How PETs Can Harm Us?

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

Tina M. Monfort

Much of our food and drink comes in contact with plastic everyday, but not all plastics are safe! While plastic food wraps and containers can be important in protecting our food, recent studies show that when certain plastics come into contact with food, some questionable chemicals migrate from the packaging to the food. This article will provide an outline on the different plastic containers, how some of their chemicals harm us and tips on what to use as alternatives. But first, let us review our Resin Identification Code: 

Code #1 - PET or PETE (polyethylene terephthalate) 

Typical Product Application: Soft drink bottles, medicine containers. 

Code #2 - HDPE (high density polyethylene) 

Typical Product Application: Toys, bottles for milk, water, detergent, shampoo, motor oil. 

Code #3 - PVC (polyvinyl chloride) 

Typical Product Application: Cooking oil, shampoo & detergent bottles, pipe & tubing, meat wrap. 

Code #4 - LDPE (low density polyethylene) 

Typical Product Application: Soft, flexible plastic as used in garbage bags, wrapping films, grocery bags. 

Code #5 - PP (polypropylene) 

Typical Product Application: Hard, but flexible. Used in ice-cream & yogurt containers, potato crisp bags, drinking straws, syrup bottles, diapers. 

Code #6 - PS (polystyrene) 

Typical Product Application: Rigid, brittle plastic. Coffee cups, take-out food containers, meat trays, plastic cutlery. 

Code #7 - Other (including polycarbonate, nylon and acrylic) 

Typical Product Application: Baby bottles 

Getting to know the culprits: Dioxins, Phthalates, Bisphenol A and Antimony - Dioxins are highly poisonous even at low doses and are produced when plastics are manufactured and incinerated. Phthalates are “plasticizers” linked to a variety of birth defects and is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. Most cling-wrapped meats, cheeses and food bought from shops are wrapped in PVC. The “plasticizers” are used in the manufacture of #3 PVC plastic to soften it into its flexible form. Traces of these chemicals, known as adipates and phthalates, can leak out of PVC when it comes in contact with food. Phthalates are also widely used in cosmetics and beauty products, including nail polish. Many #7 Polycarbonate bottles are made with Bisphenol A (BPA). It is the chemical used to make hard, clear plastics such as those found in baby bottles, food-storage containers and the lining of soft drink cans. BPA is also used in the manufacture of epoxy resins and various other plastics. Chemical bonds that BPA forms in plastic can unravel when heated, washed or exposed to acidic food, or as the container ages generally. This creates chemical contamination of the food or drink. Many studies have evaluated BPA as a hormone disruptor, a chemical that alters the body’s normal hormonal activity. #1 PETE plastic water bottles have been shown to leach antimony into water. It is important to remember that leaving water in any plastic bottle for a prolonged period of time allows for chemical leaching to occur. 

Here are tips for Reducing Your Toxic Plastic Exposure: 

1) Store your food and water in glass or stainless steel if at all possible. 

2) If you can’t use glass, use any of the “safe” plastic jars. #2 HDPE, #4 LDPE, and #5 PP. Most research has not shown leaching of any carcinogens or endocrine disruptors from these plastics. 

3) If you use a #1 PETE container (which is a commonly recycled type), remember they are not usually designed for re-use. Extended use will increase risk of leaching. 

4). NEVER use Styrofoam cups, especially for hot drinks. Polystyrene, #6 PS, is usually found in foam containers and cups may leach styrene. Styrene, is considered a possible human carcinogen, which disrupts hormones or affect reproduction. If you use baby bottles, know that around 95% of all baby bottles are currently made of polycarbonate #7. Switch to polycarbonate-free baby bottles, like those manufactured from glass or from #5 PP, or consider using glass bottles when ever practical. And don’t microwave your baby’s plastic bottles ! 

5) Avoid heating food in plastic containers. 

6) Avoid storing fatty food, such as meat and cheese, in plastic containers or plastic wrap. 

7) Avoid plastic cutlery and dinnerware, especially when cooking or heating food. 

8) Use wood instead of plastic cutting boards and spray your wooden board with a mist of vinegar, then with a mix of hydrogen 

peroxide, to kill bacteria. 

9) When purchasing cling-wrapped food from the supermarket or deli, slice off a thin layer where the food came into contact with the plastic and store the rest in a glass or ceramic container, or non-PVC cling wrap. 

10) INVEST in a good quality, non-plastic, reusable water bottle (eg: such as a SIGG bottle. These are aluminum with an inert water based internal lining). Don’t freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic. 

Yes, plastics...the “miracle” of modern science. For without plastics...there are a whole bunch of things we wouldn’t have. Personally, It’s quite impossible to imagine how we can manage without these PET containers. So again allow me to give you a very brief summary of the Do’s and Don’ts, less the technicality this time. 

1) Use stainless steel, both inside and out, with no epoxy finish- this is your safest alternative.

2) Glass bottles are safe although fragile.

3) Use plastics #2, 4 & 5 safely. Use #1 sparingly or if possible, do not re-use at all and stop re-using other plastic bottles once they appear worn and/or discolored. Bottles leach more with age. 

4) Avoid subjecting plastics to high temperatures, which increases leaching. 

Our 9 Other Dumpsites

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Alan S. Gensoli

When I was very young, our family spent Sundays at my maternal grandparents’ house in Bago City. The weekly drive was somewhat agonizing, made tolerable only by the thought of Lola’s cooking awaiting us. I remember the rough road where the highway is now. I remember cars had no air-conditioning then, so windows were constantly rolled up and down to catch a breath or shield our faces from dust. I also remember passing by a wide open dump somewhere in Tangub. And we would hold our breaths as our red Vauxhall passed by. Whatever happened to the open dump of my childhood Sundays? 

