JPEPA timeline

Inquirer

Published on Page A23 of the October 25, 2006 issue of the
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Dec. 4, 2002 -- The Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) is initiated during a visit by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to Japan. Discussions begin in a working group and a joint coordinating team from the two countries.

May 2003 -- The Philippine Coordinating Committee is created to study and negotiate the proposed JPEPA. The committee is headed jointly by Department of Trade and Industry Senior Undersecretary Thomas G. Aquino and Foreign Undersecretary Edsel Custodio.

February 2004 -- Formal negotiations between the Philippines and Japan start.

November 2004 -- Party-list Representatives Mario Joyo Aguja and Lorenzo Tañada III call for an inquiry into the JPEPA after receiving complaints that the DTI had denied requests for a copy of the proposed JPEPA.

Nov. 29, 2004 -- President Arroyo and Japan Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi agree on major elements of a JPEPA that would lead to the immediate removal of tariffs on certain fruits, vehicles, steel products, electronic appliances and garments.

Feb. 28, 2005 -- House Special Committee on Globalization starts hearings on the JPEPA but still fails to secure a copy of the proposed JPEPA from DTI.

Nov. 2, 2005 -- Aquino informs Aguja that the draft JPEPA will be provided after a review of the proposed agreement has been conducted.

Dec. 6, 2005 -- Party-list lawmakers and NGOs go to the Supreme Court to seek a restraining order to prevent the government from signing JPEPA.

May 25, 2006 -- Solicitor General Antonio Eduardo Nachura tells Supreme Court it has no jurisdiction over treaties being negotiated.

Sept. 9, 2006 -- President Arroyo and Prime Minister Koizumi sign the JPEPA in Finland ahead of the Asia-Europe Meeting.

Sept. 11, 2006 -- DTI furnishes Congress with copies of the JPEPA on the first working day after the treaty was signed. It also uploaded the text of the JPEPA in its website at http://business. gov.ph/filedirec tory/JPEPA. pdf.

From incinerator ash to used surgical gloves

From incinerator ash to used surgical gloves

Inquirer
Published on Page A1 of the October 25, 2006 issue of the
Philippine Daily Inquirer

THE Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) mandates zero tariff for the following types of waste:
• Ash and residue (other than from the manufacture of iron or steel) containing arsenic, mercury, thallium or their mixtures, of a kind used for the extraction of arsenic or those metals or for the manufacture of their chemical compounds.
• Ash and residue from the incineration of municipal waste.
• Waste organic solvents -- halogenated.
• Pharmaceutical waste.
• Residual products of the chemical or allied industries.
• Municipal waste.
• Clinical waste, like used surgical gloves, adhesive dressing, gauze.
• Waste of metal pickling liquors, hydraulic fluid, brake fluid and antifreeze.
• Worn clothing and other worn articles, including rags, scrap twine, cordage, rope and cables of textile materials.
• Polychlorinated biphenyls.
• Halogenated chlorofluorocarbons .

These types of waste are among over 100 environmentally sensitive products, including chemicals, persistent organic pollutants and ozone-depleting substances that would not be taxed upon entry into the country as soon as the JPEPA takes effect.

RP-Japan accord 'toxic' swap

RP-Japan accord 'toxic' Swap of health workers for hospital waste
By Blanche Rivera

InquirerLast updated 06:27am (Mla time)

Published on Page A1 of the October 25, 2006 issue of the
Philippine Daily Inquirer

A NEW DUMP for toxic waste may soon open for Japan -- and it has 7,100 islands.

This is how concerned environmentalists see the likely effect of the Japan-Philippines Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) which President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and then Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi signed on Sept. 9 in Helsinki on the side of the Asia-Europe Meeting.

In exchange for the export of nurses and caregivers, the Philippines will allow the entry of toxic and hazardous waste under the JPEPA, according to environmentalists.

The top Philippine negotiator in the trade talks, Senior Trade Undersecretary Thomas G. Aquino, told the Inquirer that the accord covered a broad range of products. But only regulated waste would be allowed into the country once the pact is ratified by the legislatures of the two countries and goes into effect, Aquino said.

