Sunday, November 08, 2015

A cancelled US trip

I should have left for Washington DC last Sunday, November 1 evening (should have been back tomorrow) for some meetings and conference. The main event was cancelled nearly 3 weeks earlier, so I cancelled my trip. Turns out I have a productive week here...

Nov. 2 Monday, an important meeting with new friends of Minimal Government Thinkers, might consider giving us a support.
Nov. 3, I was in Bloomberg TV Ph for a short live interview.
Nov. 4, my article in BWorld re PEMC and WESM created a stir somewhere, got a very long and angry comment by email from someone who cc'd the President, some Senators, DOE and ERC officials.
Nov. 5, another article in BWorld re free trade and Doing Business 2016 report.
Nov. 6, a tempting short-term research project offered by a friend.
Nov. 7, attended the annual UPSE reunion, an evening of fun, alcohol and camaraderie with former friends and classmates 3 decades ago.

Today some hangover in the morning, stayed home with family and gave the 2 dogs a bath.

A friend asked about that "long and angry comment". Hehehe, a certain Mr. Tecson. His cc included: Pres. Aquino, Senators. Drilon, Recto and Angara, Speaker Belmonte, Cong. Quimbo and Colmenares, Exec Sec. Ochoa, Secs. Balisacan, Purisima, Caguioa (DOJ), Abad, Singson, Abaya & Monsada (DOE), Mar Roxas, 5 ERC Commissioners, 3 COA Commissioners.

What the..., bakit sinama mga officials na yon sa kanyang angst against my article? :-)
------------

See also:

RIP, Leonard Liggio, October 15, 2014 

Washington DC, meetings and conference, September 30, 2015

Free Trade 56, Trade, investments and taxes in APEC countries

The Albert Del Rosario Institute (ADRi) has published my new paper, in time for the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit this coming November 18-19 here in Manila. My special thanks to ADRi President, Prof. Dindo Manhit.


I put a number of tables in that paper, data sources from the World Bank, UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), World Trade Organization (WTO), Alas Oplas & Co. CPAs (AOC), Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).


Foreign direct investments (FDI) inward stock is a good indicator of how much FDIs have accumulated in a country net of outflows through time.


FDI net inflows is a better indicator than plain inflows because a country may get huge amount of FDI inflows but also suffering from huge outflows so that the net inflow is actually negative. Like the US, Russia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, S. Korea and Malaysia, at least for the the years 2012-2014.

 APEC countries are marked red here.


Trade bureaucracies as a form of non-tariff barrier (NTB).


My Concluding notes

1. To have more trade and investments, governments should learn to step back from too many regulations and taxation. 

2. Corporate income and other taxes in the Philippines in particular should decline in the face of rising tax competition among ASEAN countries. 

3. Non-tariff barriers (NTBs) like import licensing and SPS measures should be relaxed and reduced. 

4. Global capitalism is about integration and competition, complementation and substitution, happening simultaneously. 

5. Markets in a competitive environment always result in innovation and business creativity. 

6. Governments should focus on their core and basic function – lay down fair rules for all players, be an impartial judge or referee in cases of disputes, protect private property ownership, enforce the rule of law, contracts between and among people.

The 12-pages paper is also posted in slideshare.
-----------

See also:

Saturday, November 07, 2015

BWorld 23, ASEAN trade bureaucracies and Doing Business 2016 Report

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last Thursday, November 04, 2015.


The most hard working, most efficient persons will not be able to produce all the goods and services that they need for themselves and their families. But there are always other people willing to produce these things or render these services in exchange for money, useful goods, and services.

On the macro level, no country or economy can prosper quickly without trade. And that includes countries that incur frequent trade deficits (in which their imports exceed their exports). Imported machines, vehicles, and computers become inputs for several activities used for the production of goods and services in the domestic economy.

Since trade is a very useful human endeavor, trade should be left as free as possible, with the least or minimum regulations and taxation by governments. The only traded goods that need heavy government regulations and inspections are guns, ammunition, bombs, poisonous substances, and other products harmful to public health and security.

In the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), a handful of countries impose few trade regulations while the others, including the Philippines, impose more.

Below is the result of the World Bank’s (WB) “Ease of Doing Business 2015” Report on International trade.

