The First Hazardous Waste Facility in the Philippines

By Lourdes Ledesma

In 1990, President Corazon C. Aquino signed Republic Act No. 6969, also known as the Toxic Substances and Hazardous and Nuclear Wastes Control Act of 1990. This Act covers the importation, manufacture, processing, handling, storage, transportation, sale, distribution, use and disposal of all unregulated chemical substances and mixtures in the Philippines, including the entry even in transit. 

Even with the regulations in place, hazardous wastes (batteries, electronic junk, chemicals, paints, pesticides, etc.) are not adequately treated and are either illegally thrown in waterways or open dumps. According to a study by USAid on e-waste recycling and disposal in Asian countries, in the Philippines, almost one-half of the 400 rivers in the country are characterized as biologically dead due to contamination from industrial and residential run-off and inadequate sewerage and drainage infrastructure. In addition, the lack of a central hazardous waste treatment facility is a major obstacle to properly disposing of toxic and hazardous waste. 

The electronics industry in the Philippines plays a major role in the economic development of the country. It has consistently contributed the highest export revenues since 1981. It has also promoted the rapid computerization of practically all the corporate offices in Metro Manila as well as most government agencies. Because of the nature of the growing information technology, rapid obsolescence of hardware has also contributed to the build-up of e-junk in the country. Most of this e-waste end up in open dumps and waterways, where they contribute to the pollution of the environment. TV sets, mobile phones and computers contain a lot of lead and other toxic metals, and when dumped anywhere, pollute the environment enough to affect the health of humans adversely. 

For decades, developing countries in Asia and Africa have been used as a dumping ground for the toxic wastes from industrialized countries in Europe and North America. In an earlier article, I related the story of a particular town in China, called Guiyu, where the U.S., Canada, Germany and other developed nations send their e-waste to be recycled and processed by the most primitive methods by Chinese families for a daily pittance. Needless to say, the town inhabitants suffer from diseases arising from undrinkable water, unbreathable air, and toxic metals poisoning. A study of hazardous waste trade traffic showed that the Philippines, India, and Thailand have been destinations of toxic wastes dumping from industrialized countries. In December, 1999, Philippine authorities seized 122 forty-foot containers carrying infectious medical wastes from Japan. The cargo was disguised as used plastic scrap for recycling. Following a public outcry, the containers were shipped back to Japan. Subsequent investigations in Japan showed that this was a customary practice, only not known to the public. Australia before 1997 was the top exporter of scrap lead batteries to the Philippines. Lead wastes from Australia, the Netherlands and the U.S. have regularly entered Asia from the Philippines, Thailand and India. In the Philippines, a leading importer and recycler, Philippine Recyclers Inc. (PRI), was found to have serious lead contamination in the soil, vegetation, and river sediments around its factory area. It had been caught illegally dumping the toxic wastes from its factory in several open dumpsites near agricultural fields. Lead contamination was found in tests conducted by Greenpeace and health experts in the blood of children living near PRI. 

Now, because of one man’s determination to address this greatest danger to our environment, the expansion of the only privately-owned integrated hazardous waste treatment facility in the Philippines was launched last April 20th, 2009 in Silang, Cavite. In a 1.4 ha. lot, Herminio Esguerra, CEO of Cleanway Technology Corporation (CTC) and the Herma Group of Companies, started, against great opposition from the local and business community, to build a secure landfill in September of 2004. He wanted to prove that saving the environment and making a profit are both viable and sustainable. Four years after Cleanway’s integrated waste-treatment facility started its business operations, it has become the Philippines’ leading integrated environmental management company that uses the most advanced technology for waste treatment and disposal. This year’s launching of a state-of-the-art expanded and integrated facility for treatment of different kinds of hazardous waste, also marked the closure of its first secure landfill and the groundbreaking of a second larger-capacity secure landfill. The company currently addresses the waste-management problems of more than 100 big companies including car manufacturers and dealers, hospitals and various industries. 

Employing the latest technology and processes, Esguerra’s hazardous toxic waste facilities are in compliance with local and international environmental laws. They handle industrial, chemical, and medical wastes, treat it until no longer toxic to humans and the environment, then dump it into the secure landfill. The “secure” landfill is the highest type of landfill which complies with R.A. 9003. It is a cavity in the earth, double-lined with geomembrane and geotextiles, a material composed of reinforced fiber and wires designed to last for years. While not yet sealed, the secure landfill is designed with a drainage system for leachates that are channeled to a treatment chamber until it is stabilized and can be returned to the environment safely. At the end of this process is a fishpond where live marine animals swim freely. 

What Esguerra has done for his community has been to raise awareness that an efficient disposal system of toxic wastes can be achieved, to create a cleaner world, while generating employment and boosting the local economy. The community has fully embraced the CTC facility, and Esguerra has given back to his community scholarships to deserving students, adopting schools and sponsoring other ourtreach programs such as medical missions. Already there are plans to expand these facilities to other sites, such as Cebu. As Esguerra comments, “Do business with the environment `correctly’ and for sure, profit will be the by-product. We owe it to the next generation. This is our legacy. This is not only for Cleanway and the Herma Group, but this is for all.” 

