either emitted directly or are formed in the Regularmaintenance - 75percent are 2-stroke atmosphere. Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) are I-- MoGy~s Switch to 4-stroke eminel m01orc~des composed of particles of different sizes. Finer particles TrucksI buses - Regularmaintenance - Exiting inspectionl - Reduced sulfur m fuel maintenancesystem not called PM,, and PM,, (less than 10 or 2.5 microns in dia- PUVs - Trap oxidizer functioning effedively meter, respectively) are receiving increasing attention Stationary because of their more serious health impacts. However, Industry End-of-pipe control the majority of ambient measurements gathered in the Philippines arestillforTSP.Measures tocontrolTSPand power PM and the degree to which they have been used in the and cyclones) Philippines,aresummarized inTable4. I I to cleaner fuels .A-M-- Fineparticulates are generated as a result of combus- - Widespreadbuming of tionprocesses. Particle pollution isgenerated from fossil -Disposalinsanitarylandfills buming - ~or b a g e fuel burning for steam generation; heating and house- roper disposal hcilties hold cooking; agricultural and forest waste burning; -Regulatingmovement of - Truckmovement diesel-fueled engine combustion; and various industrial trucks canyingdehb unregulated Reentraimment processes. Coarse or larger particles usually contain --Better mds mnsbuctim practices - Ineffectivemnbdsat Paved rn~ onstructionsites geological materials and fugitive dust from roads and :i industries. Agi;ltural jmpostingof waste burning i, Metro Manila residents are exposed to ~ v e f 100,000 , I-. tons of PM,, annually. The most comprehensive I I b-; := emissions inventory for Metro Manila was done in 1990. '-;Thisinventory isnowoutdated. A partial updatedonefor i.theMetroManila airshedin2001reported thatstationary Figure 5. Source contributions to total PM,,emissions and mobile sources contribute 37,000 and 39,000 metric in Metro Manila, 2001 (tons per year) tons per year to PM,,, respectively. Area sources (burning of agriculture and solid waste, construction, and road dust) contributed 51,000 tons per year based on the 1990 inventory.Based on these twostudies, the 2001 emissions inventory for Metro Manila(Figure5) isabout 127,000 tons annually. Accordingly, areasources domi- natetheoveraliemissions. However, the extent of health impact is determined by I I the amount of exposure, which is dominated by the Transport I transport sector in urban centers. Thus,air qualityaction 31% plansforwbanareasfocus onthetransportsector. '1 M Toldemissionsofl27,GOO1 4 dati ouo extrapolated from 1890data. d S m e : ADB MMAQISDF! 2Wfl. POLLUTANTS PM,, levels in Metro Manila continue to exceed guide- lines, but on a declining number of days. The Environ- Figure 6. TSP exceedancesfor selected air quality monitoring stations in MetroManila, 1995-2001 mental Management Bureau (EMB) of the NCR main- tains 12stations, 11 manual and one automatic. Sporadic monitoring of TSPfrom 1995 to 2001 shows that in 1997 and 1998, the 24-hour average air quality guideline (230 pg/m3)was exceeded at some sites on as many as 90 percent of the days monitored. Recently, this frequency hasdropped toabout50percent(Figure6). A recent study supported by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) analyzed the annual geometric mean concentrations of TSP at all available sites in Metro Manila since 1987.6The average results for each year confirm the downward trend in concentrations since 1995. However, all the values are still above the annual 8 EastAve (traffic) EEDSA(traffic) guidelineof 90 &m' (Figure 7). PM,, and PM,., monitoring is recent. The Manila Source: DENR-EMB,Central Ofice, Quezon City, 2002. Observatory initiated monitoring for PM,, and PM,, at three sites in Metro Manila in April 2002.7The three selected sitesare representativeofresidential, traffic, and commercial activities. Preliminary results for two Figure7. Annualmean total suspendedparticulate months areshown in Figure 8. Theinitial results indicate (TSP) concentration in Metro Manila, 1987-2001 that 55 to60 percent of PM,, is thefiner PM,,, which can problems . - - m. y AL~ : +, Two of the three sites are co-located ahich are collecting TSP and PM,, data. This combin tion oftwosets of monitoringstationsundertwodifferent institutions should result in a unique primarydata set for Year + TSP(p(llm3) Annual averageTSPguidelinevalue(90 pglm3) - - Some:PrelimimryAssessmentofOutdoorAtPollutionandHealthIn MebP Manila, 30 October 200f. 6PreliminaryAssessment of Outdoor Air Pollutim and Hntthin Metro Mnnila", University of the Philippines, Diliman, October 2001. 