Covering 189 countries, the report shows the global rankings of ASEAN members. New comers to the ASEAN, Cambodia-Laos-Myanmar-Vietnam (CLMV) were at the bottom.

Based on the report, it would take around three weeks for an exporter to finally move his containers out of CLMV, versus less than one week in Singapore and around two weeks for exporters in Malaysia and Thailand. (See Table 1)


The Philippines was midway among the 10 countries in the ASEAN in terms of global ranking, but the cost to export and import were third-highest in the region, trailing Laos and Cambodia. That is not the right way to treat our exporters and importers.

The WB recently released the “Ease of Doing Business 2016” Report. The categories in “Trading across borders” have changed from the 2015 Report.

Emphasis was given to time and cost to export and import and hence, countries that are contiguous to each other in a single market ranked high. Thus, those jointly occupying the #1 global rank are 17 countries in the European Union (EU): Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Hungary, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia and Spain.

Why? For these countries to send their goods abroad, only one hour is spent for documentary compliance, zero hours for border compliance, only 2 hours for domestic transport, and so on.

Other industrial countries that rank high but not in the top 30 are: South Korea, 31; US, 34; Germany, 35; UK, 38; Switzerland, 40; Canada, 44; Hong Kong, 47; Japan, 52. For the ASEAN countries, here are the numbers. (See Table 2)


We can interpret the above ranking like this: If those 17 EU countries were not included in the ranking and Singapore has dropped from #1 (rank in the 2015 Report) to 11th with South Korea the new #1, the following would be the new global rank of the other 9 ASEAN countries out of 172 countries covered: Malaysia, 18th; Thailand, 25th; Philippines, 64th; Cambodia, 67th; Vietnam, 68th; Indonesia, 74th; Laos, 77th; Brunei, 90th; and Myanmar, 109th.

Under this formulation,not much has changed in the global rank of the Philippines and other ASEAN countries compared to the 2015 Report.

The Philippines in particular needs to reduce the cost of international trade. Philippine exporters pay the highest, at $456, in border compliance and another $381 in domestic transport, among the ASEAN.

Our importers also pay the highest in border compliance, at $580, and second highest (next to Cambodia) in domestic transport and pay $381.

Trade is beautiful and useful.

Imposing higher costs owing to various government taxes through fees and fines is unwise. Governments should allow trade to be as free and less costly as possible.


Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is President of Minimal Government Thinkers, Inc., and a Fellow of the South East Asia Network for Development (SEANET).
------------

See also:
BWorld 19, Taxation and regulations in PH mining industry, September 24, 2015 
BWorld 20, DOE Circular to raise electricity prices, October 25, 2015 

BWorld 21, More internet use means lesser corruption?, October 31, 2015 

BWorld 22, WESM, PEMC and search for competitive electricity prices, November 05, 2015

Friday, November 06, 2015

Energy 48, US energy subsidies and global energy consumption

Another outstanding and critical posting in http://wattsupwiththat.com/ by Willis Eschenbach, Thirty Years of Subsidies, November 5, 2015. He pointed at the US federal government energy subsidies -- in the US alone (EU, Canada, Japan, etc. not included), in 2013 alone (previous years not included).

Subsidies to coal + nat gas + nuke = $5.1 billion.
Subsidies to all renewables including biofuels = $15.0 billion.
  Of which for solar and wind alone = $11.3 billion.
Wow.


Source: http://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/

The above subsidies to renewables also do NOT include:
-- subsidies by state and city governments, that's by the federal government alone;
-- subsidies via "renewable energy mandates" or mandatory use of renewables even if cheaper energy from non-renewables are available;
-- implicit subsidies via cap-and-trade, carbon taxes to fossil fuels.

So is the US and the rest of the world shifting more to solar and wind because of those direct and indirect subsidies for them, vs. taxes and penalties against fossil fuel energy sources?

The sad answer is NO. Actual energy consumption by the 7+ billion people in the planet is mainly supplied by fossil fuels.
Three lessons, according to Willis:

1. So little our ~ hundred billion dollars in solar and wind subsidies has bought us. If that was supposed to be our insurance policy, it’s not only a failure, it’s a cruel joke.

2. Failure of these “We’re all DOOOMED!! We’re running out of energy!” kind of prophecies.

3. Ludicrous claims that solar and wind are making serious inroads into the global demand for energy. They are not. Solar and wind are a rounding error.