In the course of advocating Solid Waste Management (SWM), and studying our environmental law, administrative orders from the DENR, and executive orders from Malacañang, we have come to realize that the putting up of a sanitary landfill is contingent on so many things. One of these is the safe closure and rehabilitation of old open dumps. It is for this reason that in 2008 our local government applied to the DENR for an “Authority to Close” the open dump in Purok Acacia, Brgy. Felisa. Applying for this authority requires the local government to submit a “Safe Closure and Rehabilitation Plan” to the DENR. Consequently, on Sept. 17, 2008, DENR Reg. Dir. Bienvenido Lipayon wrote to Mayor Evelio Leonardia granting the latter the Authority to Close the open dump in Felisa. 

While we welcomed this development, we also began to wonder about the other dumpsites of Bacolod. I’m referring to the open garbage dumps that the city used in years past, all of which, by the way, were operated prior to the election of Mayor Leonardia to the mayorship in 2004. We wondered, shouldn’t these open dumps also be safely closed and rehabilitated before a sanitary landfill can be built? 

Unfortunately for Mayor Leonardia, the two critical deadlines in Republic Act 9003, or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, happened in and around his incumbency. According to the law, on Feb. 16, 2004 all open dumps should be closed and replaced with controlled dumps. Then, on Feb. 16, 2006 all controlled dumps should be closed and replaced with sanitary landfills. By getting himself elected mayor in 2004, and again in 2007, Mayor Leonardia assumed the responsibility of fulfilling these deadlines. Meanwhile, the city had so many other open dumps in the past that were used during the mayorships of other politicians, but which must also be closed and rehabilitated now. Fortunately for those past mayors, open dumps were not yet illegal during their terms. But they are now, during Mayor Leonardia’s. Talk about being at the wrong place at the wrong time. But then again, imagine if Mayor Leonardia fixed all of our garbage problems today, including closing and rehabilitating all past and present open dumps? He would go down in history as the mayor who swept after other mayors, and I think Mayor Leonardia would be the better for it come 2010. As they say the Chinese say, problem is opportunity. 

How many other open dumps do we have, not counting the current open dump in Felisa? We have nine (10 including Felisa). According to the Ecological Solid Waste Management Plan of Bacolod City, authored by Dominic Schliebs (2003) with updates from Elizabeth Warnes (2006), the following are the nine other open dumps of Bacolod (dates in parentheses indicate period/s of use): 

Villa Esparanza in Brgy. Tangub (???-Dec. 31, 1997; Mar. 30, 2001); Purok Sigay in Brgy. Singcang-Airport (Jan. 1-Aug. 4, 2008; Sept. 1, 2003-Mar. 31, 2004); Maravilla Dumpsite in Purok Fortune Towne, Brgy. Estefania (Aug. 5-15, 1998); Dinsay Dumpsite in Purok Tonggoy, Brgy. Mandalagan (Aug. 15, 1998-Mar. 6, 1999; Apr. 1-10, 2001; Aug. 13-16, 2003; Oct. 1-Dec. 31, 2003); 

Javelosa/Cabansag Dumpsite in Purok Tonggoy, Brgy. Mandalagan (Mar. 7-July 31, 1999; Apr. 11-Aug. 19, 2001); Purok Sisi in Brgy. Singcang-Airport (Jan. 1-Mar. 29, 2001); Rabadilla Dumpsite in Purok Rabadilla, Brgy. Mandalagan (Aug. 20, 2002-Aug. 12, 2003); Anglo Dumpsite (Aug. 13-Sept. 20, 2003); and Lopez Dumpsite in Purok Tonggoy, Brgy. Mandalagan (Jan. 1, 2004-Jan.19, 2005). 

At the start of this year, the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance inquired with DENR Reg. Dir. Bienvenido Lipayon if the DENR had issued an Authority to Close for any or all of these nine other open dumps. In a letter dated 21 January 2009, Lipayon replied in the negative. Since the Authority to Close is issued only after a submission of the city’s Safe Closure and Rehabilitation Plan, then we urge Mayor Leonardia and the City Council to do so for these nine other open dumps. 

The reason why open dumps have to be closed and rehabilitated is to prevent seepage of garbage juice, or leachate, into the groundwater source. If you review the list of the nine other open dumps, you will notice that many subdivisions have since risen in these areas. These subdivisions have wells and water tanks, and they’re pumping water from groundwater source. Unless we can prove beyond reasonable doubt that the water pumped from these groundwater sources have not been, and will never be contaminated by garbage juice, we must close these nine other open dumps. 

And now, to DENR Sec. Atienza: In the Jan. 2, 2009 edition of the Philippine Star, Atienza claimed that there are still 896 open dumps in the country today. Does that figure include our nine other open dumps? I doubt it. The DENR has a record of having wrong records. For instance, if we did not raise stink about the Felisa dump, DENR thought that the open dump in Felisa was a controlled dump, because back in 2004 it gave the city a “Notice to Proceed” to operate an open dump. This proves, the DENR never monitored. 

Now comes the nine other open dumps. Since the list is included in the Ecological Solid Waste Management Plan of Bacolod City, a copy of which was surely furnished to the DENR, why hasn’t the DENR reminded the city to submit its Safe Closure and Rehabilitation Plan for these forgotten nine? Perhaps, because the DENR never even cared to read the plan. Or, that it’s not the job of the DENR to remind LGUs. Perhaps, it is this dilemma-whose job is it?-that the new Presidential Task Force for Climate Change, which Pres. Arroyo herself now chairs, must first address.*

Why Felisa?

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Agnes T. Jalandoni

I am confused. Bear with me and hear me out. 

Since I started to educate myself about the importance of knowing where and how our garbage is handled, I have plowed through documents that leave me amazed at how we have allowed the non-compliance of basic guidelines spelled out by Executive Orders and ordinances. Why did our City officials choose Brgy. Felisa as our dumpsite? 

Sec. 40 of R.A. 9003 the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act clearly defines the criteria for Siting a Sanitary Landfill. I am referring to the area that still has to be prepared by our city government while they close the existing open dump in Purok Acacia, Brgy. Felisa. The Safe Closure and Rehabilitation Plan submitted to the DENR by the City states that this area “is a stone’s throw away from the existing dumpsite.” The existing dumpsite was the subject of controversy when the Felisa residents blocked the passage of the city’s garbage trucks last Oct. 2008. It was apparent that the residents did not want any more garbage dumped in the dumpsite, much less, the proposed landfill. 

