GASIFICATION AS ANOTHER SOLUTION TO THE SOLID WASTE PROBLEM

GASIFICATION AS ANOTHER SOLUTION TO THE SOLID WASTE PROBLEM

I am encouraged by the recent innovation of a Cebuano agricultural engineer, Engr. Victoriano "Vic" Ocon, who developed a locally designed gasification system that can reportedly reduce the volume of solid waste by as much as 96 percent.

Engr. Ocon, president of Vic Metal Fabrication and Environmental Services, Inc., received the 2026 Presidential Filipinnovation Award, together with a ₱3.5-million grant to further develop and deploy his technology. This is something worth celebrating. Why should we always depend on imported technologies when our own Filipino engineers can develop solutions to our problems?

Gasification uses high temperatures and a controlled, limited supply of oxygen to convert suitable waste materials into synthesis gas, commonly called syngas, which contains combustible gases such as hydrogen and carbon monoxide. This gas can potentially be used to generate electricity or provide heat. The process also produces solid residues that must be properly handled.

I believe gasification, together with pyrolysis, recycling and composting, could become part of a holistic solution to our solid waste problem. I say holistic because I do not believe there is one single solution that can solve everything. Nothing should ever replace the good old practices of waste reduction, segregation and recycling.

However, I have some questions about government responsibilities.

Since solid waste management is primarily an environmental concern, the DENR should naturally play a leading role. But if gasification produces a combustible gaseous fuel, what should be the role of the Department of Energy (DOE)? If the resulting fuel can eventually be used in transportation, should the Department of Transportation (DOTr) also be involved?

I have repeatedly suggested that whenever two or more government agencies have overlapping responsibilities or opportunities, there should be a properly organized inter-agency task force or technical working group. In this particular case, I would not object if the DOE takes the lead in developing the energy component, with the DENR ensuring environmental compliance.

The DOST should provide independent scientific and technical evaluation, while the DOH should help assess possible health risks. The DILG should coordinate with LGUs to ensure that local implementation follows national standards.

We should also be careful about how we interpret our environmental laws. Open dumpsites are prohibited, yet they continue to exist in many communities. Sanitary landfills are supposed to be the proper disposal facilities, but their availability remains limited. Meanwhile, some thermal waste-treatment projects are being promoted as waste-to-energy solutions even when their actual processes and environmental safeguards deserve closer examination.

Let us remember that gasification is not automatically the same as incineration. However, calling something gasification or waste-to-energy does not automatically make it safe. We need independent emission testing, proper pollution-control equipment, reliable operating records and strict compliance with environmental regulations.

I suggest that LGUs interested in acquiring this technology consult the DOST, DENR and DOH before spending public money. They should examine not only the promised 96-percent volume reduction but also operating costs, maintenance requirements, actual energy output, emissions and the proper disposal of residues.

Most importantly, gasification should process residual waste, not become an excuse to stop segregating garbage at source.

I welcome Filipino innovations such as the one developed by Ocon. But let us combine innovation with common sense, science and responsible governance.

Our objective should not simply be to make garbage disappear. It should be to make sure that in solving one environmental problem, we do not create another.

BY RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres  iseneres@yahoo.com  senseneres.blogspot.com   09088877282/09-27-2027

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES?

HOW IS THE CRIME RATE COMPUTED IN THE PHILIPPINES? When we talk about the crime rate in the Philippines, we often assume that the figures we see are accurate reflections of reality. But have we ever paused to ask—how exactly is the crime rate computed? Where does this data come from, and how reliable is it? The computation of the crime rate in the Philippines is officially handled by the Philippine National Police (PNP). The formula itself is straightforward: Crime Rate = (Total Reported Crimes / Total Population) x 100,000 This simple equation gives us the number of crimes per 100,000 people, allowing for fair comparison across regions and time periods. However, the reality behind these numbers is more complex than it appears. Data from the Ground The foundation of our national crime rate is empirical data collected at the grassroots level—from individual police stations scattered across the country. Every reported crime is logged in local police blotters, forming the buil...
Read more

ARE GRAB DRIVERS EMPLOYEES OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS?

  A RE GRAB DRIVERS EMPLOYEES OR INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS? The question of whether Grab drivers are employees or independent contractors is becoming one of the most important labor issues in the modern “gig economy.” In the Philippines, the answer remains a legal gray area. I am not yet ready to take a firm position on this matter. Like many observers, I am still waiting for clearer laws and more definitive court rulings before making up my mind. On one hand, becoming employees could benefit Grab drivers. If they are formally classified as employees, they would automatically become members of government social protection systems such as the Social Security System (SSS), PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG. That means they could receive benefits like health insurance, retirement pensions, and housing loans. Of course, they would also have to pay their own contributions, but the long-term security might be worth it. On the other hand, formal employment might also impose stricter requirements. Dr...
Read more

MUNICH HAS PROVEN THAT IT IS CHEAPER TO CONVERT TO ORGANIC FARMING THAN TO FILTER WATER CONTAMINATED BY CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS

MUNICH HAS PROVEN THAT IT IS CHEAPER TO CONVERT TO ORGANIC FARMING THAN TO FILTER WATER CONTAMINATED BY CHEMICAL FERTILIZERS What kind of government is able to discover an opportunity at the crossroads of water management and agricultural policy ? Apparently, the government of Munich did. When Munich's municipal water utility, Stadtwerke München (SWM), became concerned about agricultural pollution in its drinking-water catchment, it did not simply wait for the problem to become a water-treatment problem. In 1992, it launched the Ökobauern program to encourage farmers in the Mangfall Valley to shift from conventional to organic farming.  The idea was surprisingly simple: pay farmers to protect the water. SWM compensated farmers for income losses and investments associated with converting to organic agriculture. The first 23 farms signed agreements in 1993. Today, more than 185 farmers are participating in the Mangfall Valley, farming about 4,600 to 4,650 hectares organically. ...
Read more