This is the first time a bilateral trade and investment agreement will include and encourage trade in hazardous waste, including the highly toxic incinerator ash, a practice banned by the Basel Convention to which the Philippines and Japan are signatories.

Former Environment Secretary Michael T. Defensor, now the presidential chief of staff, twice opposed the inclusion of hazardous and prohibited waste in the JPEPA.

Sought for comment yesterday on whether he maintained his position after the Helsinki pact, Defensor said in a text message to the Inquirer: "Yup. Still my stand but I'm sure Prez [President] wasnt able to read the details of that."

Alarmed environmentalists and nationalist trade advocates are now scrambling to convince the Philippine Senate, the country's treaty ratifying body, to reject the JPEPA when it is transmitted to Congress.

To them, the deal with Japan is simply an elaborate exchange of health care for health care waste.

"We are going to get poisoned here. We're sending them healthy bodies, doctors and nurses who will take care of their health, and what do we get? Poison," Green Initiatives Inc. chief executive officer Mimi Sison said in an interview.

Trade experts described the pact covering 11,300 tariff lines or commodities as a mega-treaty that could set the tone for future bilateral agreements.

A briefing paper prepared by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) says 141 of these items are "environmentally sensitive products deemed potentially hazardous to health and the environment if not handled properly."

RP can't treat own waste

The Philippines, which has its own laws against the importation and transport of toxic and hazardous waste, is already struggling -- often unsuccessfully -- to dispose of and treat at least 2.5 million tons of locally generated hazardous waste each year.

"We cannot even handle our household waste, and we have no recycling industry," said Sison.

The types of toxic and hazardous waste listed in the JPEPA were initially dubbed by the government as recyclable materials, which are legally traded goods.

Article 29 of the basic agreement of the JPEPA, however, stipulates that the trade covers articles "which can no longer perform their original purpose ... nor are capable of being restored or repaired and which are fit only for disposal or for the recovery of parts or raw materials."

Scrap and waste derived from manufacturing or processing operations or from consumption which are, again, "fit only for disposal or for the recovery of raw materials," as well as raw materials and parts "which can no longer perform their original purpose nor are capable of being restored or repaired" are also included.

Fit for disposal only

"How can you say this is for recycling if the agreement says they are only fit for disposal?" said Tanya Lat, Akbayan legal counsel and trade law expert who has been following the JPEPA negotiations.

Akbayan was one of the petitioners that asked the Supreme Court to compel the Department of Trade and Industry to provide the special committee on globalization in Congress with a copy of the JPEPA draft and to restrain the DTI from concluding or signing the JPEPA or transmitting it to the President until full disclosure had been made.

The Supreme Court failed to decide on the petition for mandamus and prohibition filed in December last year until Ms Arroyo and Koizumi signed the treaty in Helsinki.

The JPEPA is the Philippines' first bilateral trade accord since the 1946 parity agreement with the United States. It is seen as a move to strengthen economic integration between Japan and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Japan is the Philippines' No. 1 trading partner in Asia and No. 2 in the world. It is also one of the biggest providers of official development assistance to the Philippines.

"This is a new kind of agreement," Aquino said during a hearing of the House special committee on globalization on Feb. 28, 2005.

A month after the unveiling of the JPEPA, environmentalists and nationalist trade experts were fuming over the inclusion of waste, like incinerator ash and health care discards, on the list of goods to be traded.

'This is treason'

"It's unspeakable ... this is treason," Mother Earth founder Odette Alcantara said of the list of zero-tariff waste under the JPEPA.

Alcantara, whose group lobbied for years for the passage of Republic Act No. 8749, or the Philippine Clean Air Act, that banned incinerators in the country, said the JPEPA would defeat the law as it encourages the entry of the highly toxic incinerator ash.

"We did not pass the Clean Air Act only to import incinerator ash. That's distorted. We banned incinerators here precisely so we would not have incinerator ash, and yet we'll import it?" Sison said.

