PAETE.ORG FORUMS
Paetenians Home on the Net

HOME | ABOUT PAETE | USAP PAETE MUNISIPYO  | MEMBERS ONLY  | PICTORIAL PAETE | SINING PAETE  | LINKS  |

FORUM GUIDELINES
please read before posting

USAP PAETE Forum Index USAP PAETE
Discussion Forums for the people of Paete, Laguna, Philippines
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch    UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Proposed MRF-landfill and WasteWater Treatment
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    USAP PAETE Forum Index -> Usap Paete
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
IMO
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 12:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Approval does not mean its the only responsible action.

and definitely opposition does not translate to child's play!
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 12:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IMO wrote:
Approval does not mean its the only responsible action.

and definitely opposition does not translate to child's play!


Then please provide us with some substance, something
reasonable. I still have to hear a reasonable alternative.
Opposition should not just be simply an empty "no".

I find it very difficult to see how inaction would be reasonable
and responsible. These problems are now lingering for years.
We need to face the reality and the urgency of waste
management. Time is not on our side on this one. Responsibility
is the only right action. You can examine the entire thread
on this topic and there is not one alternative presented out there
that makes sense.

The opposition I have heard simply wants to continue to dump
garbage in sitio Sta. Ana without proper care. The opposition I
have heard tries to hide the waste by simply moving the
slaughterhouse to another location. The opposition I have
heard suggests that only meat eaters should worry about the
waste water coming from the slaughterhouse and the market.
There is that opposition that speaks against the loan but
would gladly take these projects if these were 100% free.
And lastly, there is the opposition that maintains that there is
no urgency and that there is no problem currently with the solid
waste management of Paete and its sewage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 5:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

IMO wrote:
Approval does not mean its the only responsible action.

and definitely opposition does not translate to child's play!


You left out in your considerations the context of where we are now.
What's waiting for approval is the people's request as recommended
by the MWB after weighing the subprojects and alternatives. Approval
at this point is THE responsible way. Please be reminded that the
recommendations include that any opposition should be in writing
with alternate solutions spelled out.

Agree, opposition does not translate to child's play. Opposition is
actually healthy. But it is healthful only in so far that it gives light
and meaning to all angles of the arguments to arrive at the best
choice available. Obstinate opposition to the people's wishes does
not translate to good sportsmanship, let alone maturity nor honor.

And agree, opposition carried out properly and decently does not
translate to child's play. But evasion from responsibility and holding
up the responsible course of action are by no means mature.
Back to top
guestrider/rey bagalso
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 6:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I thought the SB has the last words in this projects and i believe majority votes win, so whats goin on, are we goin back to the blame game again, if the project wins so be it, if dont, we better have something to fallback with otherwise we all goin to stink, not only literally. Let the SB makes their decision, it will not be the end of Paete if it didnt go thru, other alternative will open up and improving our sewage system should be a priority, (eliminate the cause), this is were i am leaning out, if the project went thru, lets get it together, do the best we can do and hope for the best. Give it a chance. Although our lifestyle will not change, we will still be dumping in our old canal, does it sound good? If the project is approved, we will still use the old dumping ground, floaters will still visible. But if we take care and improve our sewage system that will give us a lot of changes, we won't have to squat by the canal and wash our butt with the same flowing water, ALTHOUGH, the end result will end up in the lake too. So no matter what we do, everything goes to the lake and the sun takes care of it mostly.
Back to top
mutuk
Forum Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 1860
Location: Vice mayor Rojilyn Bagabaldo

PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hindi po sa ayaw kong mag preside sa session ng SB para sa usaping ito. May pagkakataon po na may kompromiso lang ako.

Minsan ay naiisip ko rin na huwag ng makidawdaw sa usapin dito sa usap at ako pa yata ang nasisisi na malaman nila ang nangyayari dito sa bayan natin. Noon ay puro daw pictures ngayon naman ay puro daw issues. Nang simulan na ng SB ang mga public hearings at committee meetings ay hindi na po ako nagparticipate. Ayaw kong maasiwa ang mga konsehal sa akin. Baka kasi sila ma pressure dahil alam nila ang naging stand ko sa usaping ito.Hindi kumporme ang nagdonate ng lupa na gawing SLF ito at okey sa MRF pero pansamantala lang at kailangang may makita agad na paglilipatan bago matapos ang term ng kasalukuyang Mayor. Ang dalawang proyekto ay durut na ng mapag usapan sa SB at wala na daw oras para ito ay ayusin sa mas okey na paraan.

Ang kawalan po ng Vice Mayor sa session ng SB ay hindi hadlang upang ang panukala ay hindi mapag usapan at mapagdesisiyunan. Uusad at uusad po ito batay sa kagustuhan ng sinumang may akda. Meron po kaming batas panloob na mayroong awtomatikong aakto para siyang mag preside ng pagpupulong ng hindi maantala ang mga dapat gawin sa isang panukala.

Ang mga nakaraang pulong po ay napag usapan naman ito at iniliwat na nga po sa 3rd reading noong nakaraang pulong yung sa appropriation ord. at yung iba ay nasa 2nd reading naman. Hindi po ako naging hadlang upang hindi maasikaso agad ito.

