WHO SHOULD OWN BURIED TREASURES FOUND?

 WHO SHOULD OWN BURIED TREASURES FOUND?

Well, it really depends on where it is found, and what exactly is found. That’s the simple answer. But as with all matters involving money, history, and the law, nothing is ever that simple.

For sure, anything with cultural, historical, archaeological, or anthropological value should belong to the national government. These are not ordinary objects—they are fragments of our collective identity. They are our national memory buried under soil, sand, and time. No private owner should have absolute claim over something that belongs to the Filipino story.

Everything else—ordinary gold bars, coins, jewelry—can be shared between the finder and the State, perhaps 50/50. But let’s be honest: if the government doesn’t know about the discovery, how can it even claim its share? This is where transparency and incentives matter.

But to me, what matters most are the finds that tell us who we are. These are far more precious than gold. And ironically, they’re also far more expensive to “buy back” once they end up in private hands. That’s why the better solution is for the government, particularly the National Museum of the Philippines (NMP), to be more directly involved—funding digs, monitoring sites, and responding quickly to discoveries.

Unfortunately, I also know how hard it is to squeeze budget allocations from Congress. Agriculture, infrastructure, healthcare, education, defense—these always come first. But what about national pride? What about identity? These are part of our social capital. You cannot assign a monetary value to them, but without them, a nation loses its soul.

And speaking of national pride, let’s compare ourselves with other countries.

Recently in France, a man found gold bars worth £616,000 in his garden. He did the right thing—he reported it. His reward? Most likely nothing. French law gives priority to the original owner or their heirs. And if there are no heirs, the treasure goes to the State. Imagine finding a fortune and walking away empty-handed just because you were honest.

In contrast, another couple in the U.K. found 70 Tudor-era gold coins while gardening. Those coins were sold for £467,000, and the finders received compensation under the U.K.’s Treasure Act. Their honesty was rewarded, not punished.

So where does the Philippines fall?

Our Civil Code (Articles 438–439) says hidden treasure belongs to the landowner—but if someone else finds it by chance, the split is 50/50. Simple enough.

But things change the moment the find has cultural or scientific value. Under the National Cultural Heritage Act (RA 10066), the State can claim such objects, with “just compensation.” The government may step in to preserve the site, the artifacts, and even the surrounding environment. And rightly so.

Should we tighten these laws further? Should LGUs craft their own reporting protocols? Should barangays participate in heritage conservation? Should the NMP finally get the budget it deserves?

To move forward as a nation, we must first understand our past. Somewhere beneath our fields, rivers, mountains—even backyards—are stories waiting to be discovered. But unless we protect them, someone else will own our history.

And what good is a nation that cannot even keep its own treasures?

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/07-15-2026

COULD SEAWEEDS BE THE FUTURE OF PLASTIC?

 COULD SEAWEEDS BE THE FUTURE OF PLASTIC?

I am very fascinated by that question, for two very important reasons. First, what could this mean for the thousands of Filipino seaweed farmers who depend on this commodity for their livelihood? And second, what could this mean for our environment—now drowning in millions of pieces of plastic that pollute our lands, seas, and oceans every single day? Add to that the alarming truth that microplastics are already entering our bodies through the food chain. If there was ever a moment to rethink plastic, it’s now.

God has blessed our country with long coastlines and wide open seas. We are, in fact, one of the world’s top producers of seaweeds. So imagine for a moment if seaweeds could replace plastic. Imagine if something that has become a global burden—plastic—could be replaced by something that grows naturally, renewably, and abundantly right here in our coastal waters.

What has caused us problems all these decades could suddenly present us with an opportunity.

So what should we do next? Clearly, this is something that belongs in the portfolio of the Department of Science and Technology (DOST). But other agencies must also jump in. The DFA, if we need access to patents or licensing arrangements. The DTI, if we want investors or partnerships with companies already leading the technology. And how about the plastics industry—can they transition quickly into seaweed-based materials? And if the technology requires new skillsets, do we need to start producing new types of engineers?

At the production level, BFAR should help identify which species of seaweeds grow best for this purpose. Should we focus on kelp? Eucheuma? Gracilaria? Science must guide farming.

But the potential is certainly exciting.

Why Seaweed Could Be the Future of Plastic

Seaweed-based bioplastics are biodegradable, compostable, and non-toxic. They can break down naturally in soil or water, unlike petroleum-based plastics that persist for centuries. Seaweed grows extremely fast—some species up to one meter per day—and requires no fertilizers, no freshwater, and no land. It even absorbs carbon dioxide as it grows, giving it climate benefits on top of everything else.