Letter (d) of Sec 40 states that - The site must be chosen with regard for the sensitivities of the community’s residents; and (e) states - The site must be located in an area where the landfill’s operation will not detrimentally affect environmentally sensitive resources such as aquifer, groundwater reservoir or watershed area; 

If the residents of Felisa protested then they must have good reason. Moreso, if there was a protest, why did the City buy the property in the same area when there was a protest in the first place? Before the property for the landfill was purchased, an ECC or an Environment Compliance Certificate must have been secured by the City. One of the requirements to secure this certificate is the approval of the residents and the stakeholders in the area. This would have necessitated several consultations and approvals from them. Their protest on the streets was loud enough for us to hear and hopefully, pay attention. 

What bothers me even more is item (e). As early as Jan. 5, 2005, before the garbage dump was officially opened, then BACIWA Manager Atty. Vicente Petierre, Jr. wrote to then DENR Regional Executive Director Vicente Paragas about the existence of five BACIWA wells near the open dumpsite. The area is a designated aquifer - a rich source of water and hence, a designated protected area. Common sense dictates you don’t put your garbage dump near your source of water! The dumpsite was opened anyway. What is even more alarming is the fact that in Oct. 7, 2008, BACIWA Manager Atty. Juliana Carbon wrote to DENR Regional Executive Director Claudio, expressing her concern over the danger of contamination of five BACIWA wells in Brgy. Felisa. 

In November 17, 2008, DENR Regional Director Bienvenido L. Lipayon wrote Atty. Carbon furnishing her a copy of the Water Quality Assessment Report on the Ground Water Wells of BACIWA Pumping Station # 36 and Cabura Creek Water Sampling in relation to the Felisa Dump Site and the proposed Sanitary Landfill Facility for Bacolod. Per the laboratory result of Ground Water Well # 2 it is not advisable to be used as potable water by the end users. He further recommended that necessary measures be implemented to prevent health related problems by the usage of underground water extracted from the mentioned well # 2. 

The independent water sampling studies commissioned by BACIWA also cited that the bacteria count for drinking water was above the 500/CFU ml standard. While the fecal coliform count results were more than the 1.1 standard. 

Surely, BACIWA has treated the water adequately enough before it reaches our tap? Surely? Why of all places did the city put a dumpsite in the area designated as an aquifer? Why did the city continue to purchase property in the same area when the stakeholders were not consulted properly and the results of water sampling already show that the water may already be compromised? Why Felisa?* 

A Dream Landfill Which is Real

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Lourdes Ledesma

While the DENR is trying to make the quantum leap from open dumpsites to sanitary landfills for the whole country belatedly, let us look around at our more developed neighbor countries, how they have made it. One of the benchmarks in progressing from a third-world category to a more developed status, is how a nation handles its own trash. 

In this instance, let’s look at Singapore, also an island nation, once one of the Malay States under British rule. Under the strong leadership of Lee Kwan Yew, he led his people to RECYCLE, REDUCE, and REUSE! These were the slogans that led to zero waste. But what is unique to Singapore is that they created a sanitary landfill out of two small islands and connected them with a rock embankment. Located eight kilometers south of Singapore and covering an area of 350 square kilometers, the Semakau Offshore Sanitary Landfill was built at the cost of US$370M, and can hold 63 million cubic meters of garbage, enough to accommodate Singapore’s landfill needs till the year 2045. Isn’t this great planning? The area inside is divided into 11 bays, known as “cells,” which are lined with thick plastic and clay to prevent any harmfull seepage into the sea. Since the landfill was opened in 1999, four of the eleven cells have been filled, and covered with earth and grass. 

Waste from Singapore is first incinerated in the city’s four incinerators to reduce its volume. Construction material is also processed, while toxic wastes and asbestos are packaged in such a way that it cannot leak into the environment. Then it is towed to the island by giant barges. Two thousand tons of processed wastes are dumped daily into Semakau landfill. To ensure that the surrounding areas stay pollution-free, bulldozers level and compact the wastes and then top it off with fertile soil. 

The decision to build a landfill outside Singapore was made in the 1990s when the previous landfill on the island had nearly reached capacity. As land in Singapore is expensive real estate, it was decided to build a new sanitary landfill in the smaller islands off-coast that would be environmentally friendly. 

Engineers, scientists and environmentalists have labored over its design and construction to insure that it would be ecologically sound, safe, and that the biodiversity of the sea and other wildlife would not be harmed. What distinguishes Semakau from other landfills is that it is clean, and free of smell. Mangrove forests that were destroyed during its construction have been replanted and today they serve as biological indicators that no harmful material has leaked from the landfill. The island harbors rare plant and bird species, and corals abound offshore. Its various ecosystems still continue to flourish and today Semakau has become a tourist attraction. The Minister of Environment and Water Resources, Yacoob Ibrahim, said when he opened the island for recreational activities in July, 2005: “This is a way for Singapore to show the world that, as a nation, this is a very responsible way to manage our waste and our environment.” The message he is sending is, that trash and conservation can co-exist. Today there are guided nature walks along the island’s coast, while sports fishing and other groups also have their own excursions. 

Environment Secretary Jose Atienza Jr. was quoted by Malaya after he came from Singapore to attend the Water Leaders’ Summit and address the Southeast Asia Business Forum: “There is definitely hope for the country’s garbage problem. As leaders, we are constantly searching for models that we can emulate and base our improvements upon, and Semakau landfill is one of them.” He goes on to say that: “Making the shift from open dumpsites to acceptable disposal facilities as provided for in the law is being intensified by the DENR with the support of local governments. We have already identified 211 potential sanitary landfill sites nationwide to effectively manage disposal of the country’s wastes.” Records of the National Solid Waste Management Commission (NSWMC) showed that there are 16 existing sanitary landfills in the country. Nineteen landfill sites have been issued environmental compliance certificates (ECC) and are undergoing construction. 

Will Bacolod City’s landfill site be issued the 20th ECC? When?*

Let the LGUs Do it!