'This monitoring a e undertakenas r background ~tudyfm thin Monitor. The ~ i t cat the Manill Observatory located at Loyoh Heights is represemhtivtof a rnlxed resirtentialltrafficNU.The National Printing Ofklcc at Epifiano de Ias Smtoo Avenue (EDSA) is a trafiic-dominated site. The Philippine Gmurnl Hospital (PCiH) dtc h a t e d at tbc Padre Faura rrer is r mixed instituti~nai/eommercirlsite. r 1 POLLUTANTS L PARTICULATE Air quality in other urban areas is also poor. DENR monitors TSP at over 40 stations in the Philippines. Figure 9. Annual total suspendedparticulate (TSP) Monitoring data for three highly urbanized areas in the concentrationin major cities nationwide,1997.2001 country (Baguio, Cebu, and Davao) from 1997-2001, suggests that annual TSP averagesexceed guidelines for most years(Figure 9). In Cebu and Davao,TSPlevels are beginning to decline, whereas in Baguio, the TSP levels are two to three times the annual guidelines. This is partiallydue toan increasingurban activity and the unfa- vorable meteorological conditions that limit dispersion and result in higher pollution levels. Figures 10A and B show annual TSP concentrations and their exceedance over the guideline value for various stations for all regions for 2000 and 2001. Region 9 (Zamboanga City) values are skewed because the monitoring stations are located close to major roadsand traffic intersections. The EMBhasalreadytakensteps torelocatethesestations. +-EiAGU#)(Luzm) +- CEBU(vws) - DAVAO(MWam) AnnualA w m e guideline I (90u(llm3) Figure 8. PMloand PM2.~results for three stations I I Source:DENR-EMBCentral Office and Regional Ofice CAR, R7, R11, 2002. - 1 Manila Observatory-Residential Dairy glridmn ~1L.e1% 300 National PrmtingOmce-Traffic ZW, I I --1 PMppineaGeneralHospital Commercial - Figure 10A. Annual average TSP concentration for the National Capital Region (NCR) and the Cordillera Autonomous Region (CAR), 2000 and 2001 Annual guideline $ . S $ g . g g g E 8 E n S +b EAR Figure 1OB.Annualaverage TSP cancontralionsfor aUother reglono,2000and2001 600 Incorrect sample collection 5@ procedure used \ - - E 300 5 '% U 1W. -- - - -- - -mIr I := ml. m ' 4 I '=.,=- i I k 8 . I: 4-' Region 5 R8pon 1 R egm . 2 I SOWC8.S: .?om. Site POLLUTANTS I Anoxideof nitrogen, orNO,, isacollectiveterm usedfor nitrogen oxide (NO) and dioxide (NO,), which are in gaseous forms. However, NO2is used as a measurement jources I Control options I Status indicator for NO,. In urban areas, these oxides are emitted mainly from fuel combustion. NO, emissions play a major role in the formation of ozone, particulate matter,and acid rain.The effectsof NO, on human health depend on its reaction with other pollutants. With hydrocarbons (HC), NO, creates smog; with sulfur dioxide, NO, creates acid rain; and with ammonia, moisture, and other compounds, it reacts to form nitric acid and harmful nitrate.NO, also causesretardationand leaf bleachingin plants. Measures tocontrol NO, and the I --- status of their application in the Philippines are Figure 11. Source conmbutionsto; emissionsin Metro summarized inTable5. Manila, 2001 (tons per year) Diesel-powered vehicles are the worst offenders. A Burning 8 partial update of the emissions inventory for Metro road dust 1% Manila in 2001 indicates that transport sources - contribute58percent, whileindustrialsourcescontribute 1- 41 percent to the total emissions of nitrogen oxides (Figure 11). Transport, especially diesel-fueled vehicles, is the principal contributor of nitrogen oxides. 