Hindi po sana ako dadalo ngayon regular session dahil noon pa pong Sabado masama ang pakiramdam ko hanggang sa ngayon. Pero dahil sa mga kahilingan na rin kagabi pa, umasa po kayo na pipilitin kong dumalo ngayon para manguna sa pagpupulong.

Maraming salamat po sa inyong pang unawa. Minabuti ko lang pong manahimik simula ng magkaroon ng public hearing ang SB bilang respeto ko na rin.

_________________
Rojilyn "Mutuk" Quiachon Bagabaldo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 11:16 pm    Post subject: Vice, Salamat Reply with quote

Quote:
umasa po kayo na pipilitin kong dumalo ngayon para manguna sa pagpupulong.


Salamat, Vice.

And thank you for breaking your silence so you don't
keep people wondering. Communication, that is,
good communication can prevent misunderstanding
and smooth out issues, right?
Back to top
mutuk
Forum Moderator


Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 1860
Location: Vice mayor Rojilyn Bagabaldo

PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 3:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ako na po ang magbabalita.

Napagtibay na po kanina ng bumubuo ng Sangguniang Bayan (nakadadaming boto) ang Appropriation Ordinance para sa 2 subprojects ng LISCOP.


Maganda naman po ang mga naging opinyon ng bawat isa. Pare pareho pong may puntos. At tulad ng nakagawian na namin pagkatapos ng ganitong eksena sa SB, respeto sa opinyon ng bawat isa. Masaya po kaming nagtanghalian at nagbiruan pagkatapos ng pagpupulong.

Maraming salamat po sa mga nagparticipate at nagbigay ng opinion dito sa usap.

_________________
Rojilyn "Mutuk" Quiachon Bagabaldo
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 8:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Congratulations. There is still a long way to go.

The SLF/MRF project requires a strong commitment from the people of Paete to do its best to reduce, reuse and recycle. Its Detailed Architectural and Engineering Design is still in the works and hopefully, it is finished to meet the deadline set by the LLDA.

The WWTF is a pilot project. It is a project from which Paete is expected to learn while at the same time addresses already part of the wastewater problem.

I hope that the subprojects receive the attention and care that they require. Vigilance is necessary to ensure that mistakes are not made. From procurement to implementation, it requires everyone's participation and support.

The idea of having a loan makes the subprojects go beyond the current administration. The solution to the problems Laguna de Bay faces requires a lot of time and will not be solved by one administration. It requires a continuing commitment and hopefully, with each year, and with each new administration, the local government of Paete will remain faithful to its mission to protect its citizens and the environment.

Good luck to all.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
guestrider/rey bagalso
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Now that the project is approved, lets look forward to the opening of construction jobs, WB stipulates that worker should be locals so, it will definitely benefits our work force.Looking forward to it.
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 9:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

taken from:

PROCUREMENT OF GOODS, WORKS, AND
NON-CONSULTING SERVICES
UNDER IBRD LOANS AND IDA CREDITS & GRANTS
BY WORLD BANK BORROWERS
January 2011

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Community Participation in Procurement
3.19 Where, in the interest of project sustainability, or to achieve certain specific social objectives of the project, it is desirable in selected project components to (a) call for the participation of local communities and/or nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in civil works and the delivery of non-consulting services, or (b) increase the utilization of local know-how, goods, and materials, or (c) employ labor-intensive and other appropriate technologies, the procurement procedures, specifications, and contract packaging shall be suitably adapted to reflect these considerations, provided that these are acceptable to the Bank. The procedures proposed and the project activities to be carried out by community participation shall be outlined in the Loan Agreement and further elaborated in the Procurement Plan or the relevant Project Implementation Document (or Manual) approved by the Bank and made publicly available by the Borrower. Given the demand-driven nature of Community Driven Development (CDD) projects, it may not always be practical to prepare detailed procurement plans at the time of negotiations as required under paragraph 1.18 for the CDD component of the projects, especially when the procurement of activities or the activities themselves are carried out directly by the community. Simplified procurement plans may be prepared, if practical, based on an indicative list of eligible activities to be implemented.

CDD projects generally envisage a large number of small value contracts for goods and both non-consulting and consulting services, and a large number of small works scattered in remote areas. Commonly used procurement procedures include Shopping, local competitive bidding inviting prospective bidders for goods and works located in and around the local community, direct contracting for small value goods, works, and non-consulting services, and the use of community labor and resources. The Project Implementation Document (or Manual) as referred to in the Loan Agreement shall describe in sufficient details all procurement arrangements, methods, and procedures including the roles, the responsibilities, and the extent of participation of the community in general (including in certain circumstances community tender committees as may be needed), simplified steps for all applicable methods of procurement, provisions for any technical or other assistance required by the community, payment procedures, and procedures for maintenance of records, simplified forms of contracts to be used, roles and oversight functions of the implementing agency, etc. The Bank’s procurement supervision arrangements, including technical and financial reviews and auditing requirements, shall be indicated in the PAD, the Loan Agreement, the simplified Procurement Plan, and the Project Implementation Document (or Manual). The audit scope should cover verification of both quality and quantity of goods, works, and services procured and proper use of funds.


-----------------------------

The above is just a small part of a quite long document prescribing the procurement process for projects funded by the World Bank. There are strict guidelines and hopefully, both LLDA and the WB would guide Paete in this process. This will take time.

