EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Air pollution has now become a major problem of every big city in the

world since the advent of industrialization. And so far, the only direction this

problem is heading is from bad to worse. For this reason, breathing clean air

has become just more of a distant dream than a reality. And air pollution’s

severity and its adverse effects to the environment and especially to the

human health is something that cannot just be ignored. Among the sources

of air pollution, the emissions from vehicles are considered to be the

greatest contributor. This is the consequence of urbanization and the rapid

increase of the population which also increased the demand for mobility and

more efficient means of transportation. And with the rapid expansion of the

vehicle industry, traffic congestion and fuel use has worsened the quality of

our air. Although emissions from an individual car are generally low, relative

to the smokestack image many people associate with air pollution, the

personal automobile is the single greatest polluter, as emissions from

millions of vehicles on the road add up. That is why it has been said that

driving a car is probably a typical citizen’s most polluting daily activity. Now,

Dumaguete City might not be at par with Manila, Cebu and other big cities in

the country in terms of population, size and traffic congestion. But it is

evident that Dumaguete is rapidly expanding. Population is rapidly

increasing. Buildings are rising. Businesses are booming. These

developments could only mean that Dumaguete will become one of those big

cities. And sooner or later, it will get to face that problem like any other big

city in the country – air pollution.

While there may be several sources of air pollution in the city, this

paper will only focus on those pollutions emitted from motor vehicles -

particularly motorcycles and tricycles - and how the local government has

been enforcing its laws regulating the emissions generated by these

vehicles. The paper starts by giving a brief account of Dumaguete City’s

demographics and economy. Then it goes on to present the potential

2

problem of air pollution in the city. The laws and measures adopted by the

local government to regulate the emissions from vehicles as well as their

strengths and weaknesses will also be discussed. Finally, the paper will make

recommendations as to how the local government would better reduce if not

eliminate the air pollution caused by emissions from vehicles.

OVERVIEW OF DUMAGUETE CITY

Dumaguete City, known as the “City of Gentle People” is the capital

and largest city of the province of Negros Oriental. According to the 2010

Census of Population and Housing conducted by the National Statistics

Office, the population of Dumaguete City as of May 1, 2010 is 120,883,

contributing 9.40 percent to the total population of the province. Perhaps

this is explained by the fact that Dumaguete is a university town with four

universities and a number of other colleges where students of the province

and other surrounding islands converge to enroll for tertiary education. Also,

the city is a great attraction of a considerable number of foreign tourists

because of easy access from Cebu City, the availability of beach resorts and

dive sites, and the attraction of dolphin and whale watching in nearby Bais

City. And because business is booming, Dumaguete draws a lot of people

from other places, especially from the rural areas to work in the City.

Unlike Metro Manila and Cebu City where the major modes of public

transportation are taxis and jeepneys, in Dumaguete the people use the

tricycle – a three-wheeled vehicle which can carry six passengers at a time.

According to the Statistics on Motor Vehicles Registered conducted by the

Land Transportation Office, there are about 4,170 tricycles registered in the

year 2011. This figure comprises 8.5 percent of the total of 48,958 vehicles

registered in Dumaguete City. On the other hand, in private transportation,

the motorcycles dominate reaching up to 27,469 registered motorcycles.

Surprisingly, it comprises 56% of the total registered vehicles in the city. And

3

it is for this reason that Dumaguete City is considered the “Motorcycle

Capital” in the Philippines.

VEHICULAR EMMISSIONS: AN IMMINENT THREAT TO THE AIR

QUALITY OF DUMAGUETE CITY

As mentioned earlier, compared to Metro Manila and Cebu, Dumaguete

City has not yet reached that far as to claim the title of “one of the big cities

in the country.” However, with the recent developments – the rapid increase

of population, more investors coming in to put up businesses, and more

buildings on the rise– Dumaguete becoming a big city is just around the

corner. Records on population growth from the National Statistics Office

show that the city’s population has been increasing dramatically. The

statistics reveal that the population in 1990, was 80,262, in 2000 was 102,

265 and in 2010 was 120,883. We can see that the population has been

increasing by 20,000 per decade for the past two decades. Basing on this

trend, the city is expected to have at least 140,000 people in 2020. And with

this increase in the population, it is also expected that the demand for

mobility - especially motorcycles and motor-tricycles – will also increase

probably at the same rate.