What Esguerra has shown us is that if we care enough, a vision can become a reality. Do we care enough?* 

Green Choice Awards (Part 1)

By Alan S. Gensoli

In one or two past columns, I extolled to high heavens companies that have shown, or are making baby steps towards showing concern for the environment. In fact, what I’m really keyed up to do is publish the identities of companies who are abusing the environment, or are doing nothing about the environment despite the gazillion pesos they’re earning, and then lead a call to boycott their businesses. My lawyers tell me I could get in trouble that way. So, I’ll skin them differently. I will continue to celebrate “green companies” and hope that my readers would patronize them, which is tantamount to boycotting their competitors. WE NEED TO MAKE COMPANIES MORE RESPONSIBLE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT, AND UNLESS WE PINCH THEIR POCKETS, SOME WILL CONTINUE TO “PRETEND” THAT THEY JUST DON’T GET IT. WHICH IS WORSE THAN TRULY NOT GETTING IT BECAUSE THEY’RE DUMB. 

This year, “Natural Health,” a leading environment publication in the United States, launched its annual Green Choice Awards. The editors worked with Mr. Green himself, Ed Begley, Jr., star of the TV series “Living with Ed” on HGTV, in choosing 10 corporations who displayed outstanding acts of environmental care. They also chose 15 runners-up. Today, I will share with you five of the winners, and next Monday the other five. Perhaps, two Mondays from now I can also talk about the 15 runners-up who, really, are no less deserving of the recognition. 

The annual Green Choice Awards is given to large corporations as opposed to Mom-and-Pops, or what we call SMEs, for the very reason that “Natural Health” magazine knows that large corporations have the wherewithal to create green technologies and make green products accessible and affordable to more people (because they enjoy economies of scale, among other reasons, I suppose). Indeed, while we applaud individual, humble contributions as critical parts of a whole, the leadership of huge corporations can allow us to leapfrog and make up for years of neglect, complacency, and denial. So, here are five of the top 10, in alphabetical order: 

AVEDA: With 2,218 employees in 27 countries, Aveda’s leading brands are Green Science, Smooth Infusion, and Shampure. These beauty care products are not easily available in the Philippines, but we should know Aveda by yet another name. You see, last year Aveda delivered a revenue of $7.9 Billion to its mother company, Estee Lauder Companies. There’s a familiar brand! So, cosmetic users, pucker up with Estee Lauder! From here on, if it ain’t Estee, it ain’t pretty. 

Aveda’s green focus is in the area of sourcing organic ingredients, including the 98 tons of certified organic essential oils and raw herb ingredients that the company purchased in 2008. Another raw material used heavily by Aveda is plastic. Aveda uses 100% post-consumer (meaning, recycled) packaging, thus diverting over one million pounds of plastic from landfills every single year. Aveda also buys wind-energy credits to offset 100% of the electricity used in its facilities. What does that mean? Energy used to produce every single Aveda product is paid for with wind-energy credits. That’s every single product! 

Meanwhile, Aveda employees have raised over $13 Million for 70 environmental non-profit groups. (For all the Estee Lauder-brand cosmetics and perfumes used by our lady members, the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance should apply for assistance. Hey, why not?) The company also gives employees eight paid hours each year for community work. And those who bike to work, walk to work, ride the bus, carpool, or drive a hybrid all get Aveda gift certificates. 

COCA COLA COMPANY: With over 90,000 employees in over 200 countries, Coca Cola earned $29 Billion in 2008. Aside from the obvious softdrink brands, Coca Cola’s family of products includes Nestea and Minute Maid. So, drink up! 

The company’s green focus is in the area of reducing and recycling plastic. In January this year, Coke opened its sixth recycling plant in South Carolina. The facility has the capacity to make two billion, 20-ounce bottles each year, using recycled plastic. The beverage leader has also introduced the 38-percent-smaller bottle cap, which allows it to save 40 million pounds of plastic annually, in the United States alone. Coke’s vending machines are getting green as well, now using 35% less energy, which savings account for the elimination of 630,000 tons of emissions every year. And get this: Coke’s Drink2Wear line of clothing is sewn from used plastic bottles, in fact some five billion bottles since 2007. 

On top of all that, Coke also organized Green Teams among its employees. Over at the Desna River in the Ukraine, Coke employees collected four tons of garbage and planted over 100 trees. And remember the Earth Hour last March? Two corporate headquarters switched off lighting that night, while billboards around the world turned dark. 

DISCOVERY COMMUNICATIONS: With 4,000-plus employees working in 170-plus countries around the world, the popularity of this company is attributed largely to the Discovery Channel. Thanks to Cable TV subscribers like you and I, Discovery last year raked in earnings of up to $3.44 Billion. 