The SLF/MRF project is waiting for a DAED from the municipal engineer while the WWTF project requires a clearance from DENR because of the volume of water the project proposes to treat. The latest advice from the LLDA states that Paete can proceed with signing of the loan agreement and the 2 sub-projects MOA and don't have to wait for the issuance of the ECC. Paete needs, however, to write DENR stating that Paete has already applied for the ECC and that Paete will comply with its requirements.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ming B-Bulanggugo
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 12:58 pm    Post subject: Napakagandang Video ng Laguna de Bay Reply with quote

Nakakabuhay ng pag-asa ang "video clip" na ito. Nakakagalak ng damdamin.

Ang sabi ni Confucius, a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.

Maitanong ko lang Angel, sa bilang ng mga bayan at siudad na nabanggit sa video, ilan ang may pinagtibay nang ordinansa na tulad ng Paete, na yumayakap sa magandang proyektong ito na sasagip sa lawa ng Laguna?

Hindi matatawaran ang magandang adhikain at pananaw para sa susunod pang mga lahi sa dakong iyan ng ating bansa. Ang Paete ay isang maliit na pamayanan lamang ngunit sa pagpasa ng ordinansa na unang hakbang tungo sa ikaayos ng ating mga basura at pakikiisa sa pagsagip ng lawa.

Nais ko lamang makita ang mas malawak na larawan ng napagandang proyektong ito. Bakit? Dahil baka yaong mga siudad at bayan na pangunahing nagdadala ng nakakalason at maruruming sedimento, at mga nagpapababaw ng lawa ang siyang walang pakikiisa at hindi handang sumuporta sa proyekto. Kumbaga ay isang "orchestra" ito na ang bawat isa ay may partisipasyon upang makabuo ng isang obra maestrang tugtugin.

Ito sa aking paningin ang isa sa mga nagiging pananaw ng ating mga kababayan kung bakit hilaw ang pagsuporta sa nasabing proyekto. Kaya nga ang sabi ng ilan ay dapat ang Nasyonal na Pamahalaan ang dapat na bumabalikat at nagpapatupad nito na ang ibig sabihin ay maliit lamang ang magiging gastos ng mga pamayang nakapaligid.

Sana Angel ay matugunan mo itong aking kahilingan na mabuting mabatid rin ng ating mga kababayan.

Salamat.


Ming Baldemor
Batang Quinale
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Wed Sep 07, 2011 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ming:

The answer to your question would be quite long and not definite.

There is a master plan that has been drawn by the LLDA:

http://www.llda.gov.ph/dox/ldb.....Frmwrk.pdf

The above is quite long, summarized in pesos, it will cost 300 billion pesos. In this 300 billion estimate, I think only 200 million is estimated for the constructed wetlands. This, as you would imagine, is perhaps underestimated. The pilot project in Paete designed to treat only the wastewater from the slaughterhouse and partly the market is already 5 million, to treat all of the sewage of Paete, it is estimated at 50 million. Multiplying 50 million by 40 (number of towns along the lakeshore), you will arrive at 2 billion pesos already. But the master plan assigns another 3 billion for sewage (you could see this in another slide).

I think 3 billion pesos will indeed address the sewage part of the problem of Laguna de Bay. And the pilot project in Paete, which I think the World Bank is likewise hoping, would really steer the national government into this direction.

Why 300 billion? Because it not only addresses the pollution that is damaging Laguna de Bay but also the flooding problem as well as attractive infrastructure projects for investments.

For the flood problem, the solution is painful but relocation of families living near the shore is necessary. This relocation of thousands of families will cost money. Paete has a share in this problem because it likewise has informal dwellers inside the danger zone of Laguna de Bay and I believe the municipal government with the help of the office of the vice president is finding a way to solve this problem.

The dredging, which is currently in international court (there are still high level talks going on between Belgium and the Philippines), is required to bring Laguna de Bay into a depth required by transportation. The problem here is the cost and of course, the place where the dredged material will be thrown. This is highly toxic.

Two major landfills (Paete is doing its part by constructing its own landfill), I believe, are part of this master plan, that will serve all the towns surrounding Laguna de Bay.

The infrastructures as you would see in the slides of the master plan even includes an art center perhaps in Paete.

The 300 billion plan is indeed a dream and I doubt if the Philippine government would be able to pull this off. I am hoping that the national government does prioritize and that the waste management and wastewater treatment needs are met first before any of these ambitious commercial infrastructre projects. That is why I think Paete pushing the two subprojects with help from the World Bank is a very good example.

The flooding problem needs to be addressed, first, I believe, for the people living along the shore. The relocation, unfortunately, is necessary, to remove these people from harm's way. This will require money and resources. At the same time, the Sierra Madre needs to be reforested so that sedimentation of Laguna de Bay is prevented. Dredging will be an exercise in futility if the mountains remain denuded and erosion remains a serious problem.

The flooding of Metro Manila is a bigger problem. I think people still have not realized (although it is in one of the slides) that one of the biggest problems Metro Manila is facing is land subsidence.
Land subsidence occurs when large amounts of ground water have been excessively withdrawn from the ground. Over time, as more water is removed from the area, the ground drops and creates a cone. Once the water has been removed from the sediment, it cannot be replaced. The overpopulation of Manila and its sewage design have drawn a lot of water from the ground and this water had found its way to Manila Bay, Metro Manila is sinking and it will only be a matter of time before Manila faces the same situation as New Orleans - it will become below sea level and would require levees to prevent flooding just from high tide. When I was there, more than 25 years ago, Malabon and Navotas were already facing this problem. I honestly think that 300 billion pesos will not solve this problem. Metro Manila simply has to shrink its population and water demand.

