BWorld 128, The quest for more stable and cheaper electricity in the ASEAN

* This is my article in BusinessWorld last April 28, 2017.

High economic growth means high energy demand coming from stable supply and competitively priced energy, not unstable, intermittent, and expensive energy. This is what the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) economies need as their high GDP growth of 4.7% in 2016 is projected to improve to 4.8% this year and 5% in 2018 (ADB data), much faster than the projected growth of other regions and economic blocs.

One week before the ASEAN 50th Summit Meeting, the 7th Annual Meeting of the Nuclear Energy Cooperation Sub-Sector Network (NEC-SSN) hosted by the Department of Energy (DoE) was held. A pre-feasibility study showed that many ASEAN countries are in favor of using nuclear energy for commercial use. The ASEAN Center for Energy (ACE) also sees nuclear energy as a long-term power source for the member-countries.

The intensive infrastructure projects of the Duterte administration require huge amount of energy. The proposed 25-km. subway in Metro Manila by the Japan government alone would require high energy supply for the dozens of trains running simultaneously below the ground plus dozens of train stations below and above ground.

Lots of base-load power plants, those that can run 24-7 all year round except when they are on scheduled shut down for maintenance, will be needed. These baseload plants include coal, natural gas, geothermal, and nuclear. Hydro plants too but only during the rainy season.

How reliable and how costly are the different power generation plants that the Philippines and other ASEAN countries will need? This table will help provide the answer as I have not seen data for the ASEAN yet.

Power reliability is represented by plant capacity factor or actual power output relative to its installed capacity. So unstable, intermittent sources like wind and solar have low capacity factor, not good for manufacturing plants, hotels, hospitals, malls, shops, and houses that require steady electricity supply.

Power cost is represented by the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), composed of capital expenditures (capex), fixed and regular operation and maintenance (O&M), variable O&M, and transmission investment. CCS means carbon capture and sequestration.

The cost of ancillary services for intermittent sources, the standby power plants if the wind does not blow or if it rains make solar plants temporarily inutile, does not seem to be reflected in the transmission cost though.

ASEAN countries like the Philippines will need those power plants that have (a) high reliability, high capacity factor, (b) low LCOE, and (c) low or zero need for ancillary services.

However, more ASEAN countries are entertaining more solar PV and wind onshore since they were convinced to believe that they need unstable yet expensive electricity to “save the planet.”

During the Energy Policy Development Program (EPDP) lecture last April 20 at the UP School of Economics (UPSE), Ms. Melinda L. Ocampo, president of the Philippine Electricity Market Corp. (PEMC) talked about “Electricity Trading and Pricing in the Philippine WESM.” Ms. Ocampo discussed among others, the new management system where the interval for electricity dispatch has been improved from one hour to only five minutes.

I pointed during the open forum that the imposition of the lousy scheme feed-in-tariff (FiT) or more expensive electricity for favored renewables was unleashed even to consumers in Mindanao, which is not part of WESM, and is not connected to the Luzon-Visayas grids. The FiT-Allowance that is reflected in our monthly electricity bill has risen from 4 centavos/kWh in 2015 to 12.40 centavos in 2016 and this year, we should brace for at least 26 centavos/kWh soon because the 23 centavos petition by Transco starting January 2017 has not been acted by the Energy Regulatory Commission yet.

The issue of stable and affordable energy will be tackled in the forthcoming BusinessWorld Economic Forum this May 19, 2017 at Shangri-La BGC. Session 4 “Fuelling Future Growth”of the conference will have the following speakers: John Eric T. Francia, president & CEO of Ayala Corp. (AC) Energy Holdings, Inc.; Antonio R. Moraza, president & COO of Aboitiz Power Corporation; Josephine Gotianun Yap, president of Filinvest Development Corp., and DoE Secretary Alfonso G. Cusi. Yap and Cusi are still to confirm the invite.

Local energy players will have a big role in ensuring that the Philippines should have stable and competitively priced energy supply today and tomorrow.