'ransporl Results available from a monitoring site at the Atetleo 58% station in Quezon City (control site) showthat NO, levels range from58 to 214 pg/m3(Figure 12). No reliable - inference can be made from these results, as some Notes:Total emissions 239,000;datafor area contribulionextrapdated measurementsexceeded theguideline valuewhileothers from 1990data. Source:ADB, 200f. conformed. I Flgure12. NO, concentrationsat theAteneo Station, I September 2801-April 2002 Sulfur dioxide (SO,) is a colorless gas, formed when fuel that contains sulfur (coal and oil) is burned in energy Figure 13. Source contributionsto.SO, emissions in Metro production and other industrial processes. SO, is one of Manila, 2001 (tons per year) the leading causes of respiratory problems in humans. Burning & Thedepositionofsulfurousandsulfuricacidson metallic "iOd 1 parts of equipment, building roofs, etc., results in corrosion, reducing the life of built surfaces and increa- sing repair costs. SO, can also severely damage plants. SO, control measures and the extent to which they have Industry 90% been applied in the Philippines are summarized in Table 6. Coal and oil-fredpowerplants are major contributors. Notes: Total emissions=176,000 tons; data for area sources extrapolatedfrom 1990 data. Fuel combustion, largely from coal-fired power plants, Source: ADB, 2001. accounts for most of the anthropogenic SO, emissions in I I the Philippines. This is evident from the 2001 update of Figure 14. Sulfur dioxlde(SO,) trends for air quality theinventoryforMetroManila(Figure 13).Forexample, monitoringstations in Metro Manila, 1995.2001 * '"' when three power plants were operating in Metro C) Manila, more than 90 percent of industria1emissions of 5 120 - SO, were attributed to them. 0 i m - . a C Attibierrt sulfur dioxida (ow3 levels are declining.': EE B O - 8 Following the closure of Sucat, Rockwell, and Manila 8 60- /j,\~ power plants, there has becn a remarkable decline in - ambient SO, level. Levels of SO, at the Ateneo station -5i% 20- haveconsistently been belowtheguideline(Figure 14). m 0 7 5 19% 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 L Ateneo (Instltutional) -- -+ Sevenna.Parafiaque(powerstabon) Man~laMem Park, Paraflaque(power station) Source:DENR-EMB,Central OfficdManila ObrervaWg Ateneo ds Manila UniversHyCampus, Quezon GIN 2002. I Table 6. SO2control options and their usein the philippines - ---- - A I controloptions I status -r ~uonary Power - Low sulfurfuel - Two diesel power plantsclosed, remaining willbe decommissioned by 2010 - Fluegas de-sulfurization - Few plantsconvertedto naturalgas,while heuse dlow sulfurcoalisincreasing - The recenYyapprpvedEnergy Planproposes to expand n&l gas use dufing the next10 years - Few enterprises hawhstalledcontrolmeasures andare poorlyregulated lndusffy Same as above - AwleMlity sf natural gas m SouthernLumn willallow replacementof fuel oil and oaalwith natural gas I r- - b.MoMfe - Tnrcks! pub'ic hnsport -Sulfur contentIn dlod &xed hrn 0.5 to 0.2 p m tIn @01 buses &ystem -Funcfionlng Ught RalITrandt&Rt/ s y h InMehbh h k blakody 2 percent al , -Low sulfurdiesel the daily ridership PUVs - UseOf NatulB' - lnlmductla of CNG b 9 g W b d Gas (CNG) CARBON MONOXIDEIOZONE A Carbonmonoxide(CO) Figure 15. Carbon monoxide (CO) concentration at the Carbon monoxide(CO) is a colorless,odorless, tasteless Ateneo monitoring station, July-November1999 gas, slightly lighter than air. It is formed when carbon in 40 - fuel is not burned completely. Once emitted into the 35 -- atmosphere,CO isoxidized tocarbondioxide(CO,). The - d 30- inhalation of CO can disrupt the supply of necessary V) 3 g 25 - oxygen to the blood, causing a major health threat. With 5 2 0 - prolonged exposure, CO affects the nervous system and -.' '0 5 15 - a L * can be lethal forpeoplewith weakhearts. f 7 5:c* Motorvehiclesarethemajorsource. Almost all theCO .