* This is my article in BusinessWorld last September 7, 2017.
See also:
Last week, the National Transmission Corp. (TransCo), the
administrator of feed in tariff (FiT) — which guarantees high prices for 20
years for variable renewable energy (solar, wind, biomass, run of river hydro)
filed a petition at the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC). It sought for an
increase in FiT-Allowance to be paid by all electricity consumers nationwide.
FiT-All is one of roughly 12 different charges and taxes
in our monthly electricity bill and the one with the fastest increases in
recent years: four centavos/kWh in 2015, 12.40 centavos in 2016, 18 centavos
this 2017, and 29.32 centavos next year. It is a clear example of renewables’
cronyism that penalizes electricity consumers and rewards renewable energy (RE)
developers supposedly to help “save the planet.”
Also last week, I attended the Energy Policy Development
Program (EPDP) lecture at UP School of Economics, entitled: “Natural gas:
Addressing the energy trilemma and powering our energy needs.” The lecture was
delivered by Mr. Giles Puno, President and COO of FirstGen, a big Lopez-owned
power company. Mr. Puno covered many topics but I will only focus on the
lecture’s three aspects.
One, the lecture mentioned that the cost of wind-solar
keeps decreasing so efforts to decarbonize the economy is improving, away from
coal power which cannot remain cheap in the long-term.
During the open forum, I said that this is not exactly
correct because while it is true that the technology cost of wind-solar is
declining, the FiT rates given to wind-solar keeps rising actually. FiT rates
for wind batch 1 (2015 entrants) were P8.53/kWh in 2015, this went up to P8.90
in 2016, and P9.19 in 2017. Wind batch 2 (2016 entrants) were P7.40/kWh in 2016
and P7.71 in 2017.
Solar batch 1 (2015 entrants) FiT rates were P9.68/kWh in
2015, P9.91 in 2016, and P10.26 in 2017. Solar batch 2 (2016 entrants) FiT
rates were P8.69/kWh in 2016 and P8.89 in 2017.
FiT revenues collected by all RE firms given FiT
privilege were P10.22B in 2015, a figure that rose to P18.54B in 2016, and
P24.44B in 2017.
Two, to address the energy trilemma (energy security,
energy equity/affordability, environmental stability), the lecture questioned
the 3,500 MW worth of coal supply in the Meralco power supply agreements (PSA).
These PSAs were anathema to environmental stability and energy equity since
power rate hikes will be expected since coal prices are expected to rise over
the long-term. That government should instead prioritize natural gas
development.
I mentioned in the open forum that I saw the World Energy
Council (WEC) World Energy Trilemma Index 2016 and out of the 125 countries
covered, the Philippines was #1 in environmental sustainability, thanks to our
big geothermal and hydro, plus recently added variable REs. But Philippines was
#92 in energy equity because of our expensive electricity, 3rd highest in Asia
next to Japan and Hong Kong.
So it is wrong to demonize coal (nearly 35% of installed
capacity but 48% of actual electricity production in 2016) that contributed to
declining prices in generation charge in recent years. For instance, the
load-weighted average price (LWAP) at the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market
(WESM) was declining from about P5.40/kWh in 2012 to only P2.80 in 2016.
Consider also the fact that Philippines’ coal use is
small compared to what our neighbors in the region consume. Vietnam consumes
twice the amount of what we use, Taiwan three times, Indonesia five times,
South Korea and Japan six times — for 2016 alone (see graph).
Power companies like FirstGen should focus on ensuring
that electricity consumers have cheap and stable electricity available 24/7
without any brownouts, even for a minute. Instead of demonizing and suggesting
the stopping of more coal power to come on stream.
Third, Mr. Puno and FirsGen want “government support
crucial for LNG development and (1) Holistic and defined energy mix to direct
planning and investments, (2) Incentivize LNG through fiscal and non-fiscal
policies, (3) Secure LNG Off-take, similar to how Malampaya was underpinned.”
The first two items I consider as cronyist or seeking a
crony status from the government. Setting the energy mix should be done by the
consumers, not government. The previous Petilla/Monsada plan of 30-30-30-10
energy mix for coal-natural gas-renewable energy-oil respectively is wrong and
has no sensible basis. It is good that new DoE Secretary Cusi has dumped it in
favor of 70-30-10 energy mix for baseload-mid merit-peaking plants,
respectively.
Government taxes should apply to all technology — coal,
natgas, hydro, geothermal, etc. — no special privileges of tax breaks and other
non-fiscal sweeteners. To ask for tax and non-tax privileges for LNG is asking
for crony privileges.
We need less government regulations in setting the energy
mix, less government favoritism for expensive wind-solar resulting in more
expensive electricity. Government should focus on having energy laws and taxes
that apply to all technology and players without any entity enjoying special
privileges.
-----------------
See also:
BWorld 148, Energy Trilemma Index 2016, September 16, 2017
BWorld 149, Free tuition and irresponsibility, September 17, 2017
BWorld 150, Rising state-inspired murders and budget 2018, September 18, 2017
BWorld 151, Mining taxes per hectare of land, September 22, 2017
1 comment:
Thank you for sharing valuable information. Nice post. I enjoyed reading this post.
Post a Comment