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

See also: 

BWorld 120, Five myths of solar-wind energy, April 08, 2017

BWorld 125, On the retail competition and open access (RCOA) and EPIRA, May 05, 2017 

BWorld 126, Why mining is appropriate for certain areas and provinces, May 06, 2017 

BWorld 127, Economic freedom in Asia means faster growth, lower prices, May 07, 2017

Drugs War 5, Kill-ambush-poison-bomb-you from PDu30

May tupak talaga ito. See his language:

“And here’s the shocker: I will kill you. I will really kill you. And that’s why the rapporteur of the UN is here, investigating extrajudicial killing,” Duterte said, referring to drug dealers as he was addressing an orthopedic conference in Davao City, as cited by The Philippine Star.

“I told them that once you get involved in drugs I will kill you. I will ambush you, poison you, bomb you, whatever. Steal your wife from you,” the Philippines leader added. – May 6, 2017, https://www.rt.com/news/387205-duterte-un-killings-complaint/

Those words cannot come from a stable mind. Unpresidential gutter language.

PDu30 is scared of the UN HR body. If there is nothing to fear, just invite them to come with zero conditionalities, nothing. Having conditionalities means there are fears, there are things to hide.

Many sectors also bring up the LP/yellow/dilawan in the visit by Ms. Callamard. Why divert the issue? PDu30 and his many agencies can quickly organize a forum with that lady anywhere, anytime, challenge her to a public debate because she opted to come here, pulverize her arguments if they can, they did not do it. 

Reposting some comments from my friend Bernard Ong, posted in his fb wall May 5 and 6, 2017.

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

(1) TAKOT SA UN RAPPORTEUR

Malacanang objected to the 'unannounced' visit of UN Special Rapporteur for Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions Agnes Callamard.

"We are aware that Dr. Callamard is currently in the Philippines and we are disappointed that, in not contacting our government in advance of this visit, she has sent a clear signal that she is not interested in getting an objective perspective on the issues that are the focus of her responsibility" - Spokesman Ernesto Abella.

Hold your carabao, Ernie. She is not here for you. No need to announce her visit dahil wala kayo sa agenda niya. Your are being paranoid. Which part of "extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions" triggered your praning reaction. Fentanyl muna to ease your worries.

Turns out Dr Callamard is here to attend & address a drug policy forum sponsored by CHR & Free Legal Assistance Group at UP Diliman. Government is actually represented in the forum by its lead drug agency - Dangerous Drugs Board. Sayang. Kung hindi lang sana takot si Duterte sa UP Diliman, he could have gone there to share his "Kill. Kill. Kill" approach.

So there. Dr Callamard is not here for you. Wait lang muna, your turn will come. You can relax. She is also braver than you.

Unlike you, she is not afraid of going to UP Diliman.

(2) TEKA TEKA MALI YATA

1. Takot na takot, at galit na galit, sa isang UN Human Rights official na inimbitang magsalita sa UP.

2. Nagsisilbing bugaw ng China - #1 supplier ng shabu, at nangaagaw ng lupa at dagat ng Pilipinas - para sumuko na lang ang Pilipino.

Kayo na lang. Susundin ko ang mga halimbawa nila Lapu-Lapu, Bonifacio at Gregorio Del Pilar. Ayaw ko sumama sa mga duwag at traydor.

(3) WHAT THE UN RAPPORTEUR SAID

Warning: long post. UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Abitrary Executions Agnes Callamard gave the opening speech at the drug policy forum at UP Diliman. Link to full transcript in Comments section.

Presidential counsel Salvador Panelo used her speech as basis to claim that she is incompetent to probe killings in War on Drugs in the Philippines – that Callamard already made conclusions based on news reports, some videos, opinions of critics, and hearsay.

SUMMARY OF HER SPEECH

1. There’s a document called ‘Our Joint Commitment to Effectively Addressing and Countering the World Drug Problem’ drafted by heads of states assembled at UN General Assembly.

2. Joint Commitment calls for more comprehensive approach that considers diverse factors behind drug problem – including social development, public health, justice & human rights. It calls for more effective approaches than punishment model some governments have adopted.

3. Joint Commitment urges governments to respect human rights, protect freedoms, uphold rule of law in their drug policies.

4. Joint Commitment recognizes dependence is a health disorder, whose social causes & consequences can be prevented & treated thru scientific evidence-based treatment, care & rehab. The governments affirmed the importance of data, scientific research, sharing of information including best practices on drug prevention & control.