- 5 E 0 emissions in Metro Manila come from vehicles (99.2 Jul-99 Aug-99 Sep-99 Ocl-99 Nov-99 percent). Proper maintenance and use of catalytic + 1-hr average concenlraCon converters in vehicles will reduce CO emissions by over -1 -hr average CO guideline value (35mglm3) -88 -hr average concentration -hr average CO guidelinevalue (10mg/m3) 90 percent. Recent monitoring of CO in the area shows the concentration to be above the eight-hour guideline Source: Manila ObSe~atofyAteneo de Manila University Campus /DENR-EMB, value of 10 mg/m3, but under the one-hour guideline Central Office lElectrobyie-Opsis Open Path System, 2001. valueof 35mg/m3(Figure15). Ozone (0,) Figure 16. Ozone (0,)concentrationsat the Ateneo Quallty Ozone (0,) is a highly oxidizing gas formed by the Monitoring Station, September 2001-April2002 reaction of VOCs and NO, in the presence of sunlight. Ozone can cause a range of acute effects including eye, nose and throat irritation; chest discomfort; cough; and 250, L. 4headache. ' $ m o o - . I rn h A- Other effects include pulmonary impairment fly* J - f 160 -. I I in children and young adults, and increased incidence of; ' t asthmatic attacks and respiratory symptoms, along with F damage tomaterialsand vegetations. '. :: 0 SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FE Recent results of ozone monitoring at the Ateneo site in 2001 I Metro ManiLashow that concentrations are higher than Ateneo (inslihrtional) the one-hour guideline of 140 pg/m3in seven out afeight - I 1-hraverage0, guidelinevalue (140 vglm') Aleneo (institulional) months monitored between 2001and 2002(Figure 16). Source: DENR-EMB,CenM OWManila Obrenrilfary, AMmde Man17a UniveMy &pus QuezonCity, 2002. 7 POLLUTANT5 L LEAD Lead has been phased-out. Lead can damage vital human organsand also affect the brain. Among children, Box 1. Lead phase-outin the Philippines prolonged exposure to lead can lead to neurological impairment. Theseriousness of thehealth impactsof lead April 1993 Lead content in gasoline was reduced from was recognized around the mid-1990s in the Philippines. 0.6 gll lo 0.15 gll In 1993, thePresident of the Philippines signed a Memo- randum of Agreement with three oil companies-Shell, February 1994 Introduction of unleaded gasoline (ULG) Petron, and Caltex- to reduce, and eventually eliminate, theleadcontentofgasoline. Lead waseliminated from all January 1995 Oil Deregulation Law lowered tax on ULG, and priced it cheaper than leaded-gasoline gasoline in the Philippines starting in January 2001 (see ULG sales rose Box I). April 2000 Leaded gasoline phased-out in Metro Manila Although Metro Manila phased out leaded gasoline nine months ahead of the schedule set by CAA, it took longer December 31, 2000 Leaded gasoline completely phased-out in for the rest of the country to follow. The removal of lead the Philippines additives from gasolinehasthefollowingbenefits: removes a toxicsubstancefromtheenvironment; reducesvehicle maintenance; and Figure 17. Ambient lead levels recordedat air quality 6 reducesotherpollutantsbytheuseofcatalytic monitoring stations in Metro Manila, 1993-1995 convertersinvehicles. Ambient leaa monitoring dlscontinuea. Lead I concentrations have been sEowlydecreasing since 1994, and were generally below theair quality guidelineof 1.5 pg/m3(Figure 17) by 1995. These levels are expected to drop further. However, DENR has discontinued the ambientmonitoringoflead. GREENHOUSE GASES 4 The Philippines was among the first countries to respond I tothe UnitedNationsFrameworkConventionon Climate I Figure 18. Philippinesgreenhousegas emissions,1999 Change (UNFCCC) in 1991. The Philippines Inter- agency Committee on Climate Change (IACCC), Nitrous composed of 15 government and non-government oxide - representatives, wiI1 propose climate change policies, 14% A and develop, update, and publish information on inventories ofgreenhousegases (GHG). Global Warming Methane , Energy and transport sectors contrib~itethe most 31% amount of GHG. Based on 1999 estimates, national GHG emissions are 100,738 gigagrams (Gg or lo9gram Total CO, emmisions100, 738 gigagrams of equivalent CO,). Of the total GHG emissions, 50 Source: Manila Observatory,Ateneode Manila UniversilyCampus, QuezonCity, 