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Alan S. Gensoli

Why ignore the LGUs? It seems to me, R.A. 95121 is trying to take the work away from the LGUs. Signed into law on Dec. 12, 2008, R.A. 95121, the Environmental Awareness and Education Act of 2008, mandates the inclusion of environmental education in all school levels ASAP. 

Reading through the law, however, I observe that LGUs are not mentioned anywhere at all. What is the purpose of this tactic? If we are educating people on Solid Waste Management in a particular city or town, shouldn’t we at least let the LGU know that this is going on? Indeed, shouldn’t the LGU be on top of the effort? But with R.A. 95121, it would seem the Senate and the Lower House have given up on the LGUs, and have gone over the heads of the mayors. I hope I’m wrong. Environmental education requires the collaboration of everyone. But consider the following paragraph from Sec. 6 of R.A. 95121 just to drive my point: 

“The DENR shall have the primary responsibility of periodically informing all agencies concerned on current environmental updates, including identifying priority environmental education issues for national action and providing strategic advice on the environmental education activities. The DepEd, CHED, TESDA, DENR, DOST, DSWD, and barangay units shall ensure that the information is disseminated to the subject students.” 

What happened to the city and town officials? Shouldn’t we involve them also? Of course, we should. It is true that environmental education will be rolled out in the barangay level where Solid Waste Management (SWM) will be taught house-to-house. But that is not the only venue for learning. There are many more. Who will supervise the teaching in schools, the public markets, and the commercial centers and business offices? Who will tell SM City, for instance, to educate all of its employees and concessionaires? And who will run the sanitary landfill where segregated garbage will be collected? These will all have to be overseen by the LGU. Besides, the barangay captain might need financial help from the mayor. 

The fact that R.A. 95121 makes no mention of the LGU should be clarified, if not completely restated. This is not just typographical. This smells intentional and could be counterproductive. For why did we elect our city officials if we are not willing to give them the full responsibility of running our city? Wouldn’t it be simpler if everything that happens in the city goes through our mayor? Remember last year when we all got stuck with the construction of the waterway in Banago? That was because City Hall and DPWH were pointing at each other...whose job is it? I think it’s only practical to make City Hall responsible for it and DPWH can assist. Otherwise, the finger-pointing is causing further delay. 

At one point, I recall City Hall telling us to go talk to the DPWH. Granted that waterways are the national government’s jurisdiction and so must be properly addressed by the DPWH rather than City Hall, why can’t I, as citizen of this city, go to my mayor, air whatever legitimate complaint I have, and expect my mayor to contact the right national agency to fix the problem? Why should I be the one to knock on the doors of the DPWH? Is the DPWH as powerful as my mayor? Certainly not. I elected my mayor. I had nothing to do with that DPWH. 

No wonder finger-pointing is so ingrained in our national consciousness. Even our laws, such as R.A. 95121, help perpetuate such poor values and habits. By excluding the LGU from sharing in the responsibility of implementing the law, the law obviously has less chances of success. I say, let the LGUs do the job! Because it’s their job. 

I have very good reason why I want LGUs to be directly responsible for everything that happens in our cities and towns. I want the lines of responsibility, accountability, and culpability clearly drawn. And if I want my city government to answer for everything, then it is only fair that the city government is given all the power to do everything-and the funds, too! By ignoring the LGU’s influence in educating the citizenry about the environment, R.A. 95121 made a horrible mistake. 

For months now I have been urging our LGU to begin the long and hard process of educating our people. And now, with R.A. 95121, I realize they’re not even empowered to educate their people?*

A Question of Credibility

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin
By Gigi M. Campos

A funny thing happened as we ushered in the year of the Ox. On January 26, 2009 the Philippine Star reported that Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Lito Atienza, who was named Environment Secretary on July 18, 2007 declared 2009, the year of the Ox as Law Enforcement Year. It sounds like a veiled admission that nothing much was accomplished for the environment these past two years that he was head of DENR. With the proclamation of 2009 as Law Enforcement Year from the big boss himself, can we expect the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to step-up a campaign to protect the country’s environment and natural resources?

Atienza said. “For the rest of the year, we will give more dedication and seriousness in efforts to protect the environment, including land, air, water and forests, against environmental violators whom we will pursue, guided by our environmental laws.”

Dedication and seriousness is exactly what is needed and long overdue because money and power seem to be more important nowadays than matters like cool, fresh clean water. We must make sure that Secretary Atienza is called to task to finally put the environment violators behind bars.

Why? Because our water has been polluted and trees cut down in an endless quest for lumber, all in the name of development. Precious topsoil that took millennia to grow, erode and clog our creeks and waterways. Our once fertile soil is replaced by poisons and toxic wastes to which we should never have been exposed. The crisp, clean air we once used to enjoy is filled with smog, filth and fumes. Plants and animals that have evolved in patient process, are now subjected to genetic engineering often across species all in the name of profit. In short, in our quest for total control over the environment, we did not foresee the potentially disastrous effects.

Already, there are many signs of the horrors that lie ahead if we do not do something soon to stop this destructive trend. Landslides resulting from dramatic changes in the topography of the land; floods caused by disappearing waterways and improper garbage disposal; awful viruses such as Ebola and AIDS emerge from the rain forests that are slowly being obliterated. Those that can stop this and have the power seem not to listen nor to care because to do so would mean an end to the carefree, money-grabbing life they have gotten so used to. Politicians and corporate executives would have to forego their wasteful lifestyles and it seems they are not about to let that happen.

We are rapidly approaching the point of no return. Soon, water, vital for life, will be more and more polluted and undrinkable; new diseases will launch upon society and more people will be stricken with the horrific illness that come as a direct result of the over use of chemicals in agriculture, food production and in so many industrial processes.

Early this year, Sec. Atienza reshuffled the DENR regional executive directors nationwide, warning them that they are accountable for whatever environmental violations that may happen in their respective regions, provinces and municipalities.

Sec. Atienza said that the reorganization in the DENR is a continuing process, at the same time admonishing the officials on the “one-strike” policy the department is implementing. This means that only one verified report of any environmental violation, such as illegal logging or illegal mining happening and the like in their respective areas is enough ground for the officials’ suspension.