As you could see, these problems are really gigantic. But what Paete would be doing is something that is within reach. Yes, one might say that Paete is only one of the many towns surrounding and polluting Laguna de Bay. But one has to keep in mind that the eastern part of Laguna de Bay is far from the western part. It takes a lot of time for the water in the lake to stir and mix. Polluted waters coming from Paete will spend most of its time near Paete. Thus, if Paete cleans its wastewater, it is cleaning essentially that part of the lake that is near Paete and therefore Paete is a direct beneficiary. One could see this easily in the water monitoring studies regularly made by the LLDA. Parts of the lake that are near rivers are the ones high in coliform but if one goes farther from shore, the coliform numbers rapidly decrease.

-Angel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ming B
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 6:28 am    Post subject: Salamat Angel Reply with quote

Nakakalula nga pala ang laki ng proyektong ito lalo na at kasama ang Metro Manila. Salamat sa "patience" mo sa paglalahad ng kabuuan.

Ang mga pinuno ng pamahalaang nasyonal at panlalawigan ay dapat maging matatag at huwag bibitaw (o bibitiw) sa proyektong ito sa pagdaan ng mga taon. Kung minsan dahil nga sa ikli ng panunungkulan ay hindi natatakpusan ang mga sinimulan at ang mga bagong halal lalo't kalaban sa pulitika ay ayaw ipagpatuloy ang naiwan ng sinundang nanungkulan.

Kung minsan naman ay ginagamit ang magagandang ideya at proyekto upang umani ng suporta at mahalal pero pag naluklok na ay lumalamig na ang pagsusulong ng kanyang sinimulan at ipinapasa na lamang sa susunod sa kanya. Bakit? Dahil ang puntirya ay ang mas mataas na tungkulin sa pamahalaang nasyonal.

Nabanggit mo nga pala ang pagdami ng mga bahay sa mapanganib na lugar sa lawa na siyang mga pinaglalaanan ng relokasyon. Wala bang ordinansa na nagbabawal sa pagtatayo ng ganitong mga tirahan? Para bang yung "zoning" na nagtatakda ng klase ng bahay o gusali na maaring itayo o hindi dapat itayo sa isang lugar ng pamayanan. Kung mangyayari ito
ay hindi na madaragdagan pa ang nakatayo na ngayon at malapit nang ilipat. Isang sensus o bilang ng mga bahay na ito ang dapat gawin upang ma-kontrol ang pagdami at makilala ang magtatayo pa. At dahil ordinansa, may pataw na kaukulang parusa o multa sa mga hindi susunod.

Salamat muli Angel.

Ming
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The problem concerns informal settlers (or squatters). The number of households is about 80000, most (about half) are in Lupang Arenda, San Juan, Taytay, Rizal. The lots in Lupang Arenda comprise 270 hectares of lake shore land. Syndicates have sold titles to these lands to homeless families sometime in 2001.

I think Paete has about 200-400 households. These are also squatters.

There are laws already prohibiting the use of lake shore land for residential purposes. But there is lack of political will especially when the informal settlers count very much in local elections. There are more than 100000 informal settlers in Taytay, counting those that are not included in the danger zone. These translate to a lot of votes for the mayor of Taytay.

Typhoon Ondoy, of course, was much stricter than any ordinance that could be passed in showing which lots should not be inhabited. Unfortunately, when nature makes the move, there is sometimes no mercy.

Here is a map showing the flooded regions around Laguna de Bay. Most of Paete was flooded but only a few areas remained flooded two months after (blue, November 2009).
http://reliefweb.int/sites/rel.....7A-map.pdf

The master plan is huge and I think that is one of its major problems. There is no prioritization yet. Some of its components are not attractive especially to the poor and marginalized sectors of the Laguna de Bay lakeshore community. I think the privatization and the commercial aspects of the master plan are quite offensive to these sectors and for this reason, there will be a strong opposition from these groups. Laguna de Bay is indeed a very important resource but I think the national government should focus first on its rehabilitation and the safety and well-being of the people that live near Laguna de Bay. I think with this focus, the projects reduce to about 20-30 billion pesos.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
whernas2001



Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 858
Location: beijing, china

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 5:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Magandang umaga po,

Reagarding din po sa Laguna De Bay from youtube

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?.....8LxOUoQmuA

Salamat po

Winston
_________________
what is life without something
whernas2001@yahoo.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
whernas2001



Joined: 08 Sep 2007
Posts: 858
Location: beijing, china

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 10:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yahoo Search...

Let's help our Governor save our lake.
GOVERNOR ER EJERCITO CALLS
FOR SUPPORT TO SAVE LAGUNA LAKE

ASIA’S largest freshwater lake has become a giant “septic tank” and unless the government acts quickly Laguna de Bay will die.

This was the grim picture painted by Laguna Governor Jeorge “E.R.”Ejercito as he sought President Aquino’s support for a collective effort to save and revive the bounty and grandeur of the lake.