2001. percent arefrom theenergy and transport sector, followed by agriculture (33 percent), industry (10 percent), and solid waste (7 percent). Forest and land use changes contribute 65,000 Gg of CO, but the woody biomass of forests isa majorsink forGHG and takesup68,000 Ggof CO,. This results in an overall reduction of 3,000 Gg of I CO, from land useandforestrysector. Out of the total emission of 100,738, CO,is estimated to be 55,157, methane 31,335, and aitrwusoxide 14,246 Gg (Figure 18). Muchofthenewpowergeneratedinthecountrywillwe naturalgas, a denumberofoilandcoal-hredstationsarc beingphased-out, H O m r , witb thepjected d~ubhg of powu generation over the next 10 years, and the continuing high demand for motor vehicles, the energy and transport sectors are likely to remain the major sourcesofemissions. The Philippines stands to benefit from the Clean Development Mechanism(CDM)process under the Kyoto Protocol. Opportunities for investments in renewable energy and other CO, reducing activiti~c should be harnessed and promoted with private Q*,- participation. CDM process enables investments cost through carbon trading, as well as countrytocut-backonboth localand b OZONE DEPI,ETTNC: SIJRSTANCIE Ozone-Depleting Substances(ODS) Fifty-fivepercent reduction in ODS consumption. Most of the ODs used in the Philippines are for servicing In 1987, the Philippines adopted the Montreal Protocol existingrefrigeration and airconditioningequipment(70 (MP), an international convention, which aims to protect percent), manufacturing foam (23 percent), and the ozone layer in the upper atmosphere. In 1991, the refrigeration manufacturing (7 percent). The use of Philippines ratified the MP, in which developed and solvents that were once a major source of ODs, has developing countries agreed on a common strategy to almost vanished, with the help of the multilateral fund address aglobalenvironmental problem. described above. Between 1995 and 1999, ODs con- sumption fell by 55 percent, from 3,625 to 1,640 metric Totalphase-out of ODS by 2010. According to the tons. Future reductions to meet phase-out targets may Protocol, ODs consumption in the Philippines must be come from the foam and servicing sectors, but these reduced to 50 percent by 2005,85 percent by 2007, and reductions may be more difficult to achieve. A national 100 percent by 2010 (Figure 19). To meet these targets, phase-out proposal that includes a series of investment US$23 million has been provided by the Multilateral and non-investment activities including policy and Fund to replace equipment, hold training programs, and regulatory reforms iscurrently being formulated to assist pay extra operating costs. The find served as a financial theGovernmentinmeetingitsobligations. mechanism to help developing countriesmeet the agreed incremental cost of fulfilling the Protocol's control measures. ~ F Figure19.Consumption andprojection of ODsuseinthePhilippines; ~ ~ - - . , . ; 1 I ~ h : 7 7 . .- b -*+ 4 ' 7 fl. I- L 1 --LA&- a Montreal Protocol - L- I I ODP MT 2.000 1 CFC Total no - htervention .. . CFC Total with NCPP - + implemented - 2002 NO4 I 1 11 - ~ o n t r e a l Protocol CFC Total - no intervention :ticenin service -m- CFC Total - with NCPP implemented Source:Annual UNEPdmfl Repq'l qrtm6t@@-~fModreal Prof@ to Ozone Secrelaflat,2002. -- . . .k . -. - - . L. . IMPACTS PITRT.TP HF.AT.TH Detrimental effects of various pollutants include impact I Figure20. 1 on health, productivity, infrastructure, and overall Contribution of emissionsof various pollutants to local damagesfrom fuel burning in six cities, quality of life. As shown in Figure 20, PM,,contributes I 1993(percent) the most to health damage, and a significant portion of thenon-health cost. Fine particles (PM,,) represent a threat to human health. Fineparticlescan penetratetheupperdefensesof the respiratory tract and deposit deep in the lungs. Vulnerable groups within the population- children, the elderly, and people with heart and lung diseases - are mostat risk. Health Costs Non Health Costs Tolal Local