Metodio Palaypay, a waste management expert from the University of the Philippines, said there was a known technology to immobilize incinerator ash but it was not available in the Philippines because it was too expensive. The United States and Europe have the technology.

"There is no way you can recycle incinerator ash; it's 20 times more toxic than what you put in," Palaypay said.

Unfounded

In its briefing paper, however, the DENR stressed that no provision in the JPEPA explicitly allows the trade of banned items or liberalized entry of regulated products.

Environment Undersecretary Demetrio L. Ignacio said the environmentalists' concerns were unfounded.

He said Republic Act No. 6969, or the Toxic Substance and Hazardous and Nuclear Waste Act of 1990, prohibits the entry of hazardous waste into and their disposal within the country for whatever purpose, including transit. The law sets a penalty of 12 to 20 years imprisonment for violators.

"It (JPEPA) will not violate our laws in the sense that they (toxic and hazardous waste) will not be coming in because they are banned in the first place," said Ignacio.

"The objective of the Philippines was to get the JPEPA approved, and the environment is not a concession actually because it has no effect on our laws, that's why there is no harm, in other words," Ignacio said.

Global forests disappearing for a pittance -- World Bank

Agence France-Presse
Last updated 09:37am (Mla time) 10/24/2006

http://newsinfo.inq7.net/breakingnews/world/view_article.php?article_id=28377

WASHINGTON -- Global warming caused by rapid deforestation could be curbed if developing countries were paid the proper rewards for maintaining their woodland, a World Bank study said Monday.

The report noted that the world's forests are disappearing at a rate of five percent a decade as woodland is cleared for timber and production of in-demand commodities like beef, coffee and soybeans.

But the land would have far more value if the forests were preserved and developing countries were then rewarded on global carbon markets.
Such markets are an offshoot of the Kyoto agreement against global warming, letting countries that struggle to meet targets for industrial emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) pay other countries that keep their own emissions down.

About a fifth of global CO2 emissions come from tropical deforestation but these have not been harnessed into carbon markets such as the European Union's Emissions Trading Scheme, the report said.

It said that in Latin America, dense jungle is often cleared to create pastures worth as little as 300 dollars a hectare while releasing 500 tons of CO2 per hectare.

This implies a "CO2 abatement cost" of less than one dollar a ton.
The report said it was believed that tackling climate change requires paying about three dollars a ton for CO2 abatement, while EU members are currently paying up to 20 dollars a ton.

"In other words, deforesters are destroying a carbon storage asset theoretically worth 1,500-10,000 dollars to create a pasture worth 200-500 dollars per hectare," the World Bank said.

"Yet carbon markets, such as those under the Kyoto Protocol and EU Emissions Trading Scheme, do not reward forestholders for reduced emissions from avoided deforestation."

But such rewards would require a "global commitment" against climate change, the report said, while the United States and Australia have refused to ratify the Kyoto pact in its current guise.

"Global carbon finance can be a powerful incentive to stop deforestation," said the World Bank's chief economist, Francois Bourguignon.

"Compensation for avoiding deforestation could help developing countries to improve forest governance and boost rural incomes, while helping the world at large to mitigate climate change more vigorously," he said.

The report noted also that global concern about the loss of rare species should be harnessed to compensate countries for not chopping down their forests.

In the Kerinci-Seblat National Park, on the Indonesian island of Sumatra, "avarice and opportunity" threaten an area containing 4,000 plant species and three percent of the Earth's mammal species -- including threatened ones such as the clouded leopard and small Sumatran rhinoceros.Properly regulated logging in such places would give locals a stake in keeping their forests managed, to ensure a long-term income from timber, the report said.

3 aftershocks felt after 5.2-quake jolts islands

By Norman Bordadora, Marlon Alexander Luistro, Madonna Virola
Inquirer
Last updated 02:27am (Mla time) 10/22/2006

http://newsinfo.inq7.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view_article.php?article_id=28001

Published on page A3 of the October 22, 2006 issue of the
Philippine Daily Inquirer
A MAGNITUDE 5.2-earthquake shook the sea floor between the islands of Mindoro and Marinduque at 10:30 Friday night, the Philippine Institute of Volcanology and Seismology reported yesterday.