In an open letter signed with 30 mayors of Laguna, Ejercito noted the deterioration of the 382,000 hectares lake which used to be a great source of exotic freshwater fish like kanduli, hito, dalag,tinikan, ayungin and biya. Most of these favorite fish have gone and were replaced with the carnivorous specie known as non-edible janitor fish that thrives mostly on dirty water.

Ejercito and the 30 Laguna mayors said because of pollution and dumping of waste materials, fish kills are now a regular occurrence in the lake to the detriment of the consuming public and the hundreds of thousands relying on the lake for their livelihood.

“The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005 and a study from the University of the Philippines in Los Banos found the water quality of the lake has worsen...and some parts of the lake containing toxic metals such as lead, zinc, copper and chromium,” the provincial executives noted.

They said that the continuing deforestation and the unabated abuse of land uses surrounding the lake would hasten the death of Laguna de Bay, a vital source of livelihood for some of the 13 million Laguaneses.

The Laguna provincial officials proposed the holding of a summit meeting among local government officials within the Laguna lake to discuss various solution and rehabilitation programs that include the following:

Building environmental-friendly and multi-purpose embankments to prevent siltation and inflow of floodwaters.

An alternate lakeshore highway that connects SLEX to the town of Bay to pave the way for the development of untapped resources in the fourth district of the province.

Dredging of major rivers.

Development of tourist-oriented ferry and boat system to attract local and foreign visitors.

Building water impounding structure to harness run-off water for water supply and flood control

Deliberate and sustainable watershed management to stop siltation and ensure the abundance of water supply.

Aligning the cultivation of fish.

Development of resettlement area for informal settlers.

Constructing common waste treatment.

Expressing fears that the condition of the lake will worsen unless positive program is done to mitigate its rapid destruction, Ejercito and the Laguna mayors called for “a collective effort – we all need your support and understanding Mr. President to lead all efforts in saving Laguna de Bay.”
_________________
what is life without something
whernas2001@yahoo.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Sat Sep 10, 2011 4:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I did not elaborate enough how the two subprojects fit in the
larger picture. I figured that the subprojects benefit Paete directly
and this is enough for justification.

The current Master Plan for Laguna de Bay is not simply a
rehabilitation of the lake but a conversion into a lakeshore
enterprise. The Master Plan aims to attract private investments
into commercial projects that will be based on the lake. This,
unfortunately, may not be directly aiding the marginalized
sectors of the communities living along the shores of Laguna
de Bay. The proposed infrastructure clearly promotes a
role of the lake different from what it has now, a source of
livelihood for so many, but in a much more traditional manner.

In this regard, the proposed wastewater treatment facility in
Paete aims to steer the national planning for the lake into
focusing more on rehabilitation. The master plan must focus
and begin with addressing the household pollution into the
lake. This must be done first even before the proposed dredging.
The lake has become shallow and this has been one of the
features that may be saving the lake. With greater depth,
there is a greater chance of oxygen depletion and massive fish
kills. Because the waters are shallow, it remains rich in oxygen
even if the biological oxygen demand is quite high. Reforestation
of the mountains surrounding the lake is a must. Otherwise,
dredging would just be an exercise in futility.

The rehabilitation must be done first before any of the commercial
projects. And constructed wetlands, restoring what the lake had
before, provide the best option for treating all the wastewater
that come from the municipalities within the watershed and basins
of Laguna de Bay. Although others have began similar projects
only Paete, to my knowledge, is working with the support of
both LLDA and the World Bank. The sanitation engineers and
environmental scientists need a voice of support from the public
so that these people remain strong, competent and committed.
Otherwise, the Master Plan will be driven primarily by politics
and entrepreneurship. The Master Plan requires a strong
commitment to ecology and the environment.

At the moment, the bulk of the 300 billion pesos will go to a
conversion of the lake rather than its rehabilitation. I understand
that this makes the project attractive to private investors but
I am not sure if these will indeed benefit the poor.

The constructed wetlands for the entire lakeshore communites
will cost around 2 billion pesos. The country has this capability
and the benefit is enormous - it will convert Laguna de Bay into
possible source of drinking water. The subproject in Paete aims
to steer the national government into this direction.

The Master Plan is also suggesting to build a mega-
landfill that will serve Laguna, Rizal and Metro Manila.
And the governor of Laguna has been hinting that
one of these mega-landfills might be constructed in
Paete.

http://www.laguna.com.ph/?q=co.....nt-program

I quote the last paragraph from the above:

The preparation of the Solid Waste Management Program and
Closure and Rehabilitation Plan was also intensely communicated
to 19 municipalities. In their evaluation, PENRO identified the town
of Pakil as the recommended site for material recovery facility.
They also considered the town of Paete for a new location for a
sanitary landfill.


Not having its own means of solid waste management, Paete
would not be in a good position to oppose a plan like this
especially when the other towns are strongly in favor.

Having its own materials recovery facility and sanitary landfill
places Paete in a much stronger position to oppose a provincial
landfill inside its boundaries. Paete having its own landfill
demonstrates the example that each town must be responsible
for its solid waste. And Paete at this point is now standing on
high moral ground.

The provincial government like the national government does
not consider only the interests of Paete. These larger governments
have other citizens and interests to worry about. That is why
it is important that Paete takes initiative.