costs I There are few reliablequantitative environmentalhealth I Source: EnvironmentalCosts of Fossil Fuels- A Rapid studies conducted for the Philippines. Epidemiological Assessment Method with Applicationto Six Cities,by K Lvovsky data from hospitals and clinics have not been used to eta/.,The WoddBank, 2000. verify health cost estimates that rely on population numbers, ambient measurements, and dose-response I equations. Box 2. Methodologyfor estimating health costs Valuingthe health cost. An initial analysis of the cost of An inaease in PM,, concentration by 1 ~glrnbas health impacts of PM,, in four urban areas of the - estimated to inaease mortdity rate by 0.084 Philippines-Metro Manila, Davao, Cebu, and Baguio- percent,chronic bronchitis casesto 3.06 per 100,000,and incidenceof respiratory symptomsto was undertaken as a background study for this Monitor. 18,300per100,000adults. Based on earlier international studies, this analysis Health impactswere estimatedby multiplying these computed thenumbers ofexcessdeathsand incidenceof dose-responsecoefficientswith exposed diseaseduetoimpactsofpollutants. populationsand the PM, levels above the safety fhreshold of 20 pglm3. m Based on the methodology outlined in Box 2, the yearly ItIs very difficult to puta monetaryvalueon health, and on human life. In the willingness-to-pay cost of exposure to PM, in the four cities is estimated as methodologyin severalcountries,individualsare follows: sked how much they would be willing to pay to avoid a certain symptomor illness.Per capita Over 2,000 people die prematurely. This loss is incomeswere used to adjust the unit valuesof valuedat aboutUS$l40 million. statisticallives in differentcities. The valueof statistical life in the four Philippinecitiesis Over 9,000 people suffer from estimated between US$25,000to $70,000,at lower which isvaluedatabout US$120million. bounds. The unlt cost of chronic bronchitis (per person)is Nearly 5 1 million cases of respiratory symptom estimated at US$12,750and respiratorysymptoms days in Metro Manila (averaging twice a year in at US$3 per incident.The monetary valuesof the Davao and Cebu, and five to six times in Metro health damagesarefinallyestimated by multiplying Manila and Baguio), costs about US$170 million. the health damageswith the unit values. This is a 70 percent increase, over a decade, Men compared with the findings of a similar study h e in 1992 for Metro Manila. which reported 33 million cases.' &Thisisreported in the PhilippinesEnvironmentMonitor 2000, basedon studiesof DOH. IMPACTS PIJR1,TCHEA1,TH A An estimated loss of over US$430 million. The total costof theexposure toPM,,in thesefourcitiesaloneadds Table 7. Estimates of health impact and costs up to over US$430 million (Table 7). These costs are by PM,, in four cities for 2001 equivalent to 2.5 to 6.1 percent of per capita incomes in these cities. The population of the four cities represents 28.4percent of the urban population. If the rest of the I country's population is assumed to be exposed to levels similar to those in the four cities, then the urban health cost is extrapolated to be over US$1.5 billion for the country per year. Jeepney driversand childrenface thegreatest exposure to vehicularpollution. The University of the Notes: Philippines has carried out studies on the impact of 1. The PM,, data are fmm monitoringstationsand estimatesbasedonan air vehicular emissions on vulnerable populations in Metro quality projection model. 2. Excessdeaths,chronicbronchitis, and respiratory symptomscauredby Manila during 1990-91 and 1994. Results showed the PM,, are estimatedbasedon simplifiedmethodologies. prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases 9 3. The tdalcost of death, chronic bonchitisand respiratcry m m s causd by PM,, is eshatedby first mlliplyhg the unit costs with the respective (COPD) to be highest among jeepney drivers, the most cases and then addingup We costs for &rent categaies. Since only &a&, exposed group, at 32.5 percent. Commuters had the chronic bronchitisand respratcry symp(omsCaused by PM, are mcludedin the hedh damage ehation, the totalcosts presentedin Vr! above thle qlowestprevalenceofchronicrespiratorysymptomsat are only lower boundsof the total costs causedby air pollution. 