Phivolcs said the earthquake was felt on the two islands, parts of Southern Tagalog and Metro Manila. It generated three aftershocks yesterday—one at 1:27 a.m., another at 6:09 a.m. and the last at 10:53 a.m.

It added that the quakes did not indicate a bigger quake was coming.
There were no reports of damage or loss of life.

Rodrigo Medrano, Phivolcs research specialist in Tagaytay City, said the earthquakes were not strong enough to damage property or cause death. “They cannot also cause cracks among road infrastructures and buildings,” he said.

Despite the offshore location of the earthquake’s epicenter, Phivolcs said no tsunami lashed the coastal areas of Southern Luzon as the quake and its aftershocks “had magnitudes that are not capable of generating destructive tsunamis.”

Tsunamis were usually generated by a quake with a magnitude of about 7.0, the institute said.

“However, Phivolcs still expects aftershocks to continue occurring in the next few days which may be felt, especially within the vicinity of the epicenter,” it said in its Saturday morning bulletin. “Because of this, Phivolcs is continuously monitoring the area and any new development will be relayed to all concerned.”

Phivolcs said aftershocks normally exhibited lower magnitudes than the main quake but might vary in intensity.

Phivolcs reported the earthquake to have been felt with intensity five in Marinduque, Naujan in Mindoro Oriental, Batangas City and Bauan in Batangas; with intensity four in Manila, Lipa City in Batangas and San Pablo City in Batangas; with intensity three in Makati, Puerto Galera in Mindoro Oriental, Talisay in Batangas and Lucban in Quezon; with intensity two in Quezon City, Tagaytay City in Cavite and Guinayangan in Quezon.

Magnitude-five quakes and lower could just cause container spills and hanging objects such as chandeliers to sway, Medrano said. With an AFP report

UFOs galore at Manila Bay

(Unsinkable Floating Objects):
By Rudy BrulThe Philippine STAR 10/22/2006

http://www.philstar.com/philstar/business200610244501.htm

Those ubiquitous plastic sando bags, along with other synthetic packaging materials like shampoo sachets, foam cups, drinking straws and beverage bottles, comprise at least 76 percent of the trash found floating along the breadth and length of the historic, sunset-filled coastline of Manila Bay.

This was the assessment made recently by the visiting crew and volunteers of the global Greenpeace ship M.Y. Esperanza and the Manila-based Eco-Waste Coalition, a non-governmental organization (NGO) environmental alliance, after collecting four cubic meters of 25plastic debris from the bay aboard inflatable boats.

The waste survey was part of the environmental groups’ efforts to document and monitor the extent of plastic pollution in Manila’s famous bay, which is considered as one of the most polluted bays in Asia.

"And plastics comprise most of those unsinkable floating objects or UFOs found on Manila Bay," Eco-Waste Coalition convenor Manny Calonzo said.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia campaigner Beau Baconguis echoes: "Manila Bay has become a huge floating dump for the whole of Metro Manila and the other coastal provinces from the Bataan peninsula down to Cavite."

The breakdown of the waste audit showed that those logo-inscribed supermarket carry bags and the lighter, transparent sari-sari or palengke grocery bags comprise 51 percent of the bay’s plastic debris. This is followed by sachets and junkfood packaging materials at 19 percent; five percent are styrofoams and one percent hard plastics for a total of 76 percent. Other floating objects found are rubber (10 percent) and other biodegradables (13 percent).

"The immense volume of assorted plastic garbage littering its coasts and floating in its currents is symbolic of the trashing of Manila Bay and serves as a visual reminder of the pollution that is slowly killing the seas," Baconguis added.