The two subprojects provide Paete a good standing so that it
could protect its own interests. It is true that the Master Plan
is still a far away dream but it is important that Paete maintains
a voice and stands on firm ground.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mario Ramos
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prof de Dios,
This Lake Enterprise you are saying, is there a chance someday, a new circumferential route or hiway could be built around it to hasten trade , commerce, recreational facilities and transport? Is this a possibility in the future? It was proposed in the past.
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 12:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

These are included in the current Laguna de Bay Master Plan:

(1) 28 billion PHP for a dike road, serving also as flood
control and additional water treatment.
(2) 30 billion PHP for a circumferential road
(3) 250 million PHP for a ferry system
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mario Ramos
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 11, 2011 1:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

So, if a circumferential hiway is feasible, the more control of garbage could be done since bridges and other infrastructures once built will need flood controls, screening facilities and would help clean the lake.
Back to top
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Mon Sep 12, 2011 1:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of the challenges of these projects are the informal settlers and the titling of shore areas in favor of the LLDA.

So additionally, assuming that the informal settlers will agree to be relocated, the following are estimated costs:

6.5 billion PHP to relocate about 85000 families.
16.5 billion PHP for socialized housing


The total estimated cost for the dike, road, ferry, relocation, etc
is 130 billion PHP.

Whether this would help clean the lake is unclear since the road dike will simply act as barrier. The waste may simply build up on the outer side of the dike.

I add the following article written by Ado Paglinawan:


Part Six of a Series, A People Caught in Its Own Dung

By Ado Paglinawan
Former Press Officer, Washington DC, Embassy of the Philippines

Columnist Antonio C. Abaya wrote that “the deluge from tropical
storm Ondoy that sank a reported 80 percent of Metro Manila and
continues to keep underwater most of the lakeshore towns
around Laguna de Bay has spurred a search for a solution to what
promises to become a yearly urban nightmare.”

The columnist of the Philippine Standard, however, added
that “some of the solutions proffered on the ridiculous” starting
with the alternative created by the Aquino administration
replacing the Parañaque Spillway – “a concrete wall around the
entire lake, which will serve as both an anti-flooding dike and a
perimeter highway, and a tourist attraction.”

He said the lake would then be drained of its water, its bottom
scraped and cleaned – “like a giant wok?” – and the aquifer
beneath tapped to gush forth fresh water.

“Such a monstrosity would take at least five years to build. The
proponent did not say how the lake’s thousands of fishermen
would be able to access the lake for their livelihood after that
Berlin Wall is built. If there will be gaps for the passage of
fishermen, then the seasonal rains would rush down through
these gaps in search of the lowest point, the lake, and would
likely demolish major segments of the Wall.

“The lake would never be drained of its dirty water and the
proponent would be spending billions of pesos in taxpayers’
money patching up the demolished segments of the Wall, like a
modern Sisyphus pushing up a mountain a huge boulder that
keeps rolling down.

“The proponent also does not tell us where the waters from the
Marikina, San Mateo Umiray and other rivers are supposed to flow,
or what 15-million residents of Metro Manila and lakeshore towns
will use for drinking water, while Sisyphus is trying to drain the
lake.

“Laguna de Bay could end up an immense ecological disaster, like
the Aral Sea in Central Asia after the Soviets diverted the rivers
flowing into it to irrigate the cotton fields of Uzbekistan (or was it
Kazakhstan?) in the 1980s.”

Non-government organizations and stakeholders
have also opposed the ring road dike as early as its conceptual
stage.. Yet finally in 2001 the government under Gloria
Macapagal Arroyo decided to go ahead started its
construction without consultations and a clear survey of the
affected people, and in the process, destroyed massive
hectares of farmlands.

In June of that same year, an NGO calling themselves
“Tricorps Group” composed of COPE Foundation, COMultiversity
and Urban Poor Associates, sent an investigate
team to start the social investigation in the affected areas.
Two major areas were identified as the most affected, the
Lupang Arienda in Taytay, and the coastal baranggays in
Taguig.

As two other groups, the Taytay Laban sa Lakeshore
Dike (TLLD) and the Pasig Laban sa Lakeshore Dike
(PLLD) were already operating in the Lupang Arienda. So
Tricorps focused in Taguig and assisted the organizations
there to form the Taguig Coalition Against Dike (TACAD).
A tactical alliance was forged among TLLD, PLLD
and TACAD. The major issues raised were the massive
dislocation of houses, the livelihood of the fishermen and
farmers, the ecological damage to the Lake, the defective
design, and to begin with serious doubts the dike as the real
solution to the floods.

On November 7, 2001 a big mobilization of affected
communities to the local office of the Department of Public
Works and Highways stopped the construction of the project
and ordered a new environmental study. But four months
after, in February 2002, the government's Office of
Development Assistance office disregarded its own
recommendation for additional studies and cleared the
resumption of the construction of the road dike.
But in April 2002, a Lake wide convention attended
by hundreds of representatives of people's organizations
took place. This was followed by a massive vigil rally in front
of the Japanese embassy.

The problem metastasized to Tokyo. Japanese NGOs
lobbied with the Japan Bank for International Cooperation
in Japan and the bank declared it was amenable to having a
new environmental study and a moratorium to the construction
of the project.