“I will ensure that the full force of the law will be meted out against anyone who will violate environmental laws because the certainty of punishment is the best deterrent to the commission of a crime,” Atienza said.

“I am confident that year 2009 can make the difference. Aside from the fact that we have 42 environmental laws that give us more teeth in our fight against environmental violators, the judiciary is also taking a more active role in protecting Nature and the country’s environment,” Atienza said. Judging from Sec. Atienza’s track record, can we believe this?

Atienza himself admitted that to date 900 local government units have not complied with RA 9003 or the Solid Waste Management Act, inspite of its passage into law in 2001. There should be no more excuses. Our local government officials have the power, mandate and resources to do what needs to be done. Let us truly hope that in 2009, the DENR Secretary will make good his word and decisively run after the environmental violators.

Each and every one of us must take a degree of responsibility for the threat under which we now live. We are all consumers and it is to satisfy our oftentimes insatiable appetites that many of these environmental disasters occur. Of course, some of us do try to live a lifestyle that pays heed to the environment but thanks to the marketing men, too many take the easy way and help exacerbate an already critical situation. However, for many of us in the BAHA Alliance, we saw lifestyles and attitudes change.

So what can we do to stop and, ultimately reverse the trend? Surprisingly, quite a lot and without making too much additional effort. Most of the extra effort will go into stopping to think before making buying decisions or before throwing things away.

This may be just one of the easy-to-do things that, individually, are small but, collectively will have a major impact and make a big difference. This is not just an exercise in simple conservation. It is an attempt to save the world from extinction and render it safe and welcoming for our children, our children’s children and generations yet to come.
We have two simple alternatives. A world that is lush and green, air fresh and life bringing, water clean and sustaining. A land where children are born and grow without the fear of terrible disease or starvation, a place where Man works and lives in harmony with nature. Or a land incapable of sustaining life, mutated and grossly deformed plants, animals and humans and one that is about to drop over the edge to infinite extinction. Which do you want?*

Be Green

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Marilyn M. Soliven

Climate change is in the news. It seems like everyone’s “going green”. What, exactly, does green or sustainable living mean? Different people use different definitions, but it all comes down to one fundamental concept: The Earth’s resources should not be depleted faster than they can be replenished. From that concept comes everything else, including caring for the environment, animals and other living things, your health, your local community, and communities around the world. 

When you start to look at all the different kinds of resources- from fossil fuel to forests, agricultural land to wildlife, and the ocean’s depths to the air you breathe - it’s easy to see how everything is interconnected and how the actions you take today can affect the future. 

Luckily, many of the steps you can take to stop climate change can make your life better. Here are easy actions you can do today to be greener right away and to put the five Rs (that’s refusing, reducing, reusing, recycling and rotting) into effect in your home. They are doable and won’t make any impact on your pocket- they just require a bit of time and effort, and your commitment. 

Recycle Regularly

Organizing your recycling will make life a lot easier for you and your family and you’ll be more likely to keep it up if it’s convenient for everyone. Have separate bins or garbage cans set in your home so that you can simply drop the various items to be recycled into the right receptacle as you go along. It is so much easier than sorting them out later. Call and check your neighborhood junkshop to find out what items are accepted there. 

Be Frugal With Energy Use 

Appliances such as cell phone chargers, coffeemakers, televisions and computers plugged in on “standby” still use a small amount of electricity that still adds up on your electric bill. Unplug these appliances or switch them off at a power strip to beat phantom power. 

Install compact fluorescent light bulbs when your older incandescent bulbs burn out. CFLs use 75% less energy than conventional bulbs and last up to ten times longer. 

Turn off the lights in empty rooms. 

Turn off the computer if it will be unused for more than two hours, and turn off the monitor if it will be unused for more than twenty minutes. 

The refrigerator and freezer are more energy efficient if they’re full but not overloaded. Clean the coils either below or behind the fridge in order to keep them operating efficiently. 

Turn Off the Tap 

Water is the most precious of natural resources. It is often taken for granted. Start saving water by turning off the tap while brushing your teeth. 

Take shorter showers to reduce water use. 

Collect rainwater in a barrel for use in the garden, or for washing your car or bicycle. Keep a lid on the barrel so the water doesn’t evaporate on sunny days or attract breeding mosquitoes. 

Eat Smart 

Buy locally raised organic vegetables, meat, eggs and dairy. You can enjoy fresher, tastier foods and improve your personal health. Making green food choices also has global consequences. Buying local means supporting the local economy and reducing the greenhouse gas emissions required to get food from its origin to your plate. Buying fresh foods means reducing packaging and energy used for processing. Choosing organic foods help promote organic agriculture and responsible land use. 

Buy Less, Reuse More 

You’ve probably bought many things over the years that you didn’t really need and didn’t end up using very much. When considering new purchases, first think reduce, reuse, repair, and recycle. Do you already have something that would do the job as well if you repaired it? Can you rent or borrow the item from someone else or share one belonging to a friend or family? When you do need to buy an item, consider whether it can be reused or recycled when you’re finished with it. Maybe a friend can make use of it and pass it on or a garage sale could find a new home for it. 

Get Everyone in the Household Involved 

You can achieve a lot on your own and even more together with your family. Talk over your green lifestyle plans and explain your reasons for going green. It may take a while before everyone turns off the light when they leave the room but eventually it becomes second nature. By doing things yourself and setting an example, you can help create a new green culture around the home. 

Stay Informed, Inspire Action! 

There’s so much information available about leading a greener lifestyle that it’s hard to know where to start. One of the best tools for staying informed is the Internet. Newspapers and radio and television programs are also useful for keeping up-to-date. If you want to gather more insights on green issues, flooding, garbage and our environment, watch The Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance TV Program, Banat Baha, on Sunshine Channel 14, hosted by Rene Hinojales, Mondays to Saturdays, from 12 noon to 1 pm. Tune in to Mom’s Heart, with Joy Pastoral as host, Saturdays from 11a.m. to 12 noon, DYVS 1233 Am Radio, where I will be a regular guest.*

Hala kayo, galit na si Madam!