Discovery’s green focus is in the area of creating eco-themed programming. But we’re not talking just Discovery Channel anymore. In 2008, Discovery launched Planet Green, the first TV channel to dish out “green” programming 24/7. Please call your local Cable TV company and urge them to bring Planet Green into your communities. Discovery’s headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland, is a showcase of environmental awareness. Wind-energy credits have been bought since 2007 to offset 100% of the office’s electricity and gas consumption. The building is lit up by 4,000 CFLs (compact fluorescent lamps). And the company reduces its carbon emissions by at least 260 tons, and saves 24,000 gallons of water each year by installing rainwater tanks. Now, if Discovery can do it, so can we trap rainwater in our own homes. 

Off screen, there’s more greening happening at Discovery. Employees compete to lower electricity and paper usage, thus tripling the company’s recycling rate. Those who take public transportation or buy bikes are reimbursed, and free shoes are given to those who walk to work. 

FFORD MOTOR: Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Mazda, and Volvo...these are the key brands of Ford Motor, and you ought to give these a try before you decide on your next luxury car purchase, import, or smuggle (I really don’t mean to suggest the last one, but if you have to do it anyway, choosing a “green” brand can provide saving grace). With 245,000 employees in over 40 countries, Ford rang up a whopping $172.5 Billion earnings in 2008. 

Ford Motor’s green focus is in curbing greenhouse gases. Quite apparent now in the U.S. is the aggressive marketing of hybrid cars as more manufacturers have rolled out their versions and government is giving all sorts of financial breaks to those who purchase and drive them. But while most car makers have remained on the level of using renewable sources of energy, such as electricity and biofuels, Ford Motor has put the pedal to the metal in the race to hybrid domination. Ford’s hybrid car, the Escape, sports seats made from 100% post-industrial recycled fabric. By doing this alone, Ford reduces its carbon emissions by 900 tons and saves 600,000 gallons of water. Moreover, the Escape’s new engine, the EcoBoost, launched only this year, makes the car 20% more fuel efficient. In the face of an environmental emergency, I really don’t see any reason why such seats, such engine, or the car itself, cannot find its way to the Bacolod market sooner rather than later. 

Ford Motor employees live up to the culture of a market leader. They have turned vacant lots in 17 facilities into habitats for local flora and fauna. They have also created walking trails to encourage walking (imagine that from a car manufacturer) and for nearby residents to visit their facilities. Meanwhile, all Ford Motor employees are given two paid days a year to do volunteer work. It’s probable then, that on any given day at Ford Motor, someone’s doing a good turn for the community - on any given day! 

KRAFT FOODS: Kraft has been a mark of good quality food since I can remember, and while many of us know the company by its cheese, Kraft has entered our kitchens and lunch boxes through various other products. And this Kraft continues to do to this day. In 2008, Kraft earned $42 Billion doing business in 150 countries with 100,000 employees. 

Kraft’s foresight and dynamism have brought the company to the world of coffee, where Kraft now is keen on ensuring long-term viability. And so, for this year’s Green Choice Awards, the company’s green focus is in sourcing sustainably grown coffee. And I’m not just referring to sustainable supply of coffee. I’m talking about coffee that is grown in ways that care for the environment. In 2008, Kraft Foods purchased 33,000 tons of coffee that sustains farming practices on 40,000 acres of land. More significantly for the environment, they are “Rainforest Alliance” certified coffee. Meanwhile, eight years of environmental concern have now reduced Kraft’s CO2 emissions, and energy and water use by up to 34%. Recycling rate has been pumped up to an impressive 90%. 

So, remember these companies: Aveda, Coke, Discovery, Ford, and Kraft. Next time you shop, buy their brands; it’s the least we can do to thank them, and to show their competitors who have yet to do their share, that we the consumers demand that they do their share now. On Monday next week, I will tell you the other five winners of the Green Choice Awards. Since the list is in alphabetical order, and since we’ve mentioned winners up to Kraft, only companies whose names start with the letter L up to Z have a chance to be endorsed by me. If your company does not qualify, don’t even bother reading my column next week. It’ll only make you cry. 

I don’t know about you, but I have a “home channel” on my TV. That’s the channel I most frequently watch. It used to be a cable news network. But with the Green Choice Awards, I’ve made a new Discovery! And this is exactly what I mean by “consumerism.” Tomorrow morning I will check my fridge and grocery cabinet and list down all the products that are in there. Every product that has a Kraft alternative should then fear. Put my money where my mouth is, that’s right! Either that, or I’m wasting my time in this advocacy.*

A Sea Without Shells

By Gigi M. Campos

Spending time at the beach in Sipalay is always a welcome respite - away from the problems of city life, uncollected garbage and pollution. Walking along the shores, always gets me to think of how life is like a beach. Waves of things happen to us, some good, some bad. Do we sink or swim or end up empty and lifeless on the beach, giving up when things get tough and emptying us of hope and life like the broken shells of animals once alive? Or, are we like the shellfish sometimes swept around by waves of opinions or troubles until the tide starts to go out? Or, are we like the sand crabs who live under the sand, waiting for opportunities that could lure us from our safe little holes, then plunging out to grab whatever we can of life, love, or hope then retreating back in our holes once we think we’ve had enough of life? Or, are we like the sea gulls who fly above, enjoying the wind under our wings, diving in when we see food to eat, bobbing on the water, going with the flow of life? Or, are we like the little fish who live in the shallow waters sometimes, avoiding predators, eating when they need to, enjoying the unity of a school of other fish as they swim about exploring the currents, the underwater world, and experiencing life? 