5. Governments did not commit to War-on-Drugs approach. Instead they called for balanced approach including health, rights & justice.

6. They did not suggest death penalty as an appropriate or effective response to drug trafficking or use. Instead they spoke about proportionate sentencing & alternative punishments.

7. In April 2016, the UN General Assembly recognized that ‘War on Drugs’ does not work. It is well documented around the world that bad drug policies fail to address drug dependency, drug criminality & drug trade.

8. Further, War on Drugs only makes things worst. They add problems such as extrajudicial killings, breakdown of law, vigilante crimes, torture, disproportionate sentences for drug possession, etc. It can foster a regime of impunity promoting rule of violence, eroding public trust in institutions, breeding fear.

9. In all research undertaken around the world, none of the countries that adopted War on Drugs made the drug problem disappear. In fact, the opposite happened.

10. Conference in UP Diliman is to learn from local & foreign experts who have studied drug policies, their impact & effectiveness....

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

See also:
The PH drugs war, part 2, July 27, 2016

President Duterte and hyperbole, December 19, 2016 

Drugs War 3, Dr. Noel de Dios on Duterte's war, December 20, 2016 

Drugs War 4, The NYT documentary, March 28, 2017

Energy 94, Developing Asia's love affair with coal

Energy precedes development, not vice versa. Developing countries cannot sustain growth without cheap and stable energy supply. 

I am reposting some recent reports about efforts by many developing Asian countries to grow fast via cheaper energy from coal power. Enjoy.

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

"Pakistan’s Water and Power Ministry... investment project with China, it’s committed to spending $15 billion on as many as 12 new coal power plants over the next 15 years…

To anyone who would criticize the move, Piyush Goyal, India’s power minister, had this to say: “India is not a polluter," he told the Financial Times. "It’s America and the western world that has to first stop polluting.” There’s a grain of truth to that: America and Europe did a lot of coal burning during their development, and now have strong economies to leverage in order to clean up their acts.” – May 3, 2017, https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604323/india-and-pakistans-continued-love-affair-with-coal/

"$54 billion China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which includes spending of about $33 billion on a total of 19 energy projects, including coal-fired and renewable power plants, transmission lines, and other infrastructure.

Combined, the projects will eventually generate 16,000 megawatts (MW) of electricity, which the government says is urgently needed. About three-quarters of the newly generated power will come from coal-powered plants, and the government insists that these will be fitted with the latest technology to reduce pollution and climate-changing emissions.” – May 2, 2017, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-energy-coal-idUSKBN17Z019

"China’s production of electricity from coal stayed at elevated levels post the northern hemisphere winter after reaching a high of 423.6 billion kWh in December – and the highest level recorded based on available data going back to January 2010.

And electricity production from coal in March 2017 rebounded strongly following the Lunar New Year lull in February, rising 7.7% year on year to 396.1 billion kWh, according to the National Bureau of Statistics data." – May 2, 2017, http://blogs.platts.com/2017/05/02/china-coal-fired-power-generation-surprises-naysayers/

"India is heavily reliant on coal for its electricity, more than three-quarters of which was generated by its 132 coal-fired power stations in 2014-15, according to the most recent data from the central electricity authority. However, while it is the world’s third-biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in absolute terms, its per capita emissions are a fraction of many other nations’, at just 1.59 metric tonnes a year, compared with 7.55 for China and 16.39 for the US." – May 3, 2017,

https://www.ft.com/content/18268438-2e3e-11e7-9555-23ef563ecf9a

"A MoneySuperMarket report listed Mozambique, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe as having “the most environmentally friendly people in the world,” while ranking Americans as being some of the least eco-friendly people on the planet. That may not be a bad thing, though, given the greenest countries also tend to be poor and run by authoritarian regimes." – April 22, 2017, http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/22/worlds-greenest-people-live-in-ridiculously-poor-authoritarian-regimes-graph/