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Alan S. Gensoli

When Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo ascended to the presidency in 2001, the first bill she signed into law was R.A. 9003, the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act. But R.A. 9003 is now fast becoming (if it hasn’t yet become) the most disrespected if not ignored law of the land. Now, it seems, the foolishness of the DENR and the LGUs in skirting the instructions of R.A. 9003 has won the ire of the President. It’s about time! Merese!

Executive Order 774, entitled “Reorganizing the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change” as signed by PGMA for immediate implementation on Dec. 26, 2008. The EO appoints the President as Chair of the Presidential Task Force on Climate Change (PTFCC). Thus, the EO formally tells DENR Sec. Lito Atienza who, as Chairman of the National Solid Waste Management Commission, has accomplished diddly, to step aside. Imagine a miffed Commander-in-Chief telling a foot soldier to take a hike for failure to hold a gun straight: “Kon indi ka kahibalo mag-obra, abi pahigad da!” This must be very, very embarrassing for Atienza. If I was the guy, I would recoil in shame to whatever dark hole I wiggled out of. 

Sec. 1, Letter B of the EO commands that offices of all Cabinet members IMMEDIATELY PRACTICE PROPER SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT PURSUANT TO THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACT. Hahahahaha! It doesn’t take a Master’s Degree to realize that by exacting obedience out of the offices of the Cabinet members first, the President is livid, and is turning intolerant, about Atienza’s failure to implement R.A. 9003. But she cannot single out the DENR, so she sends all of her charges to stand at the corner, so to speak. And this is a good thing, for then the other secretaries will get into Atienza’s skin for getting them in trouble with the President, through no fault of their own. 

Now, I’m beginning to like PGMA again. I should have warned Atienza a long time ago about crossing this President: Back in the early 80s when I was a student at the Ateneo, when you are scheduled to enroll in an Economics class, you better enroll early or end up in the class of Arroyo, the so-called Economics Department “terror.” Guess who that Arroyo was? Hahahahaha!

With the order for Cabinet offices to practice Solid Waste Management (SWM) immediately, why don’t we help out the President? Let’s all march to the local offices of the DENR and its downline agencies and see if indeed they are already segregating their garbage. And if they’re not, we should report them. Text your reports to this newspaper. And please include actual names and titles.

The President getting involved in the implementation of SWM could be our last chance at SWM success. If the President’s orders cannot be respected, then we’re doomed. I am also thankful that the President called the practice of SWM “the most basic form of environmental responsibility.” Meaning, SWM must be done because it is the most basic. Meaning, if the offices of these Cabinet secretaries cannot even practice SWM, knock on their heads and ask, hello, is anybody home? 

Sec. 2, Letter A of the EO warns the DENR and the LGUs to reduce the generation of solid waste by 50% within six months. That means, by June 26, 2009, at the latest. What? Another six months, after Atienza gave LGUs a six-month extension last May 5, 2008? I should get upset with the President, but hey, her additional six months carry more promise than Atienza’s own extension that expired like a rained-out pyrotechnic. 

With the new deadline set by this EO, the volume of garbage collected by our city today, around 200 tons per day, must be reduced to 100 tons, max! And that’s by June 26, 2009! Mayor Bing Leonardia, in his last SOCA, was made to report by his spinners that Bacolod is now collecting only 150 tons of garbage per day. Obviously, the Mayor’s writers wanted to impress us, but their claims will now boomerang. If indeed 150 tons per day is correct, then the Mayor must now reduce that to 75 tons by June 26, 2009. Which is easier to accomplish, 100 tons or 75 tons? Ooops.

With this EO, I think claiming that Bacolod collects 200 tons per day sounds safer than 150 tons. If City Hall insists that we generate only 150 tons of garbage per day, when in fact we collect 200 tons, there will be a difference of 25 tons when these conflicting numbers are reduced by 50%. What does City Hall do with that? That’s at least three dumptrucks of garbage per day that City Hall must hide just because the Mayor was made to claim in his SOCA that Bacolod generates only 150 tons of garbage per day. City Hall spinners didn’t see this problem coming, did they? 

This new six-month timetable set by the President means waste segregation, ASAP. Educating the public about SWM, ASAP. Collecting residual waste only, ASAP. This means a lot of work for a DENR and an LGU who have been disobeying the law for five long, long, long years, or since open dumps were declared illegal on Feb. 16, 2004. Good luck!

Sec. 4, Letter A of the EO gives hope to the residents of Brgy. Felisa. According to this section, after six months, or starting June 26, 2009, a massive campaign must be started to restore and regenerate protected areas. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan of Bacolod City, authorized by the Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board back in 2002, identifies Felisa as a protected area that must be preserved. So there.

Letter B of the same section states that “water resources and watersheds shall be IMMEDIATELY identified and protected and their water flow improved and their floral cover regenerated.” This should put a smile on the face of Atty. Juliana Carbon, GM of BACIWA. Why? Because BACIWA has five pumping stations in Felisa, where water has now shown the presence of fecal coliform in three water tests conducted thus far. 

EO 774 is long-overdue. But better late than never. Thank you, Madam President! Brilliant, as usual.*

How well do you know your PETs?

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Tina M. Monfort

Did you know that Leonardo Da Vinci invented the first form of natural plastic during the renaissance period? The plastic Da Vinci created was made from both animal and vegetable glues combined with organic fibers. When this combination dried, Da Vinci was left with a product that would be described today as a plastic-like substance. 

Plastic bottles were first used commercially in 1947, but remained relatively expensive until the early 1960 when high-density Polyethylene was introduced. 

Symbols are required to appear on all bottles of size 8 oz. and greater. The symbols consist of a triangle, formed by three “chasing arrows”, with a specific number in the center that indicates the material from which the bottle is made. Each of the three arrows can represent one step in a three-step process that forms a closed loop, the recycling loop. The first step represents collection of materials to be recycled. This step takes place when recyclable materials are placed into your recycling bin or taken to a local collection center. The collected materials are then cleaned and sorted for sale to a manufacturing facility. The manufacturing process is the second arrow in the recycling symbol. The recyclable materials are manufactured into new products for retail or commercial sale. The third step is the actual purchase and use of the products made from the recycled materials. The loop is now complete. 

