Mining 52, Regulations and bureaucracies, the mining communities

Two news reports from the Manila Times last month about the ugly result of continuing business bureaucracies and heavy political intervention in the mining sector.
 

The news on Regulations further said,

With this, it said foreign investment in the mining sector in the Philippines will be limited due to policy discontinuity, severe government intervention and strict environmental laws…

“The Philippines scores 45.1 out of 100 in our Mining Risk/Reward Index, where the average for Asian countries is 55.6,” it added…

It said any tightening of environmental regulations in the Philippines will have limited effect on actual production from the country, despite acting as a deterrent to potential new investment. Nickel ore output growth seen averaging 2.4% in 2017-2021.

The second paragraph is an assurance that the existing local and foreign players are digging up and continue their business. It’s the potential players that are being discouraged.

The news on DMCI  further reported,

In a disclosure to the Philippine Stock Exchange (PSE), DMCI said 980 jobs were cut as of March 31, 2017, which translates to 240 left from the original count of 1,220 personnel. This does not include the thousands of subcontracted and seasonal workers hired during production ramp up.

CA-rejected Gina Lopez did not and does not care about these job losses in the sector. One clear problem when one-track-minded zealots and activists are irresponsibly given high government positions.

---------

I revisited these two reports from Manila Standard.

 

In the story hikes household incomes,

Chito Gozar, senior vice president for communications and external affairs, said more numbers can disprove the belief that mining causes poverty incidence. He said the contention of environmental groups is not true because precisely mining’s end is creation of wealth that would eliminate poverty…

The UPLB study pointed out that the major change in the economy of Didipio village was due to the presence of OceanaGold in the village. Peviously, Didipio is an agricultural settlement and that farming was the primary source of household income.

In the story propel GDP growth,

David is the DoST executive director of the Philippine Council for Industry, Energy and Emerging Technology Research and Development (DoST-PCIEERD), and concurrently, Stratbase ADR Institute (ADRi) trustee.

“Hence we see the urgent need to partner with the mining industry in a series of research projects to develop a long-term national road map that will integrate the development of mining, steel and other downstream industries,” he said. 

Nice two articles. Mining-rich areas tend to be marginal and inappropriate for high-value agriculture or forestry because of the poor soil quality. By harvesting the minerals and metal ores, greater value and income for workers and staff, directly or indirectly employed by a mining firm, can be enjoyed and optimized.

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

See also: 

Mining 49, Ma'am Monsod on poverty in mining areas, April 12, 2017 

Mining 50, Canada mining taxation, April 21, 2017 Mining 51, Gina Lopez, Roy Cimatu and rule of law, May 14, 2017

BWorld 129, Open pit mines and the DENR Secretary, May 12, 2017

Climate Tricks 22: Typhoon Haiyan due to Man-Made CC?

The strongest typhoon this year in the planet, storm "Haiyan" (renamed as "Yolanda" by PAGASA) has left the country after it rammed through central Philippines, affecting many provinces like Leyte, Samar, Cebu, Iloilo, Negros Occidental, Palawan. As of this morning, casualties have topped 100 dead people, mostly in Taclocan, Leyte.

Some groups naturally seize on this story to say that "man-made climate change" is to blame. When there are less rain and less storms, it's due to "man-made global warming" or "man-made CC". When there are lots of rains, more storms, it's also due to "man-made GW/CC". So the public must send more money to the UN -- IPCC, FCCC, UNEP, WMO, UNDP, etc. The public should also donate more money to Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and other big international environmentalist groups.

A friend posted today that "Dr. CP David (UP National Institute of Geological Sciences or NIGS) goes against Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scientists and remains a climate change skeptic on GMA News TV today."

I commented that he's a real David, son of my former boss, Prof. Randy David also of UP. CP has shown independence of mind and not swallowed by a corrupt UN, at least in climate and energy policies. 

CC is true, global warming was true. CC is purely cyclical and natural, warming-cooling-warming-cooling, with or without humans and their SUVs or bicycles. Nothing to be alarmed except alarmism itself. It is wrong to say that there is only global warming and there is no global cooling.

The head of UP Biology Department, Dr. Perry Ong, delivered a "centennial lecture" in UP in 2008, attacking AGW and "man-made GW/CC" by the UN IPCC. Another friend, Fidel Nemenzo of UP Math Department, once told me that there are many UP natural scientists who are laughing at the IPCC reports. Problem is that they don't get oodles of UN money, also WB, ADB, USAID, etc. money to "save the planet."

When people say Haiyan is the "strongest storm in RECORDED HISTORY", when did they start counting with such history? 20 yrs ago? 50? 100? 1,000, 1 million yrs ago? Chances are they don't know. Just a sound bite, to keep climate alarmism remain alarmist.

And UN IPCC is NOT a scientific body. It is a government and political body. That is why it is "Inter-governmental Panel on CC" and not "Inter-scientists Panel on CC".  The head of IPCC was never a scientist. Its head for many years now, Rajendra Pachauri, is a an Indian transport economist or engineer.  

The Sun-GCRs-climate link theory is a harder nut to crack, than CO2-climate hypothesis. Like Henryk Svensmark (Denmark) theory,
Svensmark’s Cosmic Jackpot: “Evidence of nearby supernovae affecting life on Earth", April 24, 2012.

A recent critique of IPCC 2013 report, 

Scientific Critique of IPCC’s 2013 ‘Summary for Policymakers’

by Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, S. Fred Singer, and Willie Soon*, October 19, 2013

Anthropogenic GW (AGW) is religion. In religion, people do not need hard graphs, charts, satellite photos. Ok, they need graphs too, but only those that cater to the belief. If certain scientfic graphs stare them in the face and these data say the allegation is wrong, well, people close their eyes to contrary data and keep believing. That is why it is religion and faith-based. 

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/06/still-epic-fail-73-climate-models-vs-measurements-running-5-year-means/

That's why Dr. CP David, Dr. Perry Ong, others from UP natural science community have more sence and independence of mind than the UN paid hacks, plus Greenpeace, WWF, other treehuggers. But another friend suggested that skepticism is "crackpotism". Hehehe, product of emotionalism and religionism courtesy of UN's decades-long deception.