Amen to that.
------------

See also:

Weekend Fun 59, Laglag bala extortion at PH airports

The "tanim bala", "laglag bala" or bullet-planting scandal, for harassment and extortion of departing passengers at the NAIA/Manila and some provincial airports in the country continues until this week.

This and other photos and memes below are products of Filipinos' creativity to portray government inefficiency. All of these I got from friends' fb updates + those shown in  the web.

Shameful stories. The government should be very ashamed of this, but DOTC and airport officials appeared less worried, or not even ashamed. Kapal muks.

From a friend, Aiken: Bullets are not allowed on board the plane so upon CONFISCATION AND NECESSARY DOCUMENTATION, passengers should be allowed to board...BUT their names be flagged for investigation. Bullets should be treated like scissors, knives, water, i believe...unless the person carrying them is flagged as terrorist.


From another friend, Butch A.: What a bunch of clowns and buffoons we have running operations at NAIA, the Philippines' flagship international airport. Surrealistically, the Philippine President and his appointed government executives who have charge of addressing this bullet-planting extortion scheme still refuse to regard it as the scam that it is. That, despite the 105 reported incidents in this year alone vs. just 14 last year. What's their interpretation of this scheme?
 


From another  friend, Peter P.: Dear Government, make it policy to Confiscate the solitary bullet found, give the alleged carrier of the solitary bullet a stern warning, then let him/her be on her way, PERIOD! Problem solved and syndicate loses their livelihood and your people and visitors no longer have to suffer. Or will you just give me a thousand reasons why this cannot be done?


Palpak Mar, lousy and insensitive response. Laglag boto ka sa 2016.


1 or 2 day/s after, Mar changed tune. Bawi boto ka Mar.


Among the many news reports on  the subject.



Whatta shame, airport security officials and bureaucrats.
---------------

See also:
Weekend Fun 46: Pork Barrel's New Names, August 25, 2013 
Weekend Fun 51: Martilyo Gang Jokes, December 20, 2013 

Weekend Fun 57: Cow Capitalism, November 01, 2014 
Weekend Fun 58: Mugabe Falls, February 08, 2015

Thursday, November 05, 2015

BWorld 22, WESM, PEMC and search for competitive electricity prices

* This is my column in BusinessWorld yesterday.


The search for affordable and competitive electricity prices in the Philippines and elsewhere remains a continuing adventure for consumers and many industry players.

In a previous column entitled “DoE’s new circular will raise, not lower, electricity prices” (Oct. 21), it was argued that the Department of Energy (DoE) order mandating competitive selection process (CSP) by distribution utilities (DUs) would have the potential of increasing, not lowering, electricity prices.

There is an existing platform for CSP by electricity producers and distributors in the country via the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM), created under Republic Act No. 9136 or the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (EPIRA). Managed by the Philippine Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC), the spot market became operational in June 2006 and it allowed the Philippines to join three other Asian developed economies -- Japan, South Korea, and Singapore -- to have a power exchange market. (See table 1)


 Outside Asia, perhaps all the developed economies in Europe and North America have their own power exchange markets: New York, Los Angeles; Munich, Frankfurt; Amsterdam, Rotterdam; London, Rome, Madrid, Stockholm, Brussels, Zurich, etc. Australia also has its own power market.

RECENT WESM PRICES
During the WESM Market Participants Update sponsored by the PEMC last Thursday, Oct. 28 at Intercon Hotel in Makati, the corporation reported uptick in WESM prices from April to June 2015, then significant decline from July to September 2015. The main reason is the increase in power demand in May-June due to warm weather, then decrease in power demand in the wet and cool weather of July to September. There is also bigger capacity by the hydro power plants. (See table 2)



The September price is really good news for the consumers, be they residential, commercial, or industrial. Also during the period April to September 2015, total market transactions at WESM was 33,101 gigawatt hours (GWh), of which 91.4% are done via bilateral, medium- and long-term contracts and 8.6% via spot market contracts.