Being a “motorcycle capital” has its disadvantages. It has been found

out that among the vehicles, motorcycles contributes most of the pollution in

the atmosphere. They have lower fuel efficiency than any other motor

vehicle. Some of its fuel air mixtures escapes from the fuel tank; thereby

releasing unburned gasoline and lubricant, and increasing hydrocarbon and

fine particulate emissions in the atmosphere. This being the fact, and that

Dumaguete City is rapidly expanding, the problem of air pollution caused by

these vehicular sources is imminent. Time will come when the city street will

be crowded with motor vehicles – motorcycles in particular – and fumes from

burned fuel will cloud the sky like other big cities.

4

ANALYSIS ON THE STRENGHTS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE LAW

Republic Act 8749 or the Clean Air Act of the Philippines of 1999 is the

law governing the regulation and the monitoring of air pollution in the

country. Providing a comprehensive air pollution control policy, it was

enacted pursuant to the policy of the state enunciated in Section 16 Article II

of the 1987 Constitution which states that: The State shall protect and

advance the right of the people to a balanced and healthful ecology in

accord with the rhythm and harmony of nature. More specifically, the law is

intended to protect and advance the right of the people to breathe clean air

as well as to their utilization and enjoyment according to the principles and

sustainable development.

In the monitoring the air pollution, the country is divided into different

airsheds. Airsheds refer to areas with similar climate, meteorology and

topology which affect the interchange and diffusion of pollutants in the

atmosphere, or areas which share common interest or face similar

development programs, prospects or problems. It is important to note that

instead of dividing the country into the usual geographical or political

subdivision, the law for very obvious reasons, use airsheds. Monitoring by

airsheds is apparently more effective than by geographical or political

subdivision for the reason that not all areas within a geographical or political

subdivision may be affected by the same source of air pollution at the same

time. Correspondingly, a source of air pollution may affect only a portion of

one political subdivision and a portion of another.

Each airshed is assigned by the law a Governing Board which carries

out the formulated action plans for effective air quality management. This

board is composed of Provincial Governors and Mayors from areas belonging

to the airshed; one representative from each concerned government agency,

people’s organizations, non-government organizations and the private

5

sector. The main function of the governing board is more on the formulation

of policies regarding the control and monitoring of air pollution within its

airshed. It is worth mentioning, however, that, in the list of the members of

the board, the academe has not been included. Remarkably, the educational

sector, being the institution recognized to have rich in knowledge regarding

almost every subject has no representative in the governing board. It has

been widely recognized that this sector contributes more information that

may be relevant for policy making than any other sector. That is why in

almost every action plan outlined in the law as well as other laws, the

academe has always been part of those sectors which concerned

government agencies coordinate with for policy making and implementing

action plans. Other institutions, especially those enumerated as members of

the board, are not as competent.

The Clean Air Act categorizes the sources of pollution into three and

has established emission standards for each. The first category is the

stationary source which refers to any building or fixed structure or facility or

installation that emits or may emit any air pollutant. The law specifically

designates the Department of Environment and Natural Resources or the

DENR as the lead agency in the regulation and control of air pollution

generated by stationary sources. It has the exclusive authority to grant

stationary sources with air pollution clearances and permits as a requirement

for their establishment and continued operation. To obtain this requirement,

these sources simply have to comply with the emission standards

established by the DENR. Another requirement that these sources must

comply is the setting up of financial guarantee mechanisms. This mechanism

is intended to finance the needs for emergency response, clean-up

rehabilitation of areas that may be damaged during the operation. So

basically, when a stationary source ceases to operate, it does necessarily

follow that its responsibility to the surrounding environment ceases with it. It

continues to be liable for damages especially when such damages are clearly

6

attributable to the source’s operation. However, what’s frustrating about this

is that no matter how the law is strict in this requirement, the environment

can never be restored back to its original condition once it has already been

damaged. Studies show that the ozone layer, the earth’s protective shield

against the harmful ultraviolet rays of the sun, can never be restored once it

has been depleted by the air pollutants generated by emission dischargers.

True, these financial guarantee mechanisms may finance for the

rehabilitation of the areas damaged. However the damaged left behind by

these sources as well as their consequences – which are often times

permanent in nature- are far too great to be just compensated by these

financial guarantee mechanisms. It has been a very sad thing in our country

that we allow our natural resources to be exploited just to invite foreign

investors. We allow the construction of factories and industrial plants even if

it’s very obvious that the wastes and emissions they generate have a long

term effect to the environment.

It’s a good thing though that incineration has been banned especially

those emitting poisonous fumes to the air. The law defines the process of

incineration as the burning of waste, which emits poisonous and toxic fumes

like dioxin and furans. It includes traditional small-scale method of

community or neighborhood sanitation, traditional, agricultural, health, and

food preparation and crematoria. Instead of resorting to the use of

incinerators as mode of waste disposal, the law encourages the use of the

state-of-the-art, environmentally-sound and safe non-burn technologies. And

also, local government units are mandated to promote a comprehensive

ecological waste management that includes segregation, recycling and

composting. The provision of the law banning the process of incineration was

once put into issue in the case of MMDA vs JANCOM, GR No. 147465, January

30, 2002. In this case, the petitioners seek to invalidate a contract between

the Republic of the Philippines and JANCOM Environmental Corporation to

establish municipal solid waste thermal plants using incineration technology.

7

Petitioners argued that the contract is invalid for it violates section 20 of RA

8749 which prohibits the use of incinerators. However, in its decision, the

Supreme Court said that the said provision does not absolutely prohibit

incineration as a mode of waste disposal; rather only those burning

processes which emit poisonous and toxic fumes are banned. In other words,

any incinerator may be allowed operate as long as it does not emit gaseous

substances that are hazardous to the environment and to human health.

The second category of the emission sources are the mobile sources. A

mobile source is any vehicle propelled by or through combustion of carbon-

based or other fuel, constructed and operated principally for the conveyance

of persons or the transportation of property goods. The Department of

Transportation and Communication (DOTC) is the government agency that is

designated to implement the emission standards for these sources. Together

with the DTI and the DENR, the DOTC establishes the procedures for the

inspection of motor vehicles and the testing of their emissions for the

purposes of determining the concentration and/or rate of pollutants

discharged by the said source.

So far, the only measures the government, both local and national, has

taken in regulating the pollution from vehicle emission has been more on the

reduction rather on the prevention. In general, the Philippine Clean Air Act

and its Implementing Rules and Regulations only focus more on the

establishment of emission standards to which emission sources must

comply. However, no measures whatsoever are established to eliminate

completely the pollution generated from these sources. If this is the case,

even if the government would adopt the best of the best emission standards

from abroad but as long as vehicular sources continue to increase in number,

those standards are virtually useless. Pollution would still continue to pose a

threat to the environment as well as to the health of every citizen.

8

To illustrate, in section 21 paragraph A of RA 8749, the law sets Carbon

Dioxide emission limits for light duty vehicles to 2.72 g/km. This means that

for a light duty vehicle to run the streets, it must not emit more than 2.72

grams of Carbon Dioxide per kilometer. With this, one might have the

impression that it’s alright for this kind of vehicle to run as long as it doesn’t

exceed the emission limits because any excess would endanger the

environment. However, when the number of vehicles is increased, let say to

three, the effect is the same with one vehicle emitting three times more than

what is required. The only difference is the law can do nothing about it

because it only limits the emission per vehicle. And the worse part is, these

sources continue to increase unregulated by any existing law. As a result the

purpose for which the emissions are limited has been defeated. There cannot

even be a substantial reduction of the pollution as what this law is intended

for if the emission sources continue to increase. Perhaps, the law should not

only have set emission limits for these sources but also have established

some measures to regulate and control their number.

Aside from the general view that the law does not aim to prevent air

pollution but rather just to reduce the same, there are, however, other points

that may need of some improvement. Section 2 of Rule 32 of the

Implementing Rules and Regulations, a Certificate of Compliance to Emission

Standard (CCES) is required before a rebuilt or imported second hand-CBU,

or a pre-registered vehicle retrofitted with second hand engines be allowed

registration or renewal of registration. And as a condition for the issuance of

a CCES, exhaust emission standards of a vehicle should not exceed the

emission standards. However, a CCES may be issued to an imported second

hand vehicle without going through an emission testing if it came in the

country with a Certificate of Emission Compliance duly authenticated by the

Philippine Embassy or Consulate from the country of origin. Now, the

problem with exempting these imported vehicles from actual emission tests

is that the country where these importers come from may have different

9

emission standards than ours. Worse, it may have standards lower than ours.

Vehicular emission standards vary almost from one country to another.

There has not yet been an international law compelling all countries to

comply with a certain vehicle emission standard. Even the various states of

United States of America have different standards. Some states follow those

standards managed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), while

others follow those set by the California Air Resource Board (CARB). This is

not to say that other countries have lower standards and the Philippines has

higher emission standards that we should conduct emission test to every

imported second hand vehicle or engine. But rather, this is just to make sure

that these vehicles or engines are in conformity with our existing laws on

emissions. After all, it would not be so costly to conduct such emission

testing.

Now, one might think that the certificate of compliance is

authenticated by the Philippine Embassy from the country of origin and

therefore it is valid. But the big question is how exactly can they make sure

that a vehicle’s emission complies with ours? Do the embassies have their

own emission testing equipment there? If they use that of the foreign

country’s equipments, are these equipments reliable? Probably for some

countries, especially those more technologically advanced. However, no

emission testing can be more reliable than those conducted by our own

government agencies enforcing the law on vehicular emissions. The

requirement of conducting emission test for these types of vehicles should

be mandatory rather than permissive. Being permissive creates

opportunities for corruption. Persons in charge with the emission tests might

just exempt certain imported vehicles from the requirement in exchange for

a bribe. After all, the determination whether to conduct the test or not rests

upon their discretion. Making the requirement mandatory will raise no doubt

as to the vehicle’s compliance with our emission standards. If indeed, the

government is very serious in upholding the people’s right to clean air, it

10

must do all it can to make sure that these emission standards are complied

with by every motor vehicle used in the country.

WEAKNESSES IN THE GOVERNMENT’S IMPLEMENTATION OF RA 8749

The enactment of Republic Act 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air Act

established a framework for the reduction of pollution from emission source,

particularly mobile sources. The guidelines and practices outlined in the

framework may already be sufficient to mitigate and control air pollution in

the country. However, lapses in the implementation pose a big problem to

truly achieve the objectives and visions aimed for by the law. That explains

why it has been more than a decade after the enactment of the law and

there seems to be little progress on the reduction of air pollution in the

country especially in big cities like Metro Manila and Cebu City. In fact,

instead of the air quality improving, it seems to be worsening despite how

good the provisions of the law are.

As the study takes focus on motorcycles and tricycles running in the

city, we first take a look at the registration process. Compliance with

emission standards is a condition for the registration of all vehicles. Sad to

note that it is an undeniable fact that the once-a-year mandatory smoke

emission test, a requirement for getting a permit to operate a motor vehicle,

can now be bought. In fact, you don’t need to bring your car or motor vehicle

to an accredited testing center if you know who to talk to. Fixers are even

working inside and are part of the very implementing department or agency.

No matter how bold the banners are for the “No Fixer’s” campaign, inside

the offices and within the vicinity of the LTO, the directive has no teeth at all.

Reaching out to fixers become an easy way out to procure the registration

needed—no hassle on the part of the applicant. No need to wait for hours—

all you have to do is pay to the fixer and wait for a text when to get your

Certificate of Registration. This seems to be an immortal problem in the LTO,

11

no matter who is sitting on the administration this problem of Fixers has not

yet been addressed. This “uncalled shortcuts” creates great impact and

contributes to the problem of vehicular emissions that pollutes our air. Action

should be taken now. When the first step in the flow fails, the whole process

fails. On emission testing centers as well, what is worst is that during

emission testing, there had been reports that technicians in testing center

can easily manipulate the results of the test by simply making adjustment on

the engine. The relaxed emission standards indefinitely, sets our anti-

pollution program several steps backwards.

Surprising enough, is the statistic given by LTO - Dumaguete that

there were no apprehensions for violations of the anti-smoke belching for the

past five years. It seems that base on mere observation on the regular

checkpoints conducted by LTO, they are so relaxed on anti-smoke belching

and focuses more on motorcycles for licenses and registration. It should be

high time that LTO should balance their efforts not just on crime prevention

(checking of driver’s licenses/side mirrors and motor registration) but more

importantly on the on the spot checks for the drive mandated on the CAA—

the anti-smoke belching. Seldom would we notice LTO check points stopping

private vehicles/four-wheeled vehicles. They should also realize that more

non-licensed drivers are running four-wheeled vehicles due to this leniency.

Another lapse on the implementation of the law is that the reporting

and monitoring of air quality is not conducted all over the country regularly.

The law mandates the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to

divide the country into different airsheds for better monitoring and to

facilitate in the development of action plans to counter air pollution. Ambient

air monitoring stations using the most acceptable and modern technology is

to be strategically positioned within the airshed where data are gathered in

real time, analyzed and measured by competent technicians. Sadly, only a

few airsheds were identified after more than a decade since the enactment

of the Clean Air Act. Most of the monitoring facilities are available only in

12

Metro Manila and is very limited in the rest of the country. For that reason

not all areas in the country can have their airshed monitored for air pollution.

Even if they have, it wouldn’t be on a regular basis.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The task of the monitoring and controlling air pollution is a difficult

endeavor that not only the government is burdened to carry out but also a

responsibility that each citizen should undertake. As mentioned earlier,

Republic Act 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air Act of 1999 is not sufficient to

completely prevent the air pollution that has been plaguing big cities. It

merely is a means to reduce the hazardous effects of emissions per emission

source. However, no matter how the law is strict in limiting the emission per

vehicle, and no matter what vehicular emission standards the it adopts, as

long as the number of vehicles continues to increase, there can never be a

reduction of the pollution. If the government cannot even control the

population of this emission sources, then it cannot claim that it can control

the air pollution caused by these emissions.

Perhaps, one way of solving this problem is that the government

should enact a law regulating the population of motor vehicles. In

Dumaguete the majority of the vehicles operating in the streets are

motorcycles and motor tricycles for hire. There’s no problem with private

motorcycles because most of them are recently purchased. It has been a

tendency of private motorist in Dumaguete to change their motorcycles with

the new models released in the market. However, this is not the case with

the public transportation vehicles. Owners of these vehicles have no

intention of purchasing a new one until their existing vehicle is no longer

usable. And even if the time comes when they need to replace the old one,

they would probably purchase from among the second hand vehicles as a

more practical choice. At any rate, it is obvious that sooner or later, the city

streets will be crowded with old and fuel inefficient vehicles thereby

13

contributing more pollution to the air. Clearly, the government, either the

local or national, has to do something about the ever increasing population

of these motor vehicles through the passing of a law. Otherwise, their

continued operation in the city streets will finally takes its toll on the

environment and on public health.

There is a pending bill now in Congress known as the Senate Bill 2834

or the Accelerated Retirement of Inefficient Vehicles Act introduced by no

less than Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago. This bill calls for the phasing out

of old and fuel inefficient vehicles. It encourages a five year program of

replacing these vehicles for more fuel-saving models. However, the problem

with this bill is that vehicles covered by the proposal include those

manufactured before 2008. That means only those motor vehicles

manufactured on or after 2008 are allowed to operate in the streets.