Best of all, some seaweed bioplastics are edible. Imagine buying a drink in a sachet you can swallow. This is not science fiction—companies like Notpla and Sway are already doing it. There are seaweed-based films for food packaging, coatings for fast-food wrappers, molded containers, and even textile fibers under development.

Universities and innovation labs, such as Flinders University working with the biotech firm one • five, have developed sodium alginate coatings that can replace polyethylene in common wrappers. Beyond packaging, seaweed is also being explored for biofuels and sustainable fabrics.

But there are challenges. Right now, seaweed bioplastics remain more expensive than petroleum-based plastics. Scaling up farming must be done without harming marine ecosystems. And some products may lack the long-term durability needed for certain industrial uses.

Still, the opportunity is enormous.

For coastal countries like ours, seaweed represents a systems-level solution—a chance to strengthen livelihoods, reduce plastic pollution, and create a circular economy all at once. Imagine barangay-level seaweed farming cooperatives producing biodegradable packaging for local businesses. Imagine LGUs shifting their procurement to seaweed-based materials. Imagine our coastal communities becoming hubs of green manufacturing.

Could seaweeds be the future of plastic?
If we make the right decisions today, the answer could very well be yes.

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/ 07-14-2026

HOW ABOUT TURNING HUMAN WASTE INTO RENEWABLE ENERGY?

 HOW ABOUT TURNING HUMAN WASTE INTO RENEWABLE ENERGY?

It may not be an appetizing idea, but who cares if it saves money and makes money? Who cares if it will lower our energy costs and thus reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels? Who cares if it’s “dirty”—can black coal be any dirtier? The truth is, using human waste can generate clean energy — and that is what really matters.

Believe it or not, this isn’t a science-fiction fantasy. The technology is already working in many parts of the world. So why haven’t we embraced it here? More to the point: why don’t we do it as soon as possible?

---

Why It Makes Sense

The logic is simple: human waste is free, abundant, and renewable. Through processes like anaerobic digestion, microorganisms break down sewage sludge in the absence of oxygen, producing methane-rich biogas that can be used to generate electricity, heat, or even fuel. The leftover “digestate” can be used as fertilizer. 

There are other high-tech methods, too: hydrothermal carbonization can convert wet sewage into a coal-like “hydrochar,while promising lab-scale microbial fuel cells use bacteria to generate electricity directly from organic waste.

These waste-to-energy systems do more than just produce power. They also reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by capturing methane that would otherwise leak into the atmosphere. And for wastewater treatment plants, the energy recovered can offset a significant portion of their energy needs. One study estimates that anaerobic digestion could offset 50–60% of a plant’s electricity consumption. 

---

The Big Picture: It's Already Being Done

Globally, the potential is massive. If all sewage in the world were collected and treated through anaerobic digestion, we could generate 210–300 TWh of energy annually — enough to meet the electricity needs of tens of millions of people. The World Biogas Association estimates that by 2050, expanded sewage digestion could generate 385 TWh/year and reduce CO₂ emissions by 95 million tons. 

In Europe, it’s not just theory: Sweden and Poland have wastewater treatment plants that use biogas in real operations. In Barcelona, buses are already running on biomethane derived from human waste — the pilot project emits around 80% less CO₂ than natural gas. 

---

What About the Philippines?

Here at home, the picture is starting to take shape. The Department of Energy lists several biogas projects; for instance, FDR Integrated Resource Recovery in Naga City, Cebu, runs a 0.624 MW plant using municipal waste. A German company, Atmosfair, has also teamed up with Filipino firms to build biogas facilities that convert organic waste into energy. 

And while most of the local projects use animal or food waste, not human waste, the groundwork is promising. We already have sewage treatment infrastructure: take the Marikina North Sewage Treatment Plant in Metro Manila, which treats 100 million liters of used water daily. Why not tap that sludge for biogas?

---

But Why the Delay?

If this is such a “free” resource, why haven’t we done more? There are real challenges. Building and maintaining digesters or hydrothermal systems requires upfront investment. Even once made, you need steady waste input and skilled operators. 

Then there’s public perception. Many people recoil at the idea of “burning sewage,” even though coal plants are far dirtier. And from a policy standpoint, governments must create incentives, set safety standards, and ensure digestate is safe for reuse. The World Biogas Association highlights the need for clear regulations and quality benchmarks. 

