National energy independence

The Netherlands and Bhutan are two countries that do not have oil deposits, and yet they are net exporters of energy. The Netherlands because they tapped their natural gas deposits, and Bhutan because of their hydropower plants. Although I could only cite two examples, that is already sufficient proof that a country could become a net exporter of energy, even if it does not have oil deposits.

But what about the Philippines? Could we possibly become a net exporter of energy? I would say that in theory, we could become one, but on the condition that we decrease our oil imports and increase our own local power generation. That might sound like a tall order, but we do have the assets that could make it happen.

There are many countries that are now net exporters of energy, simply because they have oil deposits. By comparison, we do have oil deposits too, but the difference between these countries and the Philippines, is that they have tapped their deposits, and we have not. At least, not enough of it. Aside from oil deposits, we have rivers and waterfalls that could produce hydropower, and we also have natural gas deposits! And on top of all these, we also have geothermal energy sources! In others, we could really become an energy independent country!

 

River rehabilitation

Whenever there are proposals to rehabilitate rivers, it seems that the first thing that comes to the mind of the planners is to widen the river. That is not always the best idea because of zoning regulations, and because the lands beyond the river easements could already be privately owned, and there may be no funds available for expropriation. I therefore think that the more practical idea is to deepen the river, meaning to remove the silt and whatever other deposits that might have sunk into its bottoms.

After hundreds of years without any desilting done, it’s probably the right time for a proper river cleanup. I am saying that, because the usual idea for a river cleanup is to clean the river surface, which is a rather limited and simplistic view. Even without artificial river widening, some rivers could become wider because of erosion, which could be a problem for private landowners beyond the river easements.

I think that the LGUs have the duty to help these private owners so that their lands are not eroded needlessly. One sure way to prevent river erosion is to plant freshwater mangroves around the riverbanks. That way, the roots could stabilize the soil, and it would even bring back the fish into the waters, probably even the crabs. Mangroves are ideal to plant because they can adapt to high salinity just in case the water is still brackish.

 

Who is in charge of waste-to-energy projects?

Who is in charge of waste-to-energy projects? Should it be the DENR, or should it be the DOE? Not unless it is very clear as to who is in charge, this could become a game of finger pointing at the start that could become a game of blame throwing at the end. And in the end, nothing might even happen at all.

Somehow, someway, the DILG should also be involved, but right now, it is not even clear how the DILG is involved, if it is involved at all. In Metro Manila, the MMDA should also be involved, but it is also not clear how it is involved, again, if it is involved at all. In the provinces, the DA should also be involved with the collection of agricultural waste.

Combustible waste is the material needed for waste-to-energy projects. Obviously, the DOE should have nothing to do with the collection of the combustible waste, because that should be the responsibility of either the DENR, the DILG, the DA or the MMDA, depending on where the project site is.

If only the entire process of waste management could be done right, the first step should be waste segregation, so that the biodegradable materials could be separated from the non-biodegradable materials. Obviously, the combustible materials could be gathered from the latter, after the recyclable and marketable materials are removed. Can anyone tell me who is in charge?