WHO IS in charge of waste-to-energy projects?
Should it be the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), or should it be the Department of Energy (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 Department of Interior and Local Government (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 Metro Manila Development Authority (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 Department of Agriculture (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?
ADVOCATING FOR CHEAPER MEDICINES
Despite the passage of Republic Act 9502 (An Act Providing for Cheaper and Quality Medicines) in 2008, it seems that cheaper medicines are still not commonly used in the Philippines. No, I am not saying that cheaper medicines are not available, because they are. Take note however that the law requires medicines that are not just cheaper, they also must be of good quality. Are cheaper yet quality medicines possible? Or is that not an oxymoron? As for me, it is possible, and it is not an oxymoron. The problem I think is in the interpretation of what it means. Usually, the term cheaper medicine is interpreted to mean generic medicine, but that is really a very shallow and limited interpretation. In truth and in fact, even branded medicines could become cheaper as they are, without reducing their quality. The key to that is the packaging, and their method of delivery or distribution. For example, many medicines are delivered in individually packed aluminum wrappers, and that makes the medicines more expensive. There are generic medicines that are of good quality, but the customers do not know what they are, or which is which. The solution perhaps is to publish a list of these quality generic medicines. Better still, redesign the packaging of all medicines, to make them cheaper./PN