If it is any indication, Calonzo said, the invasion of plastic UFOs in Manila Bay mirrors the worldwide ocean scenario. Published studies, he said, showed that most of the marine debris globally is made up of 60 to 80 percent plastic materials. "In some areas, it can be as high as 90 to 95 percent of the total amount of marine debris."

Some of the country’s plastic debris might even find its way into the infamous Trash Vortex, an area in the North Pacific where plastic trash from all over the world has converged into a great gyrating mass, he added.

Each year, he said, billions of grocery bags end up as ugly ocean litter globally. Manila Bay is not an exemption to the growing list of contributing bodies of water.

Aside from making Manila Bay an unwanted eyesore, the huge volume of plastic thrash which regularly finds its way to the bay impacts greatly on the marine life, suffocating vital sea ecosystems and the plant lives, even multiplying its adverse effects on the livelihood of land-based human lives that these waters support.

Along with less visible but equally harmful pollutants, plastics have smothered the bay’s mangrove, sea grass and coral ecosystems, and as in other coastal areas where plastic thrash predominates, have led to the death of birds and marine animals via ingestion or entanglement.

Plastic bags don’t biodegrade. These grocery bags photodegrade or break down into smaller toxic slices contaminating the soil and waterways and entering the food web when animals accidentally ingest these bits and pieces.

In the said Trash Vortex in the North Pacific Central Gyre, marine pollution yielded minuscule bits of plastics found inside planktons, the bedrock of the aquatic food web. These tiny plastic pieces outweigh plankton by six to one in some parts of the Pacific, or six pounds of plastic for every single pound of plankton.

Here, Manila Bay has already been declared as a pollution hotspot in 1999 by the Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas in East Asia (PEMSEA), another independent global environmental campaigner. Manila Bay, PEAMSEA noted, suffers from pollution from industries which dump their effluents, often toxic, in the bay or in its estuaries, on top of domestic sewage.

"Degradation of the bay has long before reached alarming levels, directly affecting the health and livelihoods of around 10 million people living in the vicinity," it reported.

The invasion of those throwaway single-use grocery bags in the bay adds to the worsening degradation of Manila Bay, Calonzo concluded.

"Isn’t it time that the government, business and the plain folks move in concert to make a stand?" Calonzo dared.

PHIVOLCS EARTHQUAKE UPDATE

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Science and Technology

PHILIPPINE INSTITUTE OF VOLCANOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY
PHIVOLCS Bldg., C.P. Garcia Ave., University of the Philippines Campus, Diliman, Quezon City
Tels. 426-1468 to 79; Fax: 929-8366 (director’s office); 927-1087 (seismology); 926-3225

PHIVOLCS EARTHQUAKE UPDATE

11:00 AM, 21 October 2006


A magnitude 5.2 earthquake occurred at 10:30 PM on October 20, 2006 and was felt in Southern Luzon. The epicenter was located offshore between the islands of Mindoro and Marinduque at 13.43°N, 121.53°E, or about 35 km West of Boac, Marinduque. It was reportedly felt at (PEIS) Intensity V in Marinduque, Naujan (Mindoro Oriental), Batangas City and Bauan (Batangas); at Intensity IV in Manila City, Lipa City (Batangas) and San Pablo City (Laguna) ; at Intensity III in Makati City and Puerto Galera (Oriental Mindoro), Talisay (Batangas), Lucban (Quezon); at Intensity II in Quezon City, Tagaytay City and Guinayangan (Quezon). The possible source of this earthquake is movement along the eastern segment of Lubang Fault.

Three (3) aftershocks were felt as of 11 AM October 21, 2006 - at 01:27 AM (magnitude 3.7), at 06:09 AM (magnitude 4.7) and 10:53 AM. The 01:27 AM event was felt at intensity III in Lipa City and San Pablo City; at Intensity II in the areas of Taal, Buco, Talisay (Batangas), Quezon City, Muntinlupa, Carmona (Cavite), Tagaytay City and Lucban (Quezon). The 06:09AM event was reportedly felt at Intensity III in Batangas City, Cabuyao (Laguna), Manila; and at Intensity II in Quezon City, Manila City and Lucban (Quezon). The 10:53 AM event was felt at Intensity III at San Pablo City, Intensity II at Tanauan (Batangas) and Intensity I at Talisay (Batangas). These aftershocks were located near the epicenter of the October 20 10:30 PM earthquake.