Our oceans are becoming more acidic by the day, affecting the ability of shellfish and coral to create the shells and skeletons vital to their survival. In the 1960s, Rachel Carson came out with a book “Silent Spring” which alerted the world to the problems of the insecticide DDT in the food chain. Birds of prey were particularly vulnerable, with their eggshells becoming so thin they could no longer contain growing embryos. The threat of springtime with no birdsong catapulted the world into a new awareness of ecology and conservation. 

Forty-nine years on, a new threat is looming, this time in the sea. Once again the busy rhythm of people is causing an ecological crisis. Not as complicated as modeling global warming, not as simple as banning a pesticide, our newest planetary drama is called ocean acidification. It happens because of the connections between air, water, and shells. 

We know that human activities, particularly the burning of coal, oil, petrol and wood, have for the past 200 years increased the amount of carbon dioxide, or CO2, in the atmosphere. While these molecules float around in the air, they act like a blanket keeping Earth warm and eventually changing the whole climate. The warming effects of CO2 have been less than they could have been, however, because about a third of CO2 from the air gets mopped up by the oceans. 

What’s good for global climate change, however, is bad for the sea. When you add CO2 to sea water, it becomes more acid. And that means that the carbonate ion, CO3, gets scarcer. That might seem like no big deal, but many marine plants and animals use carbonate, along with calcium, for constructing protection and structure. 

Clams, snails, urchins, corals, some algae, and many plankton all use calcium carbonate (CaCO3) to build their shells. 

Marine ecologists have only just begun to investigate the potential problems that a more acid ocean might pose to creatures in the sea. What they have found so far is alarming. Tiny plankton, zillions of which form part of the basis of the marine food chain, are usually protected by a robust and complex ball of carbonate. 

But when you grow them in more acid conditions, these little shells become thinner and more frail. Even more alarming, experiments with corals show that under acid conditions, some do not make a skeleton. They sit there like a jelly glob with no sign of the complex architecture that makes coral reefs so diverse and so attractive to tourists - and to fish. This isn’t just a problem for squishy marine critters. Marine aquaculture and multimillion-dollar fisheries such as mussel farming are likely to be affected. 

Tourism to coral reefs is another multimillion-dollar industry, and some economies are wholly reliant on it. There is even the suggestion that a more acid ocean could be more corrosive and thus affect shipping and ports. 

Our seas are growing more acid by the day. Early estimates suggested that acidity could go up 30 per cent by the end of this century. Now scientists are warning that, in the Southern Ocean, we could be seeing measurable changes within a few decades. The effects of what we have already pumped into the air are probably irreversible. There are no practical solutions or cures - no antacid for the sea’s indigestion. The only thing we can do is to slow it down. 

Luckily, we already want to reduce carbon emissions and know we need to stop the invisible clouds of CO2 rising into the air. We already have mechanisms in place to change how we live and travel. Ocean acidification provides another, and perhaps a more urgent, reason for continuing on this path as fast as possible. 

Luckily, we still have birds of prey. That is because people cared, listened and took action. Ordinary gardeners stopped using DDT, and eventually governments also responded. Now you can’t buy DDT and you can’t spray it around. 

Geologists, who specialize in the long- term view, are beginning to call the present time a period of the anthropocene epoch. The term Anthropocene is used by some scientists to describe the most recent period in the earth’s history. It has no precise start date, but may be considered to start in the late 18th century when the activities of man first began to have a significant global impact on the Earth’s climate and ecosystems. 

It is when the activities of humans are so pervasive that they will be the dominant signal in the geologic record of our time. So far, it appears that the anthropocene will be renowned for its great extinction event - a period in which Earth became so unhealthy that hundreds of species of animals and plants ceased to be. Given that acidification is to be added to the effects of coastal pollution, ongoing development, sedimentation and over-fishing, it is not surprising that our coastal ecosystems are set to crash. 

We can choose to make a difference if we want to continue to enjoy the sight, sounds, smells and feel of the water, sun and sand... Think about all those millions of plankton making their complex and perfect skeletons. When we are on the road, we need to think about that exhaust, puffing out the back of every car, each little bit of CO2 heading into the air, into the sea, a little drop of poison for our planet. Each of us can make small differences. Think about what you can do, today, to save just one plankton, just one coral. Because a sea without shells is like a springtime without birds.* 

Biodiesel - The New Age Fuel

By Lourdes Ledesma

We are at the dawn of a new age in fuel use. And just in time, too, when our cities are being overwhelmed by fogs of pollution. Our new biofuels are biodiesel and bioethanol, sourced locally and a great boon to the livelihoods of countless of our countrymen. Allow me to tell you about biodiesel.