(Polyethylene Terephthalate) is commonly used for carbonated beverage and water bottles, mouthwash bottles, peanut butter containers, salad dressing containers, juice bottles and vegetable oil bottles. 

(High Density Polyethylene) used for milk containers, juice bottles, water bottles, bleach, detergent, shampoo bottles, trash bags, grocery and retail carrying bags, motor oil bottles, butter and margarine tubs, household cleaner bottles, yogurt containers, and cereal box liners. 

(Polyvinyl Chloride) used for window cleaner bottles, cooking oil bottles, detergent bottles, shampoo bottles, clear food packaging, wire and cable jacketing, medical tubing, with additional significant usage in household products and building materials, particularly siding, piping, and windows. 

(Low Density Polyethylene) used for squeezable bottles, bread bags, frozen food bags, tote bags, clothing, furniture, dry cleaning bags, and carpet. 

(Polypropylene) is used primarily for jars and closures. 

(Polystyrene) used for plates, cups, cutlery, meat trays, egg cartons, carry-out containers, aspirin bottles and compact disc jackets. 

The category of “Other” includes any resin not specifically numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6, or combinations of one or more of these resins. 

Generally, a product that is recycled is remanufactured into a new product that has less demanding specifications for the new use of the recycled product. Plastic materials may be recycled into a packaging material of less stringent requirements. 

Recycling has been aided by the creation of The Plastic Bottle Material Code System, also known as the Resin identification code. The symbols in this system are designed to be easily readable and distinguishable from other markings on the container. 

The code number is also supplemented by the common letter indication for the various resins under the symbol, to serve as a constant verification of the material sorted. For example, 1 type plastics are made of PETE, 2 and 4 type plastics are made of Polyethylene, 5 type plastics are made of Polypropylene, and 7 type plastics can be made of a variety of things, such as polycarbonates, 3 and 6 type plastics being the most common. 

Are PET bottles safe? Is there a risk in re-using them? Does heat cause carcinogenic chemicals to leak out from the PET bottle to the bottles’ contents? All these and more commonly asked questions on Feb.25. See you!*

Promises Made and Broken

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Agnes T. Jalandoni

They say you can tell much about a man by the promises he keeps. Our politicians have elevated the art of making promises and not keeping them into an art. 

As the city prepares its own landfill it would be good for us to monitor how our local officials plan to complete this project. Since the Bacolod Anti Baha Alliance was formed in Nov. 2007, garbage has been found to be one of the major causes of flooding. As the monitoring and research efforts of the group intensified, it became necessary to track how our city handles garbage and more importantly, where it is thrown. On Oct. 26, 2008 when the residents of Brgy. Felisa barricaded their streets to prevent 19 garbage trucks from delivering garbage to the open dump, the Anti- Baha Alliance reacted. Not only were the residents treated unfairly, but they revealed that their community was promised a controlled dump and dealt another. They did not want to be taken for another ride. 

Before we forget about this dramatic confrontation, the underlying issues and disastrous consequences of our not fully knowing the facts, let us remember that we owe the residents of Brgy. Felisa big time. Why? Because they have agreed to accept every single piece of basura we have thrown since January 19, 2005! Now the city plans to put up a landfill in the adjacent area, more basura will be dumped! What if it was your own back yard being filled with garbage?

The truth of the matter is, after the closure of the Mandalagan dump in 2004, Arlene Dalawis of DENR Region 6 issued a “Notice to Proceed” to Mayor Leonardia authorizing the city to operate a CONTROLLED dumpsite in Purok Acacia, Brgy. Felisa. The residents even recalled their being brought to Bais on a field trip to see how a controlled dumpsite is operated. Inspired by what they saw they were optimistic that what the Mayor had promised- that the city would operate a similar controlled dump would be done. They showed us a picture of the inauguration where the streamer heralded the opening of the “Controlled Dumpsite.” Broken promise! For three years, the residents watched helplessly as truck after truck wantonly dumped non- segregated garbage into the open dumpsite. Worse, the dump slowly polluted the adjacent Cabura Creek where once their children bathed and their carabaos drank. The site is 15 meters from the Cabura creek and is not the required minimum of 50 meters away. No wonder they took to the streets. 

As early as Nov. 7, 2005, the DENR issued a Cease and Desist Order (CDO) to Bacolod City preventing continued open dumping of garbage in Brgy. Felisa. This detail was mentioned in the letter of DENR Reg. Director Bienvenido Lipayon to Mayor Evelio Leonardia dated Sept. 17, 2008. Why were the mitigating measures needed to operate a controlled dump not complied with then? It was bad enough that the area did not start operating as a controlled dump. Yet, when warned, the city did not make the necessary corrections. 

How can we believe that the city will close and rehabilitate the existing dump as prescribed? Worse, can our officials prepare a landfill correctly when they could not make good on their promise to Brgy. Felisa residents? The safe closure and rehabilitation plan for the existing dump has already been submitted by the City to the DENR. 

Last Nov. 3, 2008, the Anti - Baha Alliance met with DENR Regional Executive Director Lormelyn Claudio to clarify the issues raised by Brgy. Felisa residents. During the discussion, the timetable of the Safe Closure and Rehabilitation Plan was referred to. Dir. Claudio who admitted that the first item in the plan, which was the clearing of the dumpsite by Oct. 2008 was not accomplished as scheduled. 

Another promise broken - too soon. 

As custodians of our welfare and environment, our city officials were elected to enforce the laws, comply with plans they themselves submit, and simply, just make good on their promises. In a recent interview in the Banat Baha TV show, Councilor Greg Gasataya said that they are beginning to comply with the plan. A few days later, the local papers reported that Mayor Bing and our city officials go on another field trip to San Carlos City to look at the landfill of the city. 