No report of damages have been received as of this update. Although the epicenter of the earthquake is located offshore, PHIVOLCS has not issued a tsunami watch in the coastal areas of Southern Luzon as these earthquakes have magnitudes that are not capable of generating destructive tsunamis. However, PHIVOLCS still expects aftershocks to continue occurring in the next few days which may be felt especially within the vicinity of the epicenter. Aftershocks are normally of lower magnitude than the mainshock but may vary in felt intensities as the epicenters of these aftershocks become close to populated areas. Because of this, PHIVOLCS is continuously monitoring the area and any new development will be relayed to all concerned.




PHIVOLCS-DOST
ICN/MLPB/BJTP

Two mining companies get DENR exploratory permits

By Jonathan L. Mayuga
Correspodndent / Business Mirror/
10/15/06

THE Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has approved the issuance of three exploration permits to two firms to explore gold, copper and other mineral deposits in Surigao del Norte and Batangas.

Environment Secretary Angelo Reyes said one exploration permits (EP) was issued to MRL Gold Philippines and while two permits were issued to Egerton Gold Phils. Inc.

Reyes said the two companies have complied with the requirements set under the Mining Act of 1995 and all existing rules and regulations.

The two companies presented their project presentations last week, Reyes said.

“After hearing their project presentations last week, I am convinced that these exploration projects can spur development in the host areas once substantial mineral reserves are found,” he said. He ordered the director of the DENR Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) to issue the EPs to MRL and Egerton pursuant to existing procedure, particularly Memorandum Order No. 2005-020 which pertains to the issuance of exploration permits by virtue of Department Resources administrative Order No. 2005-15.

The EP to be issued to MRL covers 316 hectares in the municipality of Malimono, Surigao del Norte, while Egerton has a combined area of 6,980 hectares covered by two EP applications in the towns of Lobo and San Juan in Batangas.

The approval of the exploration permits, according to Reyes, sends a clear signal to foreign and local investors that the government’s revitalization program for mining is on track.

“We continue to address the concerns of various stakeholders, specifically with regards to social equity and environmental protection,” he said.

According to Reyes, the two companies’ EP applications were approved based on the track records of the companies and their “seriousness” in engaging in mining operation.

The DENR chief said MRL and Egerton are both financially and technically capable and have shown a sense of corporate social responsibility.

MRL Gold is a corporation registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, 99.9 percent of which is, owned by the Mindoro Resources Ltd., a Canadian company. Egerton, on the other hand, is a Filipmo corporation with 40-percent Australian equity.

In 2000, MRL signed an operating agreement with Egerton to explore its mineral claims.

MRL Gold has been operating in the Philippines for more than 10 years. Formed in 1996 focusing on Southeast Asian countries like Myanmar, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, the company decided to shift its entire focus on the Philippines because of the country’s great technical potential.

MRL Gold president Tony Climie told reporters during a press briefing that the company is seriously considering putting in substantial investment in the Philippines, noting the support investors in the mining industry are getting from the government.

Mining permit processing resumes;

Mining permit processing resumes; environment plans crucial

First posted 02:47am (Mla time)
Oct 04, 2006

By Christine A. Gaylican
Inquirer

THE Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has resumed processing of mineral exploration and production permits that have been pending for the past nine months, Inquirer sources in the department said.

Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Angelo Reyes has asked applicants to make individual project presentations at his office, the sources said.

This procedure will bring the applicants closer to getting permits, they said.
The companies that have made presentations are MRL Gold Philippines Inc., Egerton Gold Philippines Inc., Buena Suerte Mining Corp., and Manila Mining Corp.

A ranking DENR official said Reyes had also asked applicants to submit their environment programs and social preparations for the communities at the target mine sites, and documents pertaining to their technical and financial resources.

