[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=” av-desktop-hide=” av-medium-hide=” av-small-hide=” av-mini-hide=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=”]
[/av_textblock]
[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’EDITORIAL’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=” av-medium-font-size-title=” av-small-font-size-title=” av-mini-font-size-title=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=” admin_preview_bg=”]
Ni Ime Sornito
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=” admin_preview_bg=”]
A BILL repealing the waste incineration ban under Republic Act (RA) 8749 or the Clean Air Act of 1999 got the nod of the House of Representatives’ committee on ecology. This is outrageous.
The committee appeared to be in a hurry to approve the “Regulation of Thermal Treatment Technology Act” proposed by Aklan’s Cong. Carlito Marquez and others that consequently revokes Section 20 of RA 8749.
What on earth happened?
Considered a milestone in pollution prevention, the incineration ban disallows “the burning of municipal, biomedical and hazardous waste, which process emits poisonous and toxic fumes.” RA 8749 reinforces the ban by requiring the “adoption of the best practice in ecological waste management excluding incineration.”
Given the serious health, socioeconomic and public health implications of the proposed measure, there seemed to be no serious efforts to conduct balanced and comprehensive studies on the issue. The bill promotes what is currently marketed as “waste-to-energy” plants. But these facilities, aside from increasing cancer risks, are more expensive than coal and nuclear plants, more harmful to the climate than coal, and generate very little electricity while burning up resources that may still be recovered, reused or recycled, according to environmentalists.
The pro-incineration bill could result to a massive environmental disaster and irreversible damage to the health of people, especially children. Far from solving our garbage woes, the lifting of the incineration ban will only compound our problems as incinerators can inflict harm to human health and the ecosystems, contribute significantly to environmental pollution and global warming, and fuel an unsustainable system of unbridled production, crass consumerism, and throw-away culture.
Burning trash is a regressive approach to waste management that is being phased out in other parts of the world. Our lawmakers must reject this bill. Incineration will be an illogical step backward. We already have the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003) which adheres to the ways and rhythms of nature, the best in the world. Instead of making it work with the needed political will, why would we go to a dangerous, expensive technology that many advanced nations are turning their back on?
This issue deserves more deliberation and public discussion than the hurried token consultations our honorable congressmen have deemed sufficient. Repealing the incineration ban will undermine source segregation, recycling, and other zero waste strategies that conserve precious resources, avoid toxic pollution, and generate livelihoods and jobs.
Instead of overturning the prohibition on waste burning, Congress should in fact strengthen RA 9003 through innovative zero waste projects.
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