Biodiesel is a blend of plant oil (in the Philippines, coconut oil) and petroleum diesel fuel. As mandated by the Biofuels Act of 2006, the first stage is a blend of 1% coco-biodiesel and 99% petroleum diesel. The coconut oil is first processed so that the glycerine (taba or sebo) is first removed and replaced with methyl alcohol (methanol). In other countries the plant oils may be derived from soybean, rapeseed, canola, sunflower or jatropha, olive and palm, or from used cooking oil (vegetable or animal). In the Philippines, the biodiesel blend is marketed as B1 and has been in use since 2002. The coco-biodiesel is engineered according to fuel specifications of the Philippine National Standard (PNS) and is called Coconut Methyl Ester (CME). The World-Wide Fuel Charter (WWFC) is the official standard for fuel specifications that is accepted by most major automotive manufacturers throughout the world, and it accepts blends up to 5% for diesel vehicles.

Coco-biodiesel has unique cleansing properties that can dissolve carbon and diesel soot deposits in engine combustion chambers and declogs fuel lines and fuel injector nozzles, thus extending engine life and promoting engine efficiency. Its high lubricity enhances the efficient movement of the moving parts in the fuel pump and fuel injector unit. It restores the efficiency of old engines, too.

Because of its high cetane number and oxygen content, a more complete and faster rate of combustion of the fuel is achieved. This not only cuts down the formation of harmful gases and black smoke, which is actually unexpended energy in the form of partially burnt fuel. This translates to fuel savings and is converted to greater power and mileage efficiency. Furthermore, better acceleration response is achieved, providing motorists with full driving satisfaction. Fuel economy has two cost components, namely purchase cost (P/lt.) and performance cost (kms./lt.) While the coco-biodiesel blend may be an added cost in P/lt, its great benefit comes from kms/lt., and of course, the reduction of pollution from black smoke and harmful gases. For every liter of biodiesel blend used, 3 kg of carbon dioxide is substantially reduced in the atmosphere.

Because the coco-biodiesel blend improves engine efficiency and declogs and lubricates its moving parts, it extends the life of engines and cuts down on maintenance costs, which translates to savings for the motorists. Another plus that emerges is the resurgence of the coconut industry and the increased livelihoods for millions of Filipinos dependent on the industry.

The Philippines is the leading producer of coco-biodiesel in the Asian region. Currently the total national output is 257 million liters/year, of which 147 million liters is used for domestic consumption and the balance is exported. Chemrez Inc., one of the major producers of coco-biodiesel in the country, exports 500,000 liters to Germany, China, Chinese Taipei, South Korea and Malaysia. San Miguel Corp. is also going heavily into coco-biodiesel production.

Other major players like PNOC-Alternative Fuels Corp., are developing jatropha as feedstock for biodiesel market. Presently it is engaged in conducting feasibility studies to establish its economic viability, vis-a-vis the declining prices of crude oil in the international market. It plans to establish oil refineries in several areas of the country, too. The Dept. Of Energy has so far accredited three coco-biodiesel producers, Aside from PNOC-AFC, it has approved Senbel, Inc., and the DOST-Phil. Council for Industry and Energy Research and Development Romtron (PCIERD).

Jatropha is a drought resistant perennial, growing in marginal/poor soil, which may be suitable in less developed areas of the Philippines. It grows relatively quickly and has a life span of 50 years, producing seeds with an oil content of 37%. The oil can be combusted without being refined and burns with a clear, smoke-free flame, tested successfully as fuel for simple diesel engines. It produces nuts after 2-5 years. It has medical uses in diseases like cancer, piles, snakebite, dropsy and paralysis. India is a heavy producer of Jatropha.

Other sources of bio-diesel are rapeseed, soybean oil, palm and waste vegetable oil. These are not produced in commercial quantities in this country. Soybean is the most commonly-grown oil-yielding plant in the United States, while Europe produces biodiesel from rapeseed and sunflower oil. Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand have palm as an abundant source. 

The city of San Francisco in California, U.S.A. has established a pilot plant to convert the city’s waste cooking oil from restaurants into biodiesel fuel for the city’s 1,500 trucks and vehicles. In May of 2008, Mayor Gavin Newsom announced the receipt of a $1 million grant from the California Energy Commission to the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to build the city’s first grease-biodiesel production facility. The plant will create three grades of biodiesel from “brown grease,” which are pan scrapings, and oil residues in grease traps in restaurants. These are collected by municipal trucks and turned into 1) biodiesel for vehicles, 2) lower grade biofuel for running sewage treatment plant diesel turbines and pumps, and 3) methane gas at the sewage plant and converting it for heating needs. In September, 2008 the San Francisco Port Commission approved construction of a $10 million biodiesel plant from brown grease. As mandated by law, all the city’s vehicles run on grown grease biodiesel fuel.