MRL Gold Philippines expects to get its exploration permit sometime soon, company president James Anthony Climie said.

Climie said MRL Gold Philippines had submitted a petition to the DENR to explore parts of a property in Malimono town in the southern area of Surigao for gold and copper.

The Malimono site measures 508.12 hectares.

Buena Suerte Mining Corp., an affiliate of Australia ’s Oxiana Ltd., has signified interest in surveying 4,192 hectares of the towns of Liloan, San Francisco and San Ricardo in Southern Leyte province for possible copper and gold resources.

Ten medium-scale mining companies have applied for a Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) to extract nickel, chromites, limestone and cobalt.

The MPSA is a contract that will allow the national government to share in the production of a mining company. Under it, the company will provide the financing, technology, management and personnel for the mining project.

Approval of MPSA applications is subject to qualifications and requirements set by the Philippine Mining Act of 1995.

Mining permit processing resumes; environment plans crucial

First posted 02:47am (Mla time) Oct 04, 2006
By Christine A. Gaylican
Inquirer

http://news.inq7.net/archive_article/index.php?ver=1&index=1&story_id=24652

THE Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) has resumed processing of mineral exploration and production permits that have been pending for the past nine months, Inquirer sources in the department said.

Environment and Natural Resources Secretary Angelo Reyes has asked applicants to make individual project presentations at his office, the sources said.

This procedure will bring the applicants closer to getting permits, they said.
The companies that have made presentations are MRL Gold Philippines Inc., Egerton Gold Philippines Inc., Buena Suerte Mining Corp., and Manila Mining Corp.

A ranking DENR official said Reyes had also asked applicants to submit their environment programs and social preparations for the communities at the target mine sites, and documents pertaining to their technical and financial resources.

MRL Gold Philippines expects to get its exploration permit sometime soon, company president James Anthony Climie said.

Climie said MRL Gold Philippines had submitted a petition to the DENR to explore parts of a property in Malimono town in the southern area of Surigao for gold and copper.

The Malimono site measures 508.12 hectares.

Buena Suerte Mining Corp., an affiliate of Australia’s Oxiana Ltd., has signified interest in surveying 4,192 hectares of the towns of Liloan, San Francisco and San Ricardo in Southern Leyte province for possible copper and gold resources.

Ten medium-scale mining companies have applied for a Mineral Production Sharing Agreement (MPSA) to extract nickel, chromites, limestone and cobalt.

The MPSA is a contract that will allow the national government to share in the production of a mining company. Under it, the company will provide the financing, technology, management and personnel for the mining project.

Approval of MPSA applications is subject to qualifications and requirements set by the Philippine Mining Act of 1995.

With INQ7.net

Economists on climatechange: Do we care?

By GERARD WYNN

http://www.malaya.com.ph/oct02/envi5.htm

LONDON — Will the spending needed to prevent global warming cost the world more than just sitting back, or even enjoying the possible financial benefits of a hotter planet?

Economists are divided over that cold financial calculation in the week ahead of a major report on the issue to be presented to ministers of the world’s leading nations.

Some want action now to curb climate-changing emissions, saying that will cost little today but more if we delay, while others urge a slower approach, saying uncontrolled climate change will cost little or nothing in the short-term.

The report by UK government scientist Nicholas Stern to the G8 nations and major emerging countries including China, India and Brazil, may favor the first argument, according to some sources who contributed to it.

Also in that camp is Nobel laureate and former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz.

"The net cost (of taking action) is even potentially negative but certainly is not very significant," said Stiglitz.

Financial benefits, or negative costs, occur from energy efficiency savings.
"We need to start doing something now," Stiglitz said. "There is a risk of very rapid climate change."

Robert Mendelsohn, professor at the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, argues that such negative costs may still be less than the benefits.

He sees a net global warming bonus in the near-term, as higher farming yields in northern countries offsets damage elsewhere, especially in Africa.

"In that sense it doesn’t make sense to spend money right now," Mendelsohn said, adding that beyond 2050 and a 2 degrees Celsius rise the damage and need for action grows.