---

So, What Should We Do?

1. Lead the Charge
   The DOE should take the lead — but they shouldn’t be alone. Bring in the DOST (Department of Science and Technology) for research, pilot funding, and technical validation.
   
   

2. Start Small but Smart
   Launch pilot biogas digesters at existing sewage treatment plants like Marikina, or new community systems in underserved areas. Prove the model, then scale up.
   
   

3. Engage Communities
   Educate the public about how “dirty” waste can become clean, renewable energy — and how it could lower electricity costs.
   
   

4. Integrate with Water Projects
   If biogas lowers power costs significantly, could this make desalination more affordable? Imagine turning saltwater to fresh water powered by waste-derived energy.
   
   

5. Set Clear Policy
   Create standards for digester safety, emissions, and the use of residuals. Provide subsidies or tax breaks for waste-to-energy projects to attract private investment.
   
   

---

Final Word: What’s Stopping Us?

Look, this isn’t a radical new concept — it's proven, scalable, and waiting for us to catch up. The question isn’t if we should do this. The only real question is: why aren’t we doing it yet — and why don’t we start now?

If we get serious about turning our own waste into power, we could not only save money and cut imports, but also make a real dent in our carbon footprint. And in the process, bring tangible benefits to ordinary people, especially those who most feel the pinch of high energy costs.

So, to the policymakers, the scientists, and the citizens: how about we stop wrinkling our noses — and start turning what we flush into fuel?

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/07-13-2026

LET’S BUILD MORE RETENTION PONDS

LET’S BUILD MORE RETENTION PONDS

One of the simplest, cheapest, and most practical solutions to flooding is something we often overlook: retention ponds. These man-made basins hold water permanently and manage stormwater before it wreaks havoc in our communities. And unlike mega-infrastructure projects that take years and billions of pesos, retention ponds are so easy to build that even our barangays can do them.

In other words: Why aren’t we building more of them?

A retention pond slows down stormwater, traps sediments, improves water quality, and prevents erosion downstream. It functions like a community-level buffer against the increasing intensity of rainfall we experience due to climate change. Unlike detention ponds—which dry out between storms—retention ponds always contain water. They look like real ponds, with vegetation around them, attracting fish, birds, and other wildlife.

But what makes retention ponds truly compelling is how multi-purpose they can be.

With proper filtration, they can become a source of potable water. Communities can raise milkfish or catfish, grow kangkong, lettuce, spinach, tomatoes, and even raise ducks. Schools can integrate retention ponds into their campus grounds to teach aquaponics, climate adaptation, and urban ecology. It’s flood control, food production, livelihood, and environmental protection—all in one facility.

If LGUs are looking for a low-cost climate resilience program, this is it.

To their credit, Quezon City has started building retention ponds. But the most aggressive LGU so far seems to be Cebu City, which has gone all in on this strategy.

Cebu City’s Water Catchment Ordinance (City Ordinance 2103) requires subdivisions to build retention ponds proportional to their land area. Inspectors have already checked the retention pond in Monterrazas de Cebu after severe flooding brought by Typhoon Tino. They also inspected the lagoon in Maria Luisa Subdivision, which turned out to be undersized. As a result, the city recommended the construction of two more retention ponds.

In Nasipit, Barangay Talamban, the LGU is building a retention pond to protect low-lying areas like Banilad from repeated flooding. This is what proactive governance looks like.

But the question is: If Cebu City can do it, why not everyone else?

We are an archipelago battered by typhoons year after year, yet our flood mitigation strategies remain heavily dependent on canals, dikes, and pumping stations. Retention ponds represent the kind of barangay-led, community-empowering approach we need to scale nationwide.

Shouldn’t the DILG take the lead in institutionalizing retention ponds across LGUs? And shouldn’t BFAR step in to help with aquaculture components, ensuring water quality and fish safety? With proper monitoring, retention ponds can support controlled aquaponics, provided pollutants are tested and managed.

Of course, not all ponds are safe for eating fish. Stormwater runoff may carry contaminants, so LGUs must test the water regularly. But even if the fish are not for consumption, they control mosquito larvae, support local biodiversity, and keep the ecosystem healthy. Meanwhile, vegetables grown via floating rafts or bog gardening can help absorb excess nutrients and reduce algae blooms.

