By Joseph Pilapil
|
August 2, 2024
Following online modules that started in March, I joined a diverse group of 31 participants from India, Indonesia, Maldives, Myanmar, Bhutan, Nepal, Vietnam, and the Philippines to embark on in-person workshops and study tours across the Philippines in June. We immersed ourselves in the inspiring zero waste initiatives of various Philippine cities, from the urban landscapes of Navotas and Malabon to the idyllic island of Siquijor.
It was a highly informative and fun-filled experience that helped build personal and professional connections with fellow advocates. Below are some of the most important points from the experience that resonated with me:
The Zero Waste International Alliance defines zero waste as “the conservation of all resources by means of responsible production, consumption, reuse, and recovery of products, packaging, and materials without burning, and with no discharges to land, water, or air that threaten the environment or human health.”
Planning for zero waste does not necessarily mean not producing any waste, rather, it is building policies, programs, and infrastructure needed to get as close to a goal of zero as possible.
This ultimately conserves scarce resources and prevents harmful waste disposal in incinerators, dumps, and landfills. All the while it also ensures that systems in place are socially and environmentally acceptable. The principle of zero waste employs strategies like reducing, reusing, composting, recycling, and redesigning.
Based on the definition of zero waste, burning is a big no-no in dealing with waste. Burning wastes is more technically known as “incineration.” It comes under the guise of climate action such as “waste to energy” or other fancy names like “combustion,” “pyrolysis,” “gasification,” and “plasma arc,” to mention some.
Incineration is one of the most expensive, dangerous, and climate-polluting businesses. Despite its projected waste reduction capabilities, incineration produces smoke and ashes highly harmful to human health. In fact, studies reveal that incinerators even emit more greenhouse gases than coal plants.
Incinerators are falsely advertised as a solution to the plastic crisis, especially among cities or local government units in the Philippines. Incineration is also a racial, environmental, and climate justice issue since the most affected by their negative impacts are the least responsible for the plastic crisis. These include lower-income populations and communities of color- in which many of these incinerators are located.
Aside from incineration, ZWA considers landfilling as another false solution, although it is the most common approach to the waste problem in most cities.
It is a critical component of a centralized waste management system that deals with residual waste decentralized systems in communities cannot manage. In addition, organics in landfills, together with plastics in incinerators are the two (2) biggest sources of emissions in the waste sector.
Unfortunately, one-third of all food produced is wasted, which is responsible for as much as 10% of global emissions. The best approach to reducing these emissions is to avoid dumping organic waste in landfills. As with other waste streams, waste prevention or avoidance has the greatest impact.
Meanwhile, it is important to note that recycling alone is not enough to solve the plastic crisis. Data shows only 14% of plastic packaging gets recycled and only 2% is effectively recycled and becomes something as useful as before.
The rest is downcycled into something worse. Most recycled plastics are only recycled once before ending up in landfills, incinerators, or the environment as marine litter. Recycling is also often used by plastic corporations as a lifeline to divert attention from calls to reduce their plastic production.
In the zero-waste hierarchy, recycling does not hold the top spot as the best resource management strategy. It ranks below strategies that prevent waste from being created in the first place.
The ZWA study tours also introduced us to different community MRFs. Here, we learned how MRFs are managed and the crucial role these facilities play in communities.
According to the Mother Earth Foundation, MRF is the heart and soul of an Ecological Solid Waste Management program. It is also embedded in the Philippines’ Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000 or Republic Act No. 9003.
It is a common misconception among barangays that an MRF is just a small storage shed with separate compartments for different kinds of waste with recycling potential. Unfortunately, some of these facilities are poorly managed, with mixed trash dumped in them.
Ideally, MRFs should function as a system and not just a mere storage facility for solid waste. An ideal MRF contains multiple compartments of sheds for the following: (1) recyclables (plastic bottles, tin cans, cardboard, glass, paper, etc.); (2) non-compostable and non-recyclable residual waste (sachets, wrappers, sanitary napkins, disposable diapers, etc.); and a compost pit and compost heap for biodegradable or organic wastes
Our hands-on experience sorting through household waste and recording the brands or manufacturers who produced the collected waste items was invaluable.
WABA is a two-part process of collecting and analyzing waste to determine the amount and types of waste generated by the households in a locality, and which brands are responsible for producing certain percentages of this waste.
We can’t manage what we can’t measure. Conducting a waste assessment is the first step in understanding the waste problem, while also forming the basis for localized zero waste initiatives.
The second step is the brand audit, which aims to identify which brands, products, or companies most consumed in the area and accountable for a particular percentage of these wastes. This can guide the cities in developing or strengthening policies aimed at managing and regulating problematic single-use plastic products and packaging. Moreover, this can give baseline data to inform and hold top plastic producers accountable when the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) Act of 2022 goes into full swing in the coming years.
In the Philippines, although a lot of cities have not yet conducted their own waste analysis and characterization surveys, highly urbanized communities have already appreciated the importance of this process. Some of them use these surveys as a foundation for relevant and timely waste management policies.
There can be no just transition if people from the informal waste sector are left behind.
According to the Just Transition Alliance, “just transition” is a principle, a process, and a practice. It stated: “The principle of just transition is that a healthy economy and a clean environment can and should co-exist. The process for achieving this vision should be a fair one that should not cost workers or community residents their health, environment, jobs, or economic assets. Any losses should be fairly compensated. And the practice of just transition means that the people who are most affected by pollution – the frontline workers and the fenceline communities – should be in the leadership of crafting policy solutions.”
In the Philippines, the Magna Carta for Waste Workers is being pushed at Congress in a bid to formalize the sector, which aims to safeguard waste worker rights. This entitles them to just compensation and social benefits, among many other crucial labor rights.
I joined ZWA with a vague understanding (and skepticism) of zero waste as a solution to the widespread waste problem. The whole experience both challenged and reinforced my existing beliefs and understanding of waste management.
Although there is still much to learn, the academy taught me that zero waste is indeed possible and that it is pivotal to building a sustainable future.
A former local government employee, Joseph Pilapil is passionate about climate action, disaster resilience, and sustainability in Ormoc City. He dedicated his work in mainstreaming these concepts into the local development plans and programs and reporting the city’s climate environment data through the CDP-ICLEI Track, the world’s leading climate reporting platform and progress accountability mechanism for cities. He also organized capacity development and training programs for various technical working groups of the city government. Trained as a Climate Reality Leader in 2020, Seph uses his background in development communication to make climate change easier to understand and inspire climate action. He also advocates for localizing the Sustainable Development Goals in his city. He earned his bachelor’s degree in development communication at the Visayas State University in 2015.
ABOUT KLIMA KABISAYAAN
Klima Kabisayaan is a space that aims to amplify the climate stories and initiatives of the more than 300 Pinoy Climate Reality Leaders in Visayas.
It is one of the regular columns launched by The Climate Reality Project Philippines to elevate the climate discourse and strengthen climate action across all regions in the Philippines.