He added that he does not cost species extinctions and health effects, and only crudely measures the cost of island inundations.

Richard Tol, Senior Research Officer at Ireland’s Economic and Social Research Institute, has a similar stance.

"(My damage estimate) does hide some things that some people will get very upset about," Tol said. "From an economic perspective small island states are so tiny and people are moving out of there anyway."

As an example Tol estimates the welfare loss of the Maldives submerging at three times the inhabitants’ annual salaries, in addition to the 100 percent loss of the country’s GDP.

Citizens are happy to value the preservation of the global ecosystem at a cost of 50 euros per person per year, Tol says, but added he does not factor in the risk of rapid sea level rise.

A third camp treats with suspicion both cost and damage estimates, fearing they could be huge underestimates.

"I worry that existing damage estimates have little to do with what we’ll actually see," said John Reilly, senior research scientist at MIT. "They do not really value the widespread ecological changes that are likely to occur."

A particular concern is the cost of runaway climate change, where temperature rises spin out of control, and which could trigger knock-on disasters like conflicts, or sudden sea level rise which could wipe out part or whole countries like the Netherlands, Egypt and Bangladesh.

On the costs of policies, the concern is of over-optimistic assumptions about the update of new clean energy technologies, with recent oil price hikes, for example, spurring less adoption impact than some had expected.
The annual costs of tackling climate change escalate rapidly the tougher the action.

Reilly estimates the cost of staying within a 3 degrees temperature rise at 2 percent of global GDP in 2100, but at some 8 to 10 percent of GDP to stay under 2 degrees – or some $25 trillion in 2100 money – seen as a danger threshold.

Mendelsohn estimated that the top end of possible temperature rises, nearly 6 degrees, would cost up to 2 percent of GDP in 2100.

Central Luzon forest protection mapped out

BY JOJO DUE

http://www.malaya.com.ph/oct01/envi4.htm

CITY OF SAN FERNANDO —Environment officials and forest protection officers convened a top-level meeting here recently to map out plans for the protection of Central Luzon’s remaining forests.

The forest protection plan seeks control of illegal logging activities in at least 17 identified illegal logging "hotspots" in Central Luzon as experts predict the forests will vanish by 2050 unless government institutes forest protection and rehabilitation efforts.

"The plan was patterned after the draft Omnibus Forestry guidelines laid down by the DENR that has identified upland agro-forestry development and forest boundary delineation as critical in the protection and rehabilitation of the region’s forests," Regido de Leon, DENR Central Luzon Executive Director explained.

De Leon said the plan will address forest management and protection issues that will ensure short- and long-term economic and environmental benefits of sustainable forestry activities in the region.

The illegal logging hotspots, where sporadic timber poaching activities continue, are located in Sta. Cruz, Castillejos and Iba in Zambales; San Jose, Mayantoc and San Clemente in Tarlac; Carranglan, Bongabon and Laur in Nueva Ecija; Sumacbao River and San Jose Del Monte in Bulacan; Bagac, Morong and Mariveles in Bataan; Dipaculao and Dingalan in Aurora Province; and Mt. Arayat in Pampanga.

Ricardo Calderon, DENR technical director for forestry, said the plan completed during the 1st Forestry Sector Forum in Lubao, has sought to squarely settle the issues of kaingin or slash-and-burn farming, squatting, illegal logging, forest fires, and pest and disease control in forests.

"This is the first time that a comprehensive forest protection plan has been mapped out by no less than those directly involved in forest protection, law enforcement and the DENR’s surveillance and intelligence operations," Calderon said, adding the plan strengthens inter-agency linkages with the military and the police, including the Coast Guard.

He said intelligence operations would require highly specialized skills in the recognition and containment of destructive agents in illegal logging "hotspots", including the surveillance, detection, and arrests of illegal loggers.

DENR records show that only 433,276 hectares out of the 963,120 hectares of forestlands in Central Luzon, or about 45 percent, have adequate forest cover.