I believe this can be done on a small scale here in Bacolod. When a door closes on a good thing, windows of opportunity open for the future, if we are quick to seize it.*

Catholic Lay Forum Joins Opposition to Landfill in Felisa

By Alan S. Gensoli

Last March 31st I received a copy of a document entitled, “Position Paper on Serious Danger of Brgy. Felisa Dumpsite to People of Bacolod City” signed by members of the Catholic Lay Forum of the Diocese of Bacolod. The position paper, referred to a column written by Atty. Andy Hagad for another local daily, and to a column of mine published in this newspaper, both on Jan. 5, 2009, urging the Bacolod LGU and the DENR “to transfer as soon as possible, the city dumpsite to a suitable area far from the present Barangay Felisa area where the BACIWA wells and distribution lines are located.” The paper further recommended a site in Brgy. Cabug. 

I would like to thank very much the members of the Catholic Lay Forum of Bacolod for taking up this urgent concern. This is a boost and a boon to our advocacy on Solid Waste Management (SWM). Not to look a gift-horse in the mouth, though, how I wish that this position paper arrived at my doorsteps much earlier. That it did only on March 31, the day before the city launched its “No Segregation, No Collection” policy, puts me in a jam. Much as I would like to trumpet the concern of the Catholic Lay Forum, I am wont to stand down and allow the city some room to work out its “No Segregation, No Collection” policy, which I totally applaud. 

But, the Catholic Lay Forum is right in keeping the matter about the sanitary landfill in Felisa alive, albeit hibernating for another day. 

By coincidence, last April 2nd, Jean Trebol of our alliance passed on to me some updates from Atty. Julie Carbon, GM of BACIWA. May I share these with you, but especially to the Catholic Lay Forum of Bacolod whose concerns may be temporarily addressed by the updates. 

BACIWA has five wells in the vicinity of the open dump in Felisa - these are Wells 36 to 40. Per Atty. Carbon, Well 36 is now operational, Well 37 will be energized by CENECO in two weeks’ time (which should be around April 16). Well 39 was supposedly energized by CENECO on April 5, thereafter to become operational, and Well 40 has been condemned after it was tested and found to contain salt. Meanwhile, there was no update on Well 38 and, as with any well threatened by fecal coliform, I guess no news is good news. 

If I recall right from my past conversations with Atty. Carbon, these five wells in Felisa are critical to Bacolod. I have the impression that they are the last of the Mohicans. While these five may be the later wells to be developed, this doesn’t mean that they are in addition to 35 older wells that are serving the city. Actually, BACIWA wells also dry up after some time, and some of the older wells have indeed dried up. So, to say that BACIWA has 40 wells does not mean that BACIWA has 40 functioning wells. 

This should concern all of us. And it should further concern us that BACIWA has already explored the possibility of importing potable water from sources in the mountains of Murcia. This means, we’re running out of water! Murcia Mayor Sonny Coscolluela may have told BACIWA that it will cost them an arm and a leg. It’s a seller’s market, you see: Bacolodians could lose more than just an arm and a leg if their drinking water in Brgy. Felisa proves to be “fecalized”. So, when the demand is high, the price goes up, and Murcia is happy. The market is efficient that way. 

Our concern shouldn’t end there. We should also be worried sick that while water supply is getting scarce, our annual population growth rate is still 2.12%. Worse, we have a squatter colony that comprises up to 60% of total population. That’s 300,000 people who may not afford to buy bottled water! If the BACIWA wells in Felisa become contaminated, we can have a cholera outbreak in our hands. Think about it. 

As far as the appeal of the Catholic Lay Forum of Bacolod for the garbage facility to be moved out of Brgy. Felisa, the chances of this happening could be remote if only for the fact that in 2008, our city already purchased a seven-hectare property, near the existing open dump in Felisa, purportedly to build a sanitary landfill. To be able to build the landfill, the city needs to get an Environment Compliance Certificate (ECC) from the DENR. Thus, the only chance for the landfill to be built outside Felisa, as prayed for by the position paper of the Catholic Lay Forum of Bacolod, is for the DENR not to grant the Bacolod LGU an ECC to the Felisa property. Alas, we are talking about the same DENR that looked the other way while our LGU defied R.A. 9003 for many years. 

And this brings us to a Catch 22 situation - damned if you have a sanitary landfill in Felisa, and damned if you don’t have a sanitary landfill now. Why so? Because Brgy. Felisa is an active water source, the sanitary landfill shouldn’t be there. But because the city has started collecting segregated garbage, we should already have a sanitary landfill in place. That we do not should again alarm all of us. 

During the monthly General Meeting of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance last March 30, its Monitoring Committee head Norman Campos reported that they have not seen a sanitary landfill, built or being built, anywhere near Felisa. Where then will the city deliver its residual and special wastes? 