It’s the same thing all over again. Promises, promises, promises.*

826 + 359 = P2.8 Billion

SOMETHING SMELLS

Negros Daily Bulletin

By Alan S. Gensoli

Luma si Einstein sa formula ni Atienza.

But before I go into that...last time my column ran, I asked you to look out for my next column originally scheduled on Feb. 9. I spoke too soon. During the last weekly meeting of the Communications Committee of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance, chaired by Gigi Campos, it was decided by our Writers’ Bureau that I take the column every Monday. So, here I am. 

Starting today, you can read my mind on this space every Monday. Now that you know that we have a Writers’ Bureau, you might wonder if we also have a Speakers’ Bureau. We most certainly do, but that belongs to our Education Committee, chaired by Maggie Jalandoni. In my future columns, I will insert snippets about the activities of all of our other committees, including Legal (chaired by Agnes Jalandoni), Research (chaired by Dr. Elsie Coscolluela), Monitoring (chaired by Norman Campos), New Business (chaired by Jean Trebol), Membership (chaired by Chole Chua), Secretariat (chaired by Sally Ledesma), Community Development (chaired by Dioning de la Cruz), Product Merchandising (chaired by Tina Monfort), and of course, Finance (chaired by Gina Piccio). Now you know that the members of the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance work very hard at what they do. 

Back to Einstein...este...Atienza. On May 5, 2008, DENR Sec. Lito Atienza gave LGUs an extension of six months to comply with R.A. 9003, or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000. Under R.A. 9003, all open garbage dumps were supposed to be closed by Feb. 16, 2004, giving way to the use of controlled dumps. Two years later, on Feb. 16, 2006, all controlled dumps were also supposed to be closed, giving way to sanitary landfills. By now it is common knowledge that the Bacolod garbage dump in Purok Acacia, Brgy. Felisa, is still an open dump, five years after open dumps were declared illegal. And as you will soon learn, Bacolod is not alone. Reason for the six-month extension graciously granted by Sec. Atienza because the DENR, his office, did not do its job of compelling LGUs to comply with R.A. 9003 as originally scheduled by law. How convenient. I call it incentivising inefficiency. 

Nothing in R.A. 9003 specifically bestows power to the DENR Secretary to give deadline extensions. But granted that Atienza is authorized to do so, what has he to show for the exercise of such authority? Apparently, nothing. The six-month extension started on May 5th ended on Nov. 5th. That explains the cotillion of DENR officials who came to Bacolod around that time, DENR Reg. Exec. Dir. Lormelyn Claudio and Reg. Dir. Bienvenido Lipayon on Nov. 3, and NSWMC Exec. Dir. Gerardo Calderon on Nov. 13. Chaired by Atienza himself, the National Solid Waste Management Commission, or NSWMC, was created by R.A. 9003 to implement R.A. 9003, but so far, it has fallen flat on its face. In fact, when Calderon marched into town, he claimed that there are about 900 non-compliant LGUs in the country. That’s when I suspected that the six-month extension granted by Atienza was an exercise in futility. 

True enough, on Jan. 2, 2009, The Philippine Star ran a story titled, “Atienza wants LGUs’ waste handling subsidies adjusted.” In the story Atienza admitted that there are still 826 open dumps in the country, illegal since 2004. DENR records add that there are also 359 controlled dumps, illegal since 2006. These, after Atienza authorized a delay in compliance to R.A. 9003 by giving LGUs a six-month extension. Because that is exactly what Atienza did: he authorized a delay! Not only did he fail to compel LGUs to comply, he authorized further delay in compliance by giving that six-month extension. Atienza made the worse come to worst. If he were a slice of porkchop, he just jumped from the pan and into the fire. 

As if Atienza hadn’t inflicted enough pain upon communities with open dumps, he said that he was now inclined to appeal to NEDA for a change in our national policy on waste management, in order to give LGUs money to build their sanitary landfills. And when will that happen? For surely that will cause more delay. 

On Jan. 11, 2009, the Manila Bulletin ran a story titled, “P2.8B allocated to help LGUs shift to “green” sanitary landfills.” Now, the Atienza formula is complete: 826 + 359 = P2.8 Billion! It’s not math. It’s magic. The story disclosed that the DENR has allocated P2.8 Billion as subsidy for LGUs to construct their landfills. When will this be released? Is this just mere talk to buy time? And by the way, this may not be the final solution yet, because according to the story the allocations will require counterpart funding that LGUs must cough up. There’s another reason for more delay as LGUs will predictably pretend they are cash-strapped. 

Moreover, in the same story, the NSWMC disclosed that there are 16 existing sanitary landfills in the country, while 19 more are under construction. Granting that the records of the NSWMC are correct, and that may be granting too much, that’s only a total of 35 landfills, a far cry from 931 LGUs that the NSWMC says continue to maintain illegal dumps. Now, let me offer you more insight. How come Atienza claims that there are still 826 open dumps and 359 controlled dumps, while the NSWMC claims there are 931 erring LGUs? The difference in the computations may be due to the fact that some LGUs have more than one illegal dump. Based on the foregoing numbers, on the average, every erring LGU has 1.27 illegal dumps. But Bacolod is an “above-average” kind of city. Bacolod has 10, more or less. While we are just focused on the open dump in Purok Acacia, Brgy. Felisa, there have been many other open dumps used in the past that have not yet been safely closed and rehabilitated. In early January, the Bacolod Anti-Baha Alliance sent the list to DENR Reg. Dir. Bienvenido Lipayon to confirm if the city has secured authority to close these open dumps. Lipayon wrote back to confirm that the city has not. And so, while Bacolod is one of the 931 erring LGUs, Bacolod accounts for 10 of the 1,185 (826 + 359) illegal open dumps. But let’s go back to Atienza. 

Sec. Lito Atienza seems not at all determined to put pressure on LGUs to comply with R.A. 9003. But why? Perhaps, because Atienza is planning to run for the Senate in 2010 and so he would like to get on the good side of mayors so they will carry his name in their sample ballots? If so, then let me make this promise now, that in 2010, should Atienza run for the Senate, I will personally campaign for his defeat. Pex man!*