GOVERNANCE ISSUES IN PEMC
From the WESM Web site, the PEMC Board is composed of 15 representatives/directors from various sectors of the electric power industry, plus independent members:

One from the Market Operator, one from the National Transmission Corp. (now known as the National Grid Corp. of the Philippines), four from DUs; one from WESM customers including but not limited to suppliers; four from generation companies (gencos); and four independent of the Philippine electric power industry and are nominated by WESM members.

With that said, there should be NONE from the government. In reality though, there are at least three from the government: DoE Secretary as Chairperson, the head of Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp., and the head of National Power Corp.

The presence of the DoE Secretary as Chairman of the PEMC Board should be temporary and not extended with no clear timetable. Under Section 30 of RA 9136 it says that:

“...Not later than one (1) year after the implementation of the wholesale electricity spot market, an independent entity shall be formed and the functions, assets and liabilities of the market operator shall be transferred to such entity with the joint endorsement of the DoE and the electric power industry participants.”

WESM was created in June 2006. This means that an independent market operator should have been in place by June 2007, but more than eight years after, this did not take place. What happened?

There are many government agencies regulating the power sector already: DoE (overall), Energy Regulatory Commission (tariff rates), Securities and Exchange Commission (corporate matters), Department of Environment and Natural Resources (environmental permits), Bureau of Internal Revenue (national taxes), local government units (local taxes and permits) and so on. Having government as key player within PEMC is unnecessary and a violation of EPIRA.

The key to having affordable and competitive electricity prices is via competition among market players, especially among generation companies -- harsh and fierce competition as much as possible. More government regulations, permits, and taxes do the opposite and result in market distortion, expensive electricity and unstable supply in certain periods of the year.

PEMC should be allowed to operate as truly independent of government. Let the various players, gencos and distribution utilities, and consumers, and independent directors, debate and settle among themselves various issues with the end-view of having low and competitive electricity prices for the consumers.


Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the head of Manila-based Minimal Government Thinkers, Inc., and a Fellow of Kuala Lumpur-based South East Asia Network for Development (SEANET).
--------------

See also:
BWorld 18, Non-tariff barriers in the ASEAN, September 12, 2015 
BWorld 19, Taxation and regulations in PH mining industry, September 24, 2015 
BWorld 20, DOE Circular to raise electricity prices, October 25, 2015 

BWorld 21, More internet use means lesser corruption?, October 31, 2015

EFN Asia 51, Draft program, Day 1 of Conference 2015

The Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia Conference 2016 in Bhutan is fast approaching, more than two weeks away.

Here is the provisional program and some speakers for Day 1.

I start with the Master of Ceremonies (MCs). The MC for November 23 will be Ms. Tricia Yeoh, Chief Operating Officer, Institute of Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS), Malaysia.

The MCs For November 24 will be 
Karma Choden, Program Coordinator, QED Group, and Pett Jarupaiboon, Program Manager of EFN Asia and Human Rights, FNF, Thailand. Tricia and Pett are my good friends.

Welcoming remarks will be given by Thinley Palden Dorji, Founding Partner, QED Group, and Ronald Meinardus, Regional Director, FNF South Asia. The Keynote Speaker for the opening keynote address on “Economic Freedom as a Way to Happiness” still has to confirm.


Then the opening lecture, “Economic Freedom and Happiness: Data, Models and Results” by Fred McMahon, Fraser Institute Resident Fellow and holder of the Dr Michael A. Walker Research Chair in Economic Freedom, Canada. There will be two commentators: Pema Wangchuk of the Centre for Bhutan Studies and Gross National Happiness (GNH) Research, and Dr. Mahar Mangahas, President of the Social Weather Stations (SWS) in Manila.

Photos below by rows:
Tricia Yeoh, Karma Choden, and Pett Jarupaiboon;
Thinley Palden Dorji and Ronald Meinardus;
Fred McMahon, Pema Wangchuk, and Mahar Mangahas.


The second lecture will be about Combating Poverty through Economic Freedom with four speakers from Bhutan, S. Korea, India and Thailand.

Third lecture is on Buddhist Ethic and the Spirit of Economic Liberalism with two speakers

This will be interesting: simultaneous lectures on Economic Freedom and Happiness. Five Fishbowls and topics:

1. Size of government: expenditures, taxes, and enterprises and Happiness
2. Legal structure and security of property rights and Happiness
3. Access to sound money and Happiness
4. Freedom to trade internationally and Happiness
5. Regulation of credit, labor, and business and Happiness.

