What is the rationale for importing coal from Indonesia to produce energy when we have many sources of renewable energy in our country?

This was the question posed by the Sabah Environmental Protection Association (Sepa) over the proposed 300 megawatt coal-fired power plant in Lahad Datu, Sabah.

Sepa is seeing red over the project, which is an IPP (independent power provider) joint venture project between Sabah Electricity Sdn Bhd (SESB) and Yayasan Sabah.

When contacted, Sepa East Coast Committee Chief Wong Tack condemned the project which he described as the "destruction of Sabah's ecotourism and aquaculture industry."

Wong said his association's main concerns are the proposed site for the RM1.3 billion project, and also the usage of coal as the energy.

"Although the proposed site is situated in an abandoned industrial land, it is the gateway to the ecotourism industry of Sabah," he said.

The proposed site, he said, is situated just 2km from Lahat Datu Dam, which is the main source of water supply for some 150,000 people in and around Silam, 66 km from Danum Valley Conservation Reserved, Tabin Wildlife Reserved and surrounded by mangrove forest and coral sea, Davey Bay.

"Furthermore, coal is not indigenous source of energy to our country and have to be imported from Kalimantan, Indonesia," he said, adding that it against the national energy policy.

'Clean coal?'

Wong, who is representing Sepa in its "Save Davey Bay from Coal-Fired Power Plant" campaign, stressed that Sepa is against the power plant as it would destroy the ecotourism and aquaculture industry of Sabah.

"The future of Sabah depends on tourism and aquaculture. We have only blue sky and clean beaches to offer to the world. And with global warming as the issue, it does not make sense as to why they have decided to build the power plant in Sabah," he lamented.

Wong also castigated SESB for using the term "clean coal" in its primary environmental impact assessment (EIA) report for the power plant.

"SESB just wants to take a short cut. Coal is known to be the messiest and most polluting source of energy. When converted, it produces only 30 percent of energy. 70 percent would be converted into toxic waste. It is the biggest contributor of mercury," he said.

"What is the point to bring in such a hazardous material from a foreign country and burn it here and letting the people of Sabah to deal with it for generations to come?" he asked.

He was of the view that SESB is trying to bulldoze its way to get the approval of EIA report.

"They have made statements like the locals have approved the project and that the construction would be initiated by early next year. It's totally not making sense because the people are against it."

'CM's project'

Asked if Sepa has tried negotiating with government agencies in Sabah, Wong said: "It is rumoured that the power plant is Sabah chief minister's (CM) project. Yayasan Sabah has 30 percent stake in this project and CM controls Yayasan Sabah."

"Even though the ministerial officials know that the people are against the project, they only say 'what can we do if the CM wants it," he explained.

Wong was also puzzled as to why Sabah needs another power plant when Bakun hidro power electrical dam will be ready in 2010, the same year projected for the coal-fired power plant to be ready.

"If they can spend RM10 billion to supply power to the peninsula, why not spend RM2 billion to supply power to Sabah through the state electrical grip, which Sabah is connected to?" he asked.

"They'll jeopadize billions of ringgit in revenue from ecotourism, fishery and aquaculture by building the power plant."

In a separate development, Deputy Energy, Water and Communication Minister Shaziman Abu Mansor has assured that the project will not start as long as the EIA has not been approved.

He said although the project uses public funds, the government would be stringent in approving the EIA.

During the question hour in Parliament last Thursday, Shaziman also explained that it would be difficult to transfer power from Sarawak to Sabah due to the terrain in the two states.