The problem metastasized further to Seoul. In the same
month Korean NGO's conducted their own fact finding
mission on the project with the help of the Leaders and
Organizers of Community Organization in Asia (LOCOA).
Its report also called on the government and project donors
to conduct a new EIA and to hold the project in abeyance
until the final results come out.

So much for Cory Aquino’s model. Frankly I do not need
any more intellectual study and fact-finding brouhaha to
make me conclude that the ring-road dike is a dangerous air
castle. If a road is to be made, then an elevated causeway will
be a better solution, but to use it for flood control is too
adventurous an idea.

The hundreds who died as an aftermath of Typhoon
Ondoy can no longer tell their tales but hundreds of thousands
of families who survived but lost relatives in the flood and
who incurred tens of billions of pesos in property damage
now know that a ring road dike around Laguna Lake will not
work when the flood tops even the regulation 14 foot
embankment if completed.

Why? Paraphrasing Abaya’s observation, the simple
question is where will the water exhaust to after you gather
it in Laguna Lake? So everything goes back to the urgency
of the idea of a spillway.

The floodline in Marikina and Cainta is 17 feet. If there is
no spillway or exhaust system, under the principle that water
seeks it own level, the flood will just find a way to seep back
to Marikina and Cainta, without a ring dike as what Typhoon
Ondoy illustrated, or with the ring dike as the Cory Aquyino’s
Department of Public Works and Highway has proposed.
There is another alternative. Daniel Bautista, the proponet
is the operations chief of a company called Northbay
Constructions Services Inc. His project was first presented
in the mid-1980s when his father was consultant to the
DPWH under then Secretary Jesus Hipolito. He calls the
project Storm Management and Road Tunnel, or SMART.
But Abaya would not call it “smart” giving his reasons:
“The project aims to build its tunnel under Sucat Road which
will presumably start near the Meralco Sucat Plant and
presumably connect with the Parañaque River near the
Parañaque church in Barrio La Huerta, the diverted flood
waters emptying near the Chinese temple on the Coastal
Road .

It is a two-level tunnel that will drain off excess water from
Laguna de Bay to Manila Bay, preventing the flooding of
lakeshore towns, with a six lane highway on top of the tunnel
for motor vehicles, three lanes going westward towards
Manila Bay, three lanes for vehicles going eastward towards
Laguna de Bay.

Abaya said this tunnel is huge as in the magnitude of the
Cross Harbor Tunnel in Hong Kong or the Channel Tunnel
between France and England but it does not make any sense.
He is familiar with the starting point of this tunnel Barrio Buli
near the Meralco Sucat power plant where in the 1980s he
operated a 20-hectare fish pen almost directly in front of the
plant.

He said that building a tunnel 50 meters below the surface
of Sucat Road is not feasible as digging a trench or gorge this
deep in such a heavily built-up and heavily populated area
would cause disruption to traffic flow and commerce that
would be catastrophic.

Abaya argued that “Bautista would have to use a tunnel
boring machine to dig a horizontal hole into which to insert his
concrete-or steel-skinned tunnel tube. The residents of
nearby Posadas Village would certainly object to a tunnel
being bored underneath their subdivision. So would business
and building owners along the length of Sucat Road . They
would certainly question the wisdom of building a tunnel that
could conceivably weaken the buildings’ foundations.”
Abaya recalled the widom of a Parañaque Spillway but
presented a curious alternative. Instead of flowing the
floodwaters westward to the Manila Bay through Paranaque,
he suggests going eastward to the Pacific Ocean.
In reply to a request from Rey Santaromana, an urban
planning graduate student at UP Diliman, who asked him to
critique his proposal for solving the flooding of Laguna de
Bay, he wrote back saying that the best place to locate the
desired spillway would be at the eastern end of the lake, near
Famy or Siniloan, in Laguna.

He said the area around Famy and Siniloan is largely
forested and agricultural and that any need to expropriate
land or tunnel under built-up areas would be much cheaper
than doing the same in Parañaque.

His article continued on - “And although the strip of land
between the lake and the Pacific Ocean is longer than the
strip of land between the lake and Manila Bay which is
approximately eight kilometers, he elaborated that a spillway
around Famy or Siniloan does not have to extend all the way
to the ocean. It can end on the eastern slope of the Sierra
Madre, as long as it is several meters lower than at the entry
point. The discharged water can then meander its way to the
ocean, or a channel can be blasted for it through the foothills.
“The discharged water can be tapped to turn the turbines
of two or three mini-hydros on the way down, thus generating
some 6 to 12 mw of electricity for local communities. And the
discharged water does not have to flow uselessly into the
ocean. It can be caught in a catchment basin that can be
developed for fisheries, tourism and human habitation.”
I agree with Abaya that a spillway in Famy or Siniloan
going eastward can be as he thinks “the catalyst for the
development of the eastern seaboard of Luzon, from Mauban
to Baler to Casiguran, and all its potentials for forestry,
fisheries, mining, upland agriculture, tourism and even a
major port on the Pacific Ocean , which will decongest the
overcrowded National Capital Region and the equally
overcrowded Lingayen-Lucena Corridor.”

I also agree to his concluding statements that “No
government of these islands, from the time of the Aetas, has
ever seen fit to make changes like this and develop this
neglected side of Luzon.”