So here’s a proposal:
Let’s adopt a modular retention pond framework for every LGU—micro-ponds in parks, barangay-scale ponds near schools, and large LGU ponds for inter-barangay flood buffering. It’s doable, it’s affordable, and it’s urgently needed.

Flooding has become our new normal. Retention ponds should become our new response.

Let’s build more retention ponds—before the next storm reminds us why we should have.

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/07-12-2026

CARBON CREDITS FOR PLASTIC WASTE RECYCLING

 CARBON CREDITS FOR PLASTIC WASTE RECYCLING

It’s an idea whose time has truly come: carbon credits for plastic waste recycling. At long last, we’re seeing formal mechanisms that reward recovery, not just emissions reductions. And for the Philippines — a major contributor to ocean plastics — this could be a game-changer.

---

What Are Plastic-Based Carbon Credits?

These “plastic credits” are units representing a specific amount of plastic that has been avoided, collected, or recycled. The new wrinkle: they’re now being tied directly to greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. By preventing plastic from leaking into the environment or being incinerated, these credits convert circular action into real climate value.

One of the leading models is from Plastiks, partnered with the carbon verification firm ECOTA and recovery organization Ocean Integrity. Together, they’ve committed to certify 100,000 metric tons of recovered plastic for carbon credit issuance by December 2025.
Their system is rigorous: every kilogram recovered is tracked via blockchain, timestamped, geolocated, and verified. This isn’t greenwashing — it’s traceable, auditable, real recovery.

Meanwhile, AIROI, another pioneer in this space, is turning plastic pollution into GHG offsets through its “Green Carbon Wallet.” Their blockchain-enabled platform lets companies, communities, even local governments monetize verified plastic collection and recycling. 

Then there's Verra, a heavyweight in the sustainability-certification arena. Through its Plastic Waste Reduction Program, Verra issues two types of plastic credits: Waste Collection Credits (WCCs) and Waste Recycling Credits (WRCs). These credits strictly quantify plastic collected or recycled above baseline rates, ensuring impact is genuine, additional, and independently verified. 

---

Why This Matters — Especially for Us

1. New Climate Finance for the Philippines
   Carbon credits tied to plastic recovery could channel real money to our country — not just for tree planting, but for cleaning up plastic pollution. This is climate finance with a circular economy twist.
   
   

2. Protecting Our Oceans and Wildlife
   More plastic collected means less microplastic leaking into seas. It’s a fight for marine life, for ecosystems, for every turtle and fish that mistake plastic for food.
   
   

3. Health & Pollution
   Reducing plastic waste also reduces methane and CO₂ emissions from decomposition or incineration. That’s a direct win for climate and public health.
   
   

4. Economic Opportunity
   Imagine local recycling cooperatives earning verified carbon credits for collecting and processing plastic. It’s a job-creation opportunity rooted in environmental stewardship.
   
   

---

But There’s Risk — We Must Be Careful

This market is still nascent, and skeptics are not wrong to raise concerns:

• There’s a danger of greenwashing, where companies simply buy credits instead of reducing plastic use.
  
  

• Not all plastic credit frameworks are created equal — methodology, verification, and transparency vary. 

• Without strong regulation, there’s a risk that plastic credit schemes become a way to “offset” rather than prevent pollution.
  
  

---

What the Philippine Government Should Do Now

1. Get in Early
   The rules for plastic-based carbon credits are formalizing fast. Our government should engage proactively with platforms like Plastiks–ECOTA, AIROI, and Verra to design pilot projects here.
   
   

2. Embed in National Waste Policy
   Include plastic credit mechanisms in our circular economy and ESG frameworks. Use them not just for finance, but for real, traceable environmental action.
   
   

3. Support Local Collectors
   Fund or support certified recovery organizations — especially community cooperatives that pick up plastic on the ground — so they can issue credits and earn more.
   
   

4. Use Blockchain and Verification
   Insist on transparency: blockchain tracking (like Plastiks) ensures the plastic you pay for is the plastic that was actually collected.
   
   

---

My Final Thought

For the Philippines, plastic-based carbon credits are more than just an income stream. They are a moral and ecological lifeline. We have a chance to benefit financially and rewrite our plastic legacy. But only if we act smart. Only if we insist on real, measured, verifiable recovery, not just hot air.

Let’s not just chase dollars — let’s protect our seas, our future, and our climate. Can we rise to that challenge?

RAMON IKE V. SENERES

www.facebook.com/ike.seneres iseneres@yahoo.com senseneres.blogspot.com 09088877282/07-11-2026