14.8 percent. Incidence of pulmonary tuberculosis (PTB) is also highest among jeepney drivers at 17.5 percent, compared to 9 percent for commuters. The prevalence of respiratory symptoms among school Box 3. Indoor air pollution: healthimpact children ranged h m4.8 to27.5percent and from 15.8to The Department of Health (DOH) conducted a baseline health 40.6 percentamong child vendors. A comparison of h e profile of cornrnunitlesin Metro Manila during 1999. It covered pulmonary functionsofurbanschooichildrenwith those 108randomlyselectedhouseholds,in54barangays.DOHfound in rural areas, showedmore compromised pulmonary that ambient standards for PM,, were exceeded in 9 out of 19 study areas (47 percent). Indoor monitoring showed that 42 fanctims forchildreninMetmManila. percent of households exceeded the standard. The average hwrly levels obtained(209.5 vglrn3)are indicativeof unhealthy TAeex&nqfWlnrraiqwMon isyd'tobequm@%d conditions. While vehicular traftlc could be a major source, Sincem k sptd rlw poltiondtbh d k pwr. resultsindicatethat smokinginside the house and cooking with indoor air qualitycan cause at pontribnm to the : kerosene, wood, andcharcoalwereprimarycontributorsinthese developmnntof chronic muphtorpd.lauuea m h I ~ J 'households, A similar study in 1995 in urban slums in Metro Manilafoundsimilarresults. asthmamdhypersemhivitppncumoniti~( h f l b of the lungs). Tbae aremany sources of indoor dr pollution: tabecco moke, cockinguld heatink md vapors ~ i ~ m & w i a lppinu, hitwe! etc. s , S t n ~ h r ~ & ~ u r p , m ktobighlwdsPd,t&Wr e airpJln$misio-$ arrssjakalih~ b k i & t k PailIpp&&(B0x.l). . , 9Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is manifested by! a chronic cough and phlegm, wheezing and shortness of breath. 7 IMPACTS L PUBLICHEmTH A Non-heulth impacts. While health impacts are no doubt themost compelling reason to takeaction, the non-health costsofpollution arealsosignificant.Thesecostsinclude Table 8. Non-healthimpacts of air pollution those stemming from congestion and loss of produc- tivity,damage to ecosystemsand physical infrastructure. One study estimates that in six cities, including Metro Manila, the non-health costs of NO, and SO, outweigh health costs. In thecase ofparticulatepollution, however, I r IMPACTS PUBLIC PERCEPTION A The Philippine Information Agency (PIA) of the Few know about CAA. Only one in three among the Philippines conducted a knowledge awareness and generalpublicareaware of CAA. Thisissurprisinggiven practice (KAP)survey for the DENR in 2001. A total of that the draft law was discussed extensively and over a 1,600 people representing four groups - general public, long period of time. Only a third to half of the surveyed public utility vehicle(PUV) drivers,PUV ownerslopera- PUVdrivers and ownersareawareof theAct. tors, and industry owners/managers- were surveyed. Figure 21 compares concerns about air pollution, aware- Roadside enforcement has wide support. The four ness ofprograms to control air pollution, and awareness groups were nearly unanimous (96 percent) that there about CAA,amongthefourgroups. Thesurvey findings should be roadside apprehension of smoke-belching to some extent conform to previous survey results of the vehicles. Social Weather Station(SWS) in 1995,which concluded Most believe that air pollution is primarily caused by that air pollution is among the top three environmental motor vehicles. concernsof MetroManilaresidents. Motor vehicles - 98 percent (public); 96 percent A large majority is alarmed about airpollution. Nearly (PUV drivers); 92 percent (industrial owners/ three-quarters of the general public believe that air managers) pollution is an alarming problem. This concern is also Factories- 51 percent(public); 49percent (PUV sharedbya large majorityof PWdriversandowners. drivers); 44 percent (industrial owners/operators) Low-levelofawareness