Pursuant to the program of the Bacolod LGU to begin collecting segregated garbage on April 1, the city will pick up RESIDUAL WASTE and SPECIAL WASTE only. As far as I am concerned, these are the two worst types of garbage. Residual wastes are the dirtiest of the dirty - it’s a buffet of used sanitary napkins, used disposable diapers, used toilet paper, and everything else you wouldn’t want your manicure to touch. Meanwhile, special wastes are actually household hazardous wastes, such as household chemicals. Thus, these two types of waste require a garbage facility that has an impermeable lining at the bottom, to prevent juice coming from these to seep into the ground where our potable water source could be contaminated. And so now, what good is garbage segregation if there is no sanitary landfill to bring segregated garbage to? But then, too, can we allow a sanitary landfill to be built in Felisa?*

Burning Trash Won’t Make it Disappear

SOMETHING SMELLS!

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Gigi M. Campos

After more than eight years, the city of Bacolod took its first step towards an implementation of RA 2009 last April 1st. With this new policy of NO SEGREGATION, NO COLLECTION in place, the temptation to find other means of getting rid of garbage becomes very strong. Why? Because there are still some people who just don’t want to be bothered by the tedious task of segregating and may resort to the next easiest option - backyard trash burning. This is no longer allowed by RA2009, but in our country it has been a common method of disposing garbage, particularly in the rural areas. Many years ago when we used to live in the town of Pontevedra, I would see the household help of my in-laws religiously sweeping the dry leaves of chico, avocado and iba trees in the backyard in neat little piles and setting them to flame every afternoon. It was a common sight in many backyards. 

It was also said that smoking fruit trees would ensure prolific produce when fruiting time came. Sure enough, we always enjoyed an abundant supply of fruits from just the backyard. Nobody knew of the dangers of backyard trash burning. 

Burning backyard trash has been declared illegal because the burning of trash whether in a barrel, a pile or anywhere outdoors releases toxic smoke into the air. The content of the smoke emitted depends on the trash that went into the fire, the temperature of the fire and the available oxygen. Backyard trash fires can smolder and as a result produce greater amounts of harmful chemicals. Harmful chemicals can also be present in the ash from the fire. 

Trash containing plastics, polystyrene (such as foam cups), CCA (Chromated Copper Arsenate) pressure-treated wood, and bleached or colored papers are the worst kind because these materials can produce harmful chemicals when burned. For example, when CCA pressure-treated wood which contains arsenic is burned, arsenic can be released in the smoke or remain in the ash. 

A study by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the NYS Department of Health (DOH) and the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) measured the types and amounts of many chemicals in the smoke from burning trash. For some of those chemicals, burning about 10 pounds a day of trash from a household burn barrel may produce as much air pollution as a modern, well-controlled incinerator burning 400,000 pounds a day of trash!! Emissions of dioxins and furans from backyard burning alone are estimated to be greater than for all other sources combined. 

We are all at risk from trash burning. Smoke from any fire can affect our health, our family’s health and our neighbor’s health. The smoke from backyard burning is released close to the ground where people can easily breathe it. The smoke from the fire can deposit dangerous chemicals on garden vegetables and garden soil. People can be exposed to those chemicals by eating fruits and vegetables grown near the trash-fire or in garden soil tilled with the ashes. Young children may be at greater risk than adults because of their playing behaviors, their small size and their developing bodies. 

The chances of developing health effects from contact (exposure) with smoke from backyard fires depends on how much smoke a person contacts, how a person is exposed (e.g., breathing the smoke or eating vegetables affected by the smoke) and how long and often the person is exposed. Some people may be more or less sensitive than others to chemicals in smoke. People exposed to smoke could experience burning eyes and nose, coughing, nausea, headaches, or dizziness. Some people find the odors produced by burn barrels disagreeable, and they may experience discomfort, headaches, and nausea. Smoke can trigger asthma attacks. People with heart and lung conditions are at greater risks for health effects. Repeated exposures to pollutants in burning smoke may occur when people burn trash on a regular basis, and this may increase the risk of chronic health problems. Of course, unattended backyard burning can also cause accidental fires. 

Information from studies showed that smoke from burning trash contains particulate matter, carbon monoxide, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen cyanide, benzene, styrene, formaldehyde, arsenic, lead, chromium, benzo(a)pyrene, dioxins, furans and PCBs. Some of these chemicals are found in smoke from any fire. Although substances such as particulate matter, carbon monoxide and formaldehyde can cause immediate health effects with enough exposure, some chemicals such as dioxin can build up in foods and in your body. Some of these chemicals can remain in the environment for a long time and can remain on your property (for example, soil outside and dust inside your home). 

There are three ways burning trash can get chemicals into our bodies — breathing the smoke, eating food contaminated by smoke and ash, and playing in areas of contaminated soil or dust. Smoke and ash can settle on fruits and vegetables. If ash is mixed into the garden soil, chemicals can be taken up by crops. Chemicals can enter milk, eggs or meat if farm animals eat contaminated feed or soil. 

We need to break the habit and stop burning trash. Here are some simple tips to avoid the need to burn your trash: 

Reduce - Avoid waste. Buy fewer items and select products with the least packaging. 

Re-use - Buy products that can be re-used and/or come in containers that can be re-filled. 