Each fishbowl has five resource persons (1 fixed expert, 1 fixed moderator and 3 open resource persons from each group in each time) and a rapporteur.

I am curious what is that "Happiness Index" that helps Bhutan become prominent, here's what I found.

source: http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/SurveyFindings/Summaryof2015GNHIndex.pdf

It is not an international comparison of which country has the most number of happy people compared to other countries. Nonetheless, it is another approach to measure people's well-being.

For me, the important thing to remember always is that where the people have more economic freedom and individual responsibility (freedom and responsibility must be intertwined, always), there is more happiness.

I will continue with program for Day 2 in the next few days.
--------------

See also:
EFN Asia 47, Participation in Jeju Forum 2015, May 08, 2015 

EFN Asia 48: Report on "Free Market Environmentalism", May 29, 2015 

EFN Asia 49, Conference 2015 in Bhutan, September 15, 2015 

EFN Asia 50, New network member, Center for Indonesian Policy Studies, September 25, 2015

Wednesday, November 04, 2015

Energy 47, Low capacity factor of wind, solar and biomass plants

For the lovers of "renewable energy only to save the planet", see this chart. Official data from the PH Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC), the one managing the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM).



Solar would give us zero electricity from 7pm to 6am, zero electricity for our houses and offices, streets and highways, for 11 hours. The next 13 hours, solar would give us only 5% to 65% (never, never reaching 100%) of its rated capacity, average of 20%. So a 100 MW solar plant would give zero for 11 hours, and give between 5-65 MW during day time, average of only 20 MW.

Wind would give only 8-17% of rated capacity. So those cute windmills in Bangui, Ilocos; in Pililla, Rizal; in Guimaras, etc., when the wind does not blow, zero electricity. When the wind blows, max of 17%. When the blows too much too, say during a strong typhoon, the turbine must be locked, or the wind blades might spin too fast and fly out and damage the windmill.

And look here, if there are windmills (in Bangui, Ilocos Norte), zero houses, zero fishing village, zero resorts and tourism, zero econ. activity. Only picture taking, then facebooking, then feel good. Even if electricity output, fishing output, tourism output, is zero. Blangko, nada.


And those "beautiful" solar farms -- zero trees, zero rice or corn or sugarcane or chicken farm, houses, nothing. Only trapped heat, that gives zero electricity for 11 hours and ave. of 20% for the next 13 hours. This photo from a solar plant in Bais, Negros Or., by the Ayalas. Among the lousy projects of the Ayalas, collecting expensive electricity from the people.


Among the reasons why tourism and hotel here in the PH is expensive, is expensive electricity. I once talked to Joey Lina, President of Manila Hotel about 8 years ago. He told me that their electricity bill alone was about P10 M a month. That's huge. Hotels are very electricity-intensive. Even if the rooms are not occupied, even if it's midnight, the hallways, lobby, etc. should have lights 24/7, the elevators should be running 24/7, etc.

And we pay expensive electricity via feed in tariff (FIT) for solar, wind, biomass and run-of-river hydro. Yeah, darkness and brownouts, expensive electricity is beautiful. Ask the North Koreans if this is true. And we see these news stories, certain businessmen are bragging that we electricity consumers should pay them high, guaranteed price and profit for the next 20 years.


In competitive capitalism, there is no such thing as "guaranteed price" and profit for many years. There is only guaranteed competition, opportunity of expansion or risk of bankruptcy. Consumers are better off under this situation than under guaranteed cronyism.

One anomaly: PEMC leadership (headed by DOE Secretary + 2 govt corporations, PSALM and NPC), knows this thing, the foolishness of adding more MW renewables capacity with expensive FIT. The two immediate effects are (a) to destabilize the grid with intermittent, unstable, on-off power, and (b) raise the cost of electricity.

PEMC, if it is a really independent corp., should write to DOE to warn these things. But DOE cannot write to and warn DOE. DOE here can only support and continue the lousy system because DOE is also the main implementer of renewable energy law of 2008 (RA 9513).

A friend made this  comment, and I say Amen to it:

"The single most important policy trajectory that government should focus on is how to help the viable plants to get built fast, and stop non-viable ones from ever being built, until they exhibit viability without need for any subsidy."
-----------

See also: