This one’s not for the birds

Who’s afraid of the bird flu? (All of Asia, including the Philippines, is.) Exactly how real is the bird flu scare, as far as the country is concerned? These questions and more concerns (you may have wanted to ask but didn’t know who to ask) are answered by this e-mail we got from Victor Florenz Genato, who’s into farm management: 

The Philippines has 7,000 plus islands spread across the archipelago. It is surrounded by salt water, which is suspended in mid-air through condensation, and serves as filter to harmful vapors, bacteria, viruses, and the like. The first reported severe avian flu outbreak was in China, not to mention Hong Kong, where it all started with the SARS virus. The avian flu is the common veterinary term, Now, it’s simply called bird flu. It’s the tailspin of the virus SARS. But it was averted in humans and subsequently contained through modern medicine.

China, on the other hand, is only four hours away. Migratory birds are another thing to consider. These birds of many species fly away out of China to escape the harshest of winters. 

The neighboring Asian countries such as Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Laos, Cambodia were greatly affected because they are all close-in neighbors. They lack the proper sanitation and bio-security among farms. We Filipinos are better off when it comes to sanitation. I’ve been to China and saw their farms, they have no sanitation to speak of.

The bird flu virus is active in cold climates. It’s hardly active in hot tropical climes such as ours. At present, our country is bird flu-free.

Bird flu thrives on wet, dampy, and very dirty places. These places serve as their nest and breeding grounds. This is one thing we should worry about: the migratory birds who seek temporary shelter, whose main bulk is found mainly in the Candaba swamp. It’s scary to think that since it is a swamp, it can act as the birds’ nesting place and incubator to nourish the bird flu virus H5N1 and cause it to mutate to another form. That’s the fear of many poultry raisers now, especially in regions 2, 3, and 4, which are close to Candaba.  

The bio-researchers and pharmaceutical companies can take advantage and rake in millions through their so-called vaccines.

You can imagine the sleepless nights it will cause our poultry raisers if there’s one reported outbreak, and how this will wipe out their investments! Imagine all the chickens that will be culled, slaughtered, and burned to avert the spread of the said virus.

* * *

A burning issue

Incineration is not the solution to the country’s waste problems.

That burning warning came from Dr. Jorge Emmanuel, a California-based chemical engineer and chemist, speaking at a lecture-forum organized by the Ecological Waste Coalition, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives and Health Care Without Harm.

According to Dr. Emmanuel, "gasification and the related technologies of waste pyrolysis and plasma arc share characteristics with more traditional forms of waste combustion."

These include the formation and release of hazardous pollutants, creation of toxic ash and waste water, high economic costs, energy consumption, and incompatibility with community-driven waste prevention and recycling programs.

These "incinerators by other names," he points out, release toxic substances, including persistent organic pollutants (POPs) such as dioxins, furans, polychlorinated biphenyls, and hexachlorobenzene, which are being targeted for reduction with the goal of elimination under the Stockholm Convention on POPs.

Emmanuel asserts, "Not only do these incinerators in disguise emit hazardous air pollutants, they also discharge contaminated solid and liquid residues, which could be highly toxic.

Activists contend that waste incineration goes against the waste prevention and reduction goals of RA 9003 or the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000.

Manny Calonzo, spokesman for the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, asserts, "Community recycling enterprises should be encouraged to grow, not face increased competition with expensive incineration disposal technologies that create far fewer jobs. Also, incinerators do not eliminate or adequately control the toxic emissions from today’s chemically complex municipal discards."

Thus, to counter these health/environmental/economic threats from waste incineration, the Ecological Waste Coalition seeks the vigilant enforcement of the incineration ban under the Clean Air Act of 1999 and the Ecological Solid Waste Management Act of 2000, and the implementation of zero waste and clean production practices that will contribute to the reduction in the volume and toxicity of discarded materials.

For more information, call the Secretariat of the Eco Waste Coalition and GAIA at 929-0376

* * *

We’d love to hear from you. E-mail us at ching_alano@yahoo.com.