Recycle - Learn about your community’s recycling programs. Dispose of your recyclables accordingly, and urge others to do the same. 

Compost - Compost plant-based kitchen and yard waste. 

Segregate - The only way you can get your trash collected and properly disposed of is if your trash and recyclables are segregated. 

Let’s be considerate of your neighbors and stop backyard burning. Remember, it is not only a bad idea, it is against the law!* 

Green House Pa-effect?

SOMETHING SMELLS!

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Alan S. Gensoli

The mission of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance is to impel government to find lasting solutions to the flooding problem of Bacolod. Now that the Bacolod LGU has begun the collection of segregated garbage only, and since unsegregated garbage is a major cause of flooding, that mission seems to have been accomplished. Has it?

Coincidentally, too, on March 31, 2009, the day before the government launched its “No Segregation, No Collection” policy, the Banat Baha TV show of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance ended its third season. Just as well, it would seem, as if to say that the Banat Baha had done its job and it was time to put the camera away. Is it?

A fortnight ago today, the alliance held its monthly general membership meeting. The accomplishments of the Banat Baha were recalled and applauded. This has been a project of so many individuals, but especially of Dr. Elsie Coscolluela, the Executive Producer, and Rene Hinojales, the host of the show. Michael Varca was the show’s producer/director/writer/researcher all rolled into one.

Customary in our monthly meeting is the presentation of committee reports. We have nine standing committees: Communications, Education, Finance, Legal, Membership, Monitoring, New Business, Secretariat, and Special Events. Let me share with you highlights from two of these reports as these are most significant at this point in time.

The Monitoring Committee, co-chaired by Norman Campos and Maite Elorde, reported on two issues that had been left unfinished, unattended since the time the Bacolod LGU fired us from the Bacolod Flood Mitigating Committee in November 2008. The construction of the floodway at Brgy. Banago is nowhere near completion. And that green house on top of the Banago Creek is still there, together with other illegal structures, squatter shanties in fact, all obstructing the water flow. Their stilts continue to collect garbage coming from their fellow illegal structures upstream, and for sure they continue to pooh pooh straight into the creek, fecal coliform and all! But of all, the green house stands proud. Mainit sa mata. With its bold color in a canvas of ashen grey and putrid brown, the green house seems to brag to the world: “Hey, look at me, I’m on top of a creek and no one can do anything about it! Not even the city government!” Bah, humbug.

Just before we were fired from the Mitigating Committee in November last, we were told that these illegal structures had already been identified and scheduled for demolition. We know none has been demolished. We also know that these are not new structures but the same old illegal structures that we talked about last year. How do we know that? Because of the green house. It has become a reference point, thank you.

Meanwhile, the floodway is also not done. The DPWH has rip-rapped some 270 meters worth of floodway. Not only is this not enough, the 270 meters are not contiguous. For some reason, those who constructed this created several giant bath tubs, now filled with stagnant, black, filthy, stenchy, yucky water with nowhere to empty? Another 500 meters need to be dug up and the Bacolod LGU has offered to do the job, after which the DPWH will construct the rip-rap. This has not yet been dug up, our Norman Campos reported.

Meanwhile, our Education Committee, co-chaired by Joel Jaquinta and Maggie Jalandoni, reported on the Solid Waste Management (SWM) seminar held for the Business Inn and Planta Centro Hotel. I wrote about this in a recent column, but I have more insight to add, especially valuable to private enterprises.

Coming out of that seminar, Joel observed that the simplified steps and procedures featured in the flyer distributed by the Bacolod LGU may not be summarily applicable to all enterprises. Perhaps, the simplified steps are applicable in most homes, but not in businesses where the size and type of operations greatly vary. For instance, a restaurant with a seating capacity of 25 and another with a seating capacity of 50 will generate different loads of garbage. In another case, a fine dining restaurant and a turo-turo will also generate different kinds of garbage.

Another area where adjustments may have to be made is in the schedule of garbage pick-ups. Enterprises should adjust to the schedule that the city has planned out. For instance, according to the government’s pick up schedule, residual wastes will be collected on Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturdays only. What then should a busy restaurant do with its garbage on other days? A popular fastfood-type establishment using disposable materials (such as plastic bags, plates, utensils, cups and tumblers, styro food containers) will have to put mitigating measures in place to prevent itself from smelling and from being inundated with bugs and ants if it has to wait for 48 hours before the next pick up. For this reason, an SWM seminar especially designed to address the unique needs of an establishment is recommended. And our Joel Jaquinta is available for that. For a reasonable fee, of course. You may contact him through his cellular phone number, 0920-637-8557.

With these reports from our Monitoring and Education committees, these questions are once more begged: Has the mission of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance been achieved with the start of the collection of segregated garbage on April 1? Has the Banat Baha TV show fulfilled its objectives, or outgrown its purpose after three seasons? If our last monthly meeting would have it, uh-uh. There’s just so much more monitoring and educating to do. So, don’t be surprised, because when you least expect it, “Smile!”, you’re on Banat Baha camera!

A Happy Easter to all!