The disclosure by Sarawak public utilities minister Awang Tengah Awang Ali Hassan last Saturday that Sarawak and Sabah are holding talks on the purchase of energy from Sarawak shows that there are viable alternatives to the RM1.3 billion 300MW coal-fired power plant proposed to be sited in Sandakan soon.

Sarawak is also expected to supply up to 400 megawatts (MW) of electricity to Brunei by 2013 from the yet-to-built 944MW Murum Dam in the Baram, Sarawak.

yong teck lee "The Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp) feels strongly that Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB), the 80 percent owner of Sabah Electricity Sdn Bhd has not sufficiently considered non-coal options before embarking on the proposed coal power plant in the East Coast of Sabah," said its president Yong Teck Lee in a statement today.

He said that in unprecedented full page advertisements in local newspapers in June this year TNB chairperson Leo Moggie had claimed that coal was "the only viable option for eastern Sabah."

However, the TNB chairperson admitted that natural gas was more environmentally friendly and faster to build than a coal power plant.

Yong said granted that solar power, wind power and bio-mass are not yet commercially viable, TNB has a basic duty to the people of Sabah to invest in hydroelectric power and natural gas energy.

How can Sandakan be an option?

Official publications of TNB and Sabah Electricity Sdn Bhd (SESB) show that the TNB had advanced knowledge of the proposed combined cycle gas power plant in Kimanis, and had planned the Liwagu and Upper Padas hydroelectric dams and the options to purchase electric power from the proposed hydropower dams at Lawas and Limbang in Sarawak.

Despite this, the Sapp chief, TNB and SESB have been stubbornly engrossed with coal "as the only viable option" for eastern Sabah.

He said in 2006, Moggie had stated that other than Silam in Lahad Datu, there was not much option.

How could it be that today Sandakan has become an option? asked Yong.

"If a coal-fired power plant is bad for Lahad Datu on environmental grounds, how could it be good for Sandakan, a neighbouring nature city?" he added.

He said the wide media coverage on climate change and the pollution of coal power in countries such as China has awakened Sabahans.

Concerned citizens have come up with convincing arguments against coal power that the state government had to reject the proposed coal power plant in Lahad Datu on environmental grounds.

Yong said the state government’s rejection of the Lahad Datu site in April this year has effectively made it illogical for anybody to justify Sandakan as a site.

Sandakan is only two hours' drive from Lahad Datu, he said, adding that clean coal technology could not have improved so dramatically since April.

Presumably, he said, the contract signed by TNB with China contractors early this year is still the same one. Nothing has changed.

He said that recent statements made by elected representatives and other officials in Sandakan convey the impression that the people of Sandakan would be forced by the prospect of severe power blackouts by year 2011 to grudgingly accept the coal power plant.

If so such a crude way to force the coal power plant on the people is highly irresponsible, he noted.

Yong said that in admitting that coal is a polluter, TNB has relied on the assumption that the management of the coal power plant will be faultless and with strict compliance with EIA conditions.

He added that the reality today is that the people of Sabah, including in Sandakan, face persistent power failures.

Even SESB transmission towers have collapsed due to metal thefts. As for enforcement of EIA conditions, he said the people have a right to be skeptical.

"When rivers are openly polluted, huge logs smuggled under the noses of the authorities, illegal immigrants roam glaringly on the streets, turtle eggs freely available in the Sandakan market, Sandakan airport without water, our public delivery system is so weak and maintenance culture so lacking, how can the people be expected to take the risks of a potentially disastrous coal power plant in their neighbourhood?" asked Yong.

The Sapp chief said irrespective of what the EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) might have to say, the social impact of the coal-fired power plant will cause much distress and anxiety to Sandakan residents and impact on the social-economic and tourism development of this future city leading to a crisis of confidence on the ability of their government to protect and promote their interests and livelihood.

"It is for this reason that Sapp calls on the authorities, including the state and federal governments, to urgently get TNB to embark on and invest in non-coal energy options," he said.

The non-coal energy options include:

1. The natural gas power plant in Kimanis. It does not make sense for Petronas to pipe Sabah’s natural gas 500 km to Bintulu via a RM 3 billion pipeline and then make Sabah import hydroelectric power from Sarawak. What is so difficult for Petronas to build the natural gas plant in Kimanis?

2. Expedite the 200 MW Liwagu hydroelectric dam which is ideally located in the middle of the East-West Grid interconnection

3. To fully utilize the existing under-used 275 kilovolts (kV) East West Grid for power transfer from the West Coast to the East Coast

4. If TNB insists to site a power plant in the East Coast for reasons of security of supply in an “islanded” network, then a gas pipeline from Kimanis to Tawau should be considered. After all, the pipeline distance from Kimanis to Tawau via Sapulut is shorter, less complicated and cheaper than that to Bintulu.

5. Import of power from Sarawak.

According to Yong, it is TNB's duty to explain why none of these options is possible.

It is also the responsibility of the state government to ensure sufficient supply of electric without compromising the environment and the health of the people, he added.