Fortunately, this bill’s impracticality has impede its way of becoming a

republic act. Had the enactment of this bill pushed through, then there would

be many car owners howling in protest right now. The bill would have been

more practical if the vehicles covered therein were those manufactured very

much earlier than 2008. Vehicles manufactured in 2008 are just too recent.

It’s even possible that there are vehicles manufactured during that time still

in the display room waiting to be purchased. Perhaps the bill should focus on

those vehicles manufactured earlier, let say, ten years ago. And from this

group of vehicles, the law then provides for measures in identifying those

necessarily discarded – those that can no longer be used without damaging

the quality of the air.

Another alternative the government has in reducing or even

preventing the problem of air pollution is the adoption of compressed natural

gas of CNG as fuel for motor vehicles especially the public utility vehicles.

Compressed Natural Gas is a natural gas under pressure which remains

clear, odorless, and non corrosive. It is already produced both worldwide and

domestically at relatively low cost and is cleaner burning than gasoline or

14

diesel fuel. Vehicles using CNG show at an average reduction in ozone-

forming emissions eighty percent compared to gasoline vehicles. This

scientific breakthrough could be the very solution to this pollution problem

plaguing our cities. However, this has still remained a mere proposal due to

the marketability of CNG in the Philippines. Moreover, there are only few

established suppliers of CNG in the country. The government cannot yet

compel vehicle owners and manufacturers to switch to CNG since it is not yet

available to all places in the country.

There was, however, a petition to the Supreme Court for the issuance

of a writ of mandamus commanding Land Transportation Franchising and

Regulatory Board (LTFRB) and the Department of Transportation and

Communications (DOTC) to require public utility vehicles to use CNG as

alternative fuel. This was the case between Henares vs LTFRB and DTO, GR

No. 158290, October 23, 2006. In their petition to compel the use of CNG,

petitioners cited statistics on the high growth and low turnover in vehicle

ownership in the Philippines which have been the major contributor to the

problem of air pollution. They also added that the energy and transport

sectors are likely to remain the major sources of harmful emissions in the big

cities. However, the Supreme Court denied their petition because there is no

provision in RA 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air nor, as a matter of fact, in

any other law that imposes a legal duty to LTFRB and DOTC that will justify a

grant of the writ of mandamus compelling the use of CNG for public utility

vehicles. They further stated that the legislature should provide first the

specific statutory remedy to the complex environmental problems bared by

the petitioners before any judicial recourse by mandamus is taken. In other

words, legally speaking, the petition is not compelling for the simple reason

that there is no law, not even RA 8749, that provides for this remedy of

mandamus to the petitioners to compel the use of CNG. And practically

speaking, these natural gases have not yet become available to every city.

Its availability is limited probably only to Manila, Cebu and other big cities

15

only. If only the government would maximize this scientific breakthrough and

find some measures in making this fuel available to other places, then

perhaps the problem of air pollution would be significantly reduced.

CONCLUSION.

At present, the problem of air pollution is becoming a plague in almost

every city. And it is becoming a potential threat in developing cities like

Dumaguete City. And with the rapid development of our city and the

significant increase in the population, it is very clear that the problem of air

pollution faced by the big cities in the country will also be the same problem

our city will get to face sooner or later. Based on the discussions above,

Republic Act 8749 or the Philippine Clean Air act is just a step of the

government in its effort in reducing and preventing the crisis of air pollution.

The law, by itself, is not sufficient to address the problem. It merely

establishes standards to which each emission source has to comply for them

to be granted with permits to operate. The pollution problem will still

continue to pester our environment and our health unless something is done

with the rapid increase of these emission sources – particularly mobile

sources. Not only is the law insufficient, there are even a lot of lapses in its

implementation. Lead agencies are not functioning as they should.

Procedures are circumvented to achieve personal ends. No matter how good

the law is, if it’s not properly implemented, the purpose for which it was

created will be defeated. Perhaps, the government should not just be

concerned itself in the enactment of laws sufficient to address the problem

but also to make sure their proper implementation. Otherwise, breathing

clean air will just be more of a distant dream than a reality .

16