about control efforts. Just over Overhalfthe PUVownerddriversdo regularchecks on a quarter of the general public is aware of programs that theirvehicles. are being implemented by institutionsand individualsto 62 percent of PUVowners/opZi-'af6?staketheir 1: control air pollution. While the level of awareness vehicles tocommercial shopsformaintenance , ,-.'r,j among polluters (industry and P W ) is high (at 38 to 44 4 checkups. ..I- - .'L1 ~ercent),a greater majority of the general public (72 - 1 53 percent of PW drivers bring their vehicles to isstillunaware of CAA &ct/v/tie$.. the Land Transportation Office (LTO) for emission testing. P I I Figure 21. Publicperceptionof air pollution Survey respandents -- General puMic PUV drivers 36 PUV ownerdoperatars , f I Industryowerslmanagen I 0 1C RESPONSES I GOVERNMENTICIVILSOCIETYIPWATESECTORA Withthecommongoal ofachievingclean air, thegovern- cleaner production. Technical assistance in the forms of ment, private sector, and civil society have initiated training and support to conduct plant level environmental several policies, programs, and projects that address air auditisprovided. pollution. Enacting CAA. The most comprehensive policy to date Box 4. Programmaticapproach and partnership is CAA. Among the key policy shifts incorporated in to clean.up Metro Manila's air quality CAA are the use of market-based instruments and the expanded roleof theprivatesector (see section on Mana- The Government and the ADB have launched a major effort through the Metro Manila Air Quality Improvement Sector gement and Box 4). Studies are ongoing for the develop- Development ProgramlProject (MMAQISDP) to reduce air ment of an emission charge system for stationary and pollution in the metropolis.The four-year US$200million project mobile sources. Progressive improvements in gasoline supported byADBsince1999,aimsto reform policies,strengthen anddieselfuelareplanned by 2004. institutions,and implement specific actions to improve the air quality by abating pollutionfrom mobile and stationarysources. Implementing anti-smoke belching campaigns. MMAQISDPactivitiesinclude: Roadside enforcement of smoky vehicles, especially in establishmentof a motorvehicleinspectionsystem(bythe Metro Manila, is being strengthened. The enforcement DOTCILTO); teams of theMMDA,implement as wellascoordinatethe implementationof aprogramof industrialairemission abatement(DENR); anti-smoke belching efforts of local government units introductionof vehicularemissionstechnologymeasures (LGUs). The program has resulted in the decreased and thereviewof policieson second-hand vehiclesand number of smoke-belching vehicles on Epifanio de 10s enginesandthesettingupof anagelimiton publictransport SantosAvenue(EDSA)frommorethan20percent to less vehicles; than 10 percent over a five month period (April-August trafficengineeringand managementand roadside enforcement in MetroManila(MMDA); strengtheningand upgradingof existingambientairquality Enforcing vehicleemission standards.The Department monitoringsystemandtheimprovementof theairquality of Trade and Industry (DTI)issued regulations requiring reportingsystem (DENR, DTI, PIA,DOTCILTO,private sector,NGOs);and importers to submit a certificate that the imported vehi- estabiishmentof aneffectivepubljcawarenessprogram; cles havepassed the emission standards of the country of andcapacitybuildingandinstitutionaldevelopmentprograms origin or the Philippines, whichever is higher. Once in ofvariousstakeholders,andstudiesof healthimpact. use,thesevehicles aresubjecttoannualemissions testing prior to renewal of registration. TheLand Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB) has also adopted the policy of canceling the franchiseof vehicles Broadening education and communication. The proven toberepeatoffendersofemissionsstandards. DENWEMB and other agencies have launched information, education, and communicatiol~ Promoting cleanerfuels. Renewable and indigenous toraisepublicawarenessaboutairpollution. . cleaner fuels such as natural gas, solar energy, hydro, d-!--. ,:;7:: , "'