Manila—The proposed Waste-to-Energy (WTE) incineration facility in Smokey Mountain faced a resounding and unified challenge from residents, environmental advocates, waste workers, health advocates, youth, legal advocates, and community organizations during the public hearing held by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources Environmental Management Bureau (DENR-EMB) last September 7, 2026, in Brgy 128, Tondo, Manila.
Past Public Participation Failures
One of the most striking revelations during the hearing was that around 70.84 percent of the estimated 67,000 residents from the seven affected barangays were reported unaware of the proposed WTE project based on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) submitted by Manila Integrated Environment Corporation (MIEC).
Residents also said they were not sufficiently informed beforehand about what was going to be constructed in their area. Anora Madrid of Samahang Magkakapitbahay sa Upper Smokey Mountain (SMUSM)-Kadamay asserted, “Lagpas 70% ang hindi nakakaalam ng proyekto. Ang pinapaalam, SM (mall) at eskwelahan ang itatayo dyan sa amin.” More than 70% of residents are not aware of the project. We were told that a mall and a school were going to be built here.
The EIS also said the facility will generate around 150 tonnes of fly ash and 260 tonnes of bottom ash daily. This results in a staggering 410 tonnes of combined ash per day (or 149,650 tonnes per year) that must be handled, transported, and stored to a dumpsite. During the public hearing, it was mentioned that the dumpsite will be in Calauan, Laguna. The company did not mention if a prior consultation was already conducted with the affected communities near this site in Laguna.
Creating More Pollution
Project proponents shared potential benefits that could be derived from the project, but these were swiftly countered by residents and organizations during the open forum.
Regarding the claim that WTE is the solution to the waste problem, Ochie Tolentino of EcoWaste Coalition stated that there is already a solution, it just needs better implementation and enforcement. “May batas po tayo RA 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act. Kung ito po ay naipatupad, hindi natin kailangan ng WTE.” We already have a law, RA 9003, Ecological Solid Waste Management Act. If this was implemented effectively, we wouldn’t need WTE.
During their presentation, MIEC stated that WTE is encouraged under the Renewable Energy Act, but the Manila Anti-Incinerator Alliance (MAIA) asserts that under the Renewable Energy Act only biodegradable waste and anaerobic digestion technology are allowed, not residual waste and stoker incineration. Proponents also stated that the facility will need 1,363 cubic meters of water per day with 871 cubic meters supplied by Maynilad and 492 coming from their Waste Water Treatment Plant. A resource-intensive project such as this cannot be considered clean and will only put further pressure on our water resources.
While the proponents assured they will implement emission monitoring and mitigation measures to ensure safe air quality, the figures presented are just estimates and predicted models for now. Studies showed that WTE incineration ash poses severe health risks to both plant workers and nearby residents by exposing them to concentrated heavy metals, dioxins, and PFAS through inhalation, skin contact, or environmental contamination.
As Elena Plaza of Nagkakaisa at Nagdadamayang Marala Organization (NANAMOR) puts it, “Ang pinag-uusapan natin dito ay ang kalusugan ng mamamayan. Gusto ko pong maunawaan ng mga tao dito na ‘yung epekto nito hindi natin makikita agad-agad, matagal po. Pero sino ba ang maapektuhan, hindi ba tayo?” What’s at stake here is the health of the people. I want everyone here to understand that the effects of this facility might not be felt immediately, it will take time. But who will be the ones affected? It’s us.
The project proponents also claim that the facility will generate jobs for the community, but their presentation showed they only need 260 workers during the construction phase and 100 workers for the operational phase. The disparity was pointed out by Rev. Ruel Distor of Partido Lakas ng Masa (PLM), “Isipin ninyo, 60,000 katao ang maapektuhan, ang kukunin nilang empleyado, wala pang isang libo.” Think about it, 60,000 individuals will be affected, but they will only hire less than 1,000 employees.
The proposed facility requires 3,000 tons per day of waste as feedstock to keep the plant operational. Once operational, it will be operating for around 28 years. MAIA asserts if the facility will implement legally mandated source segregation, reduction, reuse, recycling are under R.A. 9003 and DENR DAO 2019-21, the remaining legally available residual waste stream will be entirely insufficient to fuel a 3,000 TPD plant. The project creates a multi-decade contractual dependence on generating more mixed, unsegregated waste to avoid starving the plant of fuel, directly undermining national recycling and Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) mandates.
“Tondo is known for being the base of informal waste workers. In Tondo’s Barangays 124, 126 and 128, and adjoining communities in Navotas, waste workers operate within dense and interconnected informal economies built around the collection, sorting, recovery, reuse and sale of recyclable materials from municipal, commercial and coastal waste streams”, MAIA said.
NANOMOR and SMUSM mentioned that there are more losses than benefits. “How are we going to benefit from promised education and health services to the community if we are to be displaced in our community that we have already nurtured for 30 years to give way for this incineration plant?”
Angela Gando of BAYAN Manila also said that the project failed to account for the cumulative pressures of other major developments already transforming Tondo, Baseco, Parola and the North Harbor area. “These communities are already living with degraded environmental conditions, intense industrial and port activity, waste facilities, traffic, flooding and displacement pressures. Yet instead of assessing how another major pollution source will interact with these existing burdens and ongoing developments, the EIS fragments this project and ignores the environmental quality and ongoing development in Tondo.“
Deny the ECC
MAIA submitted a position paper endorsed by 47 civil society organizations calling the DENR–EMB to deny the ECC for the proposed Smokey Mountain WTE facility.
The alliance said the project’s EIS fails to address the cumulative health, environmental, climate, and social impacts of incineration, displacement, and Smokey Mountain redevelopment.
It also added that Japanese WTE technology does not automatically make incineration appropriate or sustainable for Manila, where communities already face severe pollution and waste management challenges.
Instead of locking Manila into decades of dependence on waste burning, the government must invest in genuine Zero Waste solutions: source segregation, reuse and recycling, composting, decentralized and community-based waste systems, protection of waste workers’ livelihoods, and the ecological restoration of Smokey Mountain without incineration.
###
About MAIA:
The Manila Anti-Incinerator Alliance (MAIA) is a coalition of community organizations and advocates opposing incineration and false solutions, and advancing zero waste, environmental justice, and the rights of urban poor communities.
Download the full case report in this publication, entitled “The Smokey Mountain Waste-to-Energy Project: Arrested development and environmental justice in urban Manila.”
Media contact:
Marvee Sambajon, Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) Asia Pacific Communications Officer for Campaigns, marvee@no-burn.org
