6 JANUARY 2009
SEE ALSO
RELEVANT DOCUMENTS
RELEVANT LINKS ALSO IN MINDING MINING
CROSSBORDER SPECIAL REPORT
PUBLIC EYE
PERSPECTIVE FIRST PERSON
2015 OR BUST?
HIMIG PINOY
MAD OVER MONEY
2007 FEATURES
PUBLIC EYE
CROSSBORDER 2006 FEATURES |
CLOSING DOWN a mine is not just a matter of giving employees their walking papers and putting a padlock on the door. Indeed, when a mine ceases operations, a full-blown cleanup (plus sometimes an orderly dismantling) follows. Or at least that is what should happen.
To date, though, only one abandoned mine is undergoing rehabilitation. And while Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB) officials say a few other idle mines have attracted lease applications (and presumably would be checked and fixed up at some point), there is no question that these and others like them pose health and environmental risks – and will continue to do so until their various problems are addressed.
In fact, a 2001 report by Tetra Tech EM Inc. on 20 abandoned mines across the country had observed that all pose risks at varying degrees. Noted the U.S.-based environmental consultancy firm: “Land and water media are impacted with chemical contaminants, which may harm human health and the aquatic, terrestrial and wild lives. Unless proper mitigation and corrective actions are undertaken, the surrounding population and receiving environment will be continuously exposed to both chemical and physical risks.”
MGB had tapped Tetra Tech to help it draw up a list of mines that needed the most attention. In its report, Tetra Tech said that most of the 20 mines it was asked to assess failed to meet the official criteria for total suspended solids (TSS), total dissolved solids (TDS), and the measure of acidity or alkalinity (pH). Most also failed to comply with the United States Environmental Protection Agency standard for freshwater sediments, indicating the accumulation of metal contaminants in the receiving bodies of water.
Previously, MGB had conducted a similar study, but that one assessed 44 abandoned mines.
MGB pinpointed six mines from the Tetra Tech report that it said would take priority in rehabilitation efforts. These had been run by the following companies: Philippine Pyrite Corp. in Bagacay, Western Samar; Palawan Quicksilver Mines in Puerto Princesa City; Basay Mining Corp. in Negros Oriental; Consolidated Mines Inc. in Marinduque; and Thanksgiving Mine/Benguet Exploration Inc. and Black Mountain Inc. in Benguet.
IT IS the Philippine Pyrite mine in Bagacay that is now undergoing rehabilitation. Yet while it says it will still use the Tetra Tech study as a reference point, the MGB has started re-evaluating and revising its priority list of abandoned mines for rehabilitation, based on an entirely new set of criteria and processes.
For sure, even Tetra Tech had confessed having difficulties over what constitutes an “abandoned mine.” Abandoned areas usually refer to areas with no claimant at all, but the firm noted that although many mines had ceased operations, several still have owners and even managers.
A case in point is the controversial Marcopper mine in Marinduque, which has not been in use since it had a monumental mine-tailings spill in 1996. The company that owns it still exists, and guards remain there to secure the premises. The MGB also says that it did not include it in any of its risk assessment studies primarily because of ongoing court proceedings.
At least there is an action plan for the Marcopper cleanup, although that has been on standby for the last three years. Besides that of Philippine Pyrite, the rest of the mines the MGB had on its old list have neither that nor the chance of being rehabilitated anytime soon — unless new owners step in and do the cleanup themselves. That means a wait that may not be welcome to the communities living within or near the six other former “priority” mines, since they will bear the brunt of any calamity coming from these sites. (see Table 1)
In truth, having families near the mine sites had been one of the key factors on which MGB based its selection of the seven mines for priority rehabilitation. Thus, even if Tetra Tech had ranked others higher in terms of risk, those mines were excluded from the MGB list because they were deemed far enough from any household for the dangers they posed to have immediate impact.
Email us your comments about this article, or post them in our blog. Copyright © 2009 All rights reserved. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||