I also agree with him that “it is time to think outside the box,
with a spillway at Famy or Siniloan, and an over-all plan by
who else (but) Jun Palafox.”
Anything in engineering can be made possible. What
challenges my non-technical mind, however, is whether the
typography of the affected areas will be facile to and allow
such bold measure.

A great factor that works in favor of the Paranaque
Spillway is the idea is to merely gravitate the waters from the
higher Laguna Lake to the lower Manila Bay.
The Paranaque Spillway is also a lot shorter. Almost a
straight line, it is even less than the distance of ten kilometers
from the crossing of Cubao or Shaw crossing with Epifanio
de Los Santos Avenue to kilometer zero at the Rizal
Monument at Roxas Boulevard, a few hundred meters from
the Manila Bay.

However, I am excited with the idea of an eastward
spillway going but with a sooner prototype going westward.
The Paranaque Spillway and Abaya’s options are not
mutually exclusive.

They can go together, both serving the common good.
Now let us leave the architects and urban planners,
engineers and public works experts, and the environmental
gurus to do their better part.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
adedios
SuperPoster


Joined: 06 Jul 2005
Posts: 5060
Location: Angel C. de Dios

PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

P18B lake rehab deal junked
But Aquino’s open to improved scope
BY JOCELYN MONTEMAYOR
13 September 2011

BUDGET Secretary Florencio Abad yesterday said government would discontinue the Laguna Lake Rehabilitation Project and come up with a more comprehensive clean-up and development project.

But he also said government is open to a possible renegotiation of the P18.7-billion loan acquired from Belgium to finance the rehabilitation project.

"The President is not averse if the Belgian government wants to extend that loan for a project that is truly going to be beneficial for the Laguna de Bay area," he said.

The project undertaken by Belgian contractor Baggerwerken Decloedt en Zoon (BDC) was under a deal signed in April last year between Belgium and the Arroyo government. Last December, the Aquino government put the project on hold for alleged irregularities.

Abad said the project "is not acceptable." He said while it involves de-silting the lake, it does not have a program for reforestation resettlement. He said the silt and waste that clogs the lake usually comes from the mountains and informal settlers.

"A project to de-silt and develop Laguna Lake for tourism, aquaculture and fisheries livelihood, source of potable water and ecological haven requires reforestation, infra, resettlement and ecological rehab. So there is a need to re-work the project. Renegotiation of loan along this is an option but no decision yet on this," Abad said.

He also said Nereus Acosta, presidential adviser on environmental protection, is reviewing the project again to determine what is really needed to rehabilitate and develop Laguna Lake.

He said rehabilitation has many aspects – "water supply, infrastructure, settlements, reforestation, livelihood, things like that."

"It’s a good project kung matino ang project," he added.

Abad said apart from the LLRP, the government is also reviewing the 72 roll on-roll off (ro-ro) projects with French consortium Eiffel Matierre. He said government discovered that at least 32 of the project sites are located in the eastern seaboard "where the Pacific Oceans’ fury and might can easily destroy whatever modular ro-ro port project that you can set up there."

"He (President) says it’s useless because these are not designed for the area. In fact, the area has to accommodate the design so it’s not a good project. So we are reviewing the balance of the ports to see whether in fact they will be useful. If they will be useful, maybe, but then we have to go to cost because the cost is more expensive by two-thirds," he added.

Aquino earlier said of the 72 ro-ro projects, 66 might be cancelled and this could lead to savings of some P218 million for each of ro-ro port.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
guestrider/rey bagalso
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 7:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

LLDA/LLRP are they the same management?. If so, does it mean that our approved projects are dead too.? I tend to believe that the current president is right to cancel it, it has too many loopholes that too many hands in the cookie jar is involved. In 5 yrs. Aquino will be gone too.Hopefully, his administration will act faster to get the clean-up program rolling, otherwise will never get to see it happen. Laguna lake is in deep trouble..
Back to top
Guest
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Sep 13, 2011 9:58 pm    Post subject: Thank you! Reply with quote

I thought we should thank those who had the foresight & tenacity,
including those who supported to get these subprojects going.
With the ro-co (roller coaster) projects mentioned above,
who knows when any of those will materialize.

The subprojects provide more immediate benefits to the Paetenians. Just the
thought that these are going to happen makes me feel proud that Paete has
chosen to move forward. So as Mr. Ming Baldemor has expressed, sana po
our future municipal leaders (not only the provincial & national leaders) ay
huwag bibitaw (o bibitiw) sa proyektong ito sa pagdaan ng mga taon.
Kung minsan dahil nga sa ikli ng panunungkulan ay hindi natatakpusan
ang mga sinimulan at ang mga bagong halal lalo't kalaban sa pulitika ay
ayaw ipagpatuloy ang naiwan ng sinundang nanungkulan
.

The commercialization of Laguna de Bay gives me the butterflies. True, there
will be more jobs, but there will also be a lot of competition from non-locals
who would be coming to dig gold where gold may be found. Fine if we could
accommodate the influx of tourists and new settlers alike. We'd need more
housing, better infrastructures & adequate utilities. Such a dramatic change
might sprint progress ahead of the community which could spell disaster. Even
a leader nation like America suffers the consequences of going too fast too soon.

And the the chunk of gain goes back to the investors. Ouch!

Back to now. Thank you, Paete for this good act for your people!
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    USAP PAETE Forum Index -> Usap Paete All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 6 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group