"America was built on cheap and abundant coal. Fossil fuels powered the U.S. into the industrial age and replaced inefficient windmills and woodburning as the primary sources of electricity. America currently has access to 500 years’ worth of coal — far more than any other nation. Even despite the last decade’s war on coal during the Obama years, the U.S. still derives about one third of our power from coal — second only to natural gas." – April 17, 2017, https://spectator.org/coals-colossal-comeback/

“China’s fundamental demand for coal and natural gas has improved alongside better-than-expected economic growth in the first quarter,” Tian Miao, an analyst at North Square Blue Oak Ltd. in Beijing, said by phone. “The government’s investment in infrastructure has boosted power consumption while the move to replace coal with gas to fight pollution is also gaining some traction for gas demand.” – April 17, 2017, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-17/china-coal-production-rises-as-government-avoids-output-limits

"Coal conversion has become profitable in China because of an unusual combination of low coal prices relative to state-set gas or petrol prices.  Coal-to-liquids projects normally make economic sense only when oil prices are high or supply is limited. The technology was first developed in Nazi Germany, and commercialised in apartheid-era South Africa." https://www.ft.com/content/02931290-1d94-11e7-a454-ab04428977f9

"despite a huge workforce of almost 400,000 solar workers (about 20 percent of electric power payrolls in 2016), that sector produced an insignificant share, less than 1 percent, of the electric power generated in the United States last year (EIA data here).

In contrast, it took about the same number of natural gas workers (398,235) last year to produce more than one-third of U.S. electric power, or 37 times more electricity than solar's minuscule share of 0.90 percent. And with only 160,000 coal workers (less than half the number of workers in either solar or gas), that sector produced nearly one-third (almost as much as gas) of U.S. electricity last year." – May 3, 2017, http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/todays-most-productive-energy-workers-are-in-coal-and-gas-not-solar/article/2622029

"According to a recent International Energy Agency (IEA) report, Japan’s 600 MW Isogo plant in Yokohama is probably the best in the world. It is an ultra-supercritical HELE plant, with emission levels comparable to a natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) power plant." -- April 18, 2017, https://dddusmma.wordpress.com/2017/04/18/japan-and-china-remarkably-clean-coal/

"The Petra Nova carbon capture system was installed in the W.A. Parish generation station. This is the largest and cleanest fossil fuel generaton station in the United States." -- April 18, 2017, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/18/clean-coal-carbon-capture-and-enhanced-oil-recovery/

India's "plans to build nearly 370 coal-fired power plants... The construction of 65 gigawatts worth of coal-burning generation with an additional 178 gigawatts in the planning stages would make it nearly impossible for India to meet those climate promises, the researchers say." -- April 25, 2017, https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/04/25/india-wont-be-able-to-meet-paris-climate-agreement-commitments-due-to-expanding-coal-power-plants/

Two other useful sources here,

1. http://www.jcoal.or.jp/eng/

2. GWPF, “THE PARIS AGREEMENT and the Fifth Carbon Budget” by David Campbell,

http://www.thegwpf.org/content/uploads/2016/09/Campbell.pdf  (13 pages long)

Bottomline: more environmentalism, more UN, more government renewables cronyism are bad for developing economies that want cheaper energy for them to develop faster and sustain growth.

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

See also:
Energy 91, Thailand's bright nights (part 2), March 03, 2017 

Energy 92, Asia retains big coal use, April 07, 2017 

Energy 93, Coal imports in East Asia, April 10, 2017

BWorld 127, Economic freedom in Asia means faster growth, lower prices

* This is my article in BusinessWorld on April 26, 2017.

Thanks to its rapid economic growth, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is being looked up to by other economic blocs as it celebrates its 50th anniversary this month in Manila.

The pace of trade liberalization until this decade is perhaps the world’s fastest both among ASEAN member-states, and even among those outside the group.

Free trade creates good will among people and governments across the globe. It gives foreign trade partners greater access to the home market and, in the process, these trade partners tend to open up to more ASEAN countries’ exports and investments.

Here are two tables that show the economic wonders of free trade policy -- not exactly zero-tariff and minimal non-tariff barriers (NTBs) but approaching there -- for the emerging economies of Asia. We will use the purchasing power parity (PPP) values of gross domestic product (GDP) to somehow equalize valuation of goods and services across the world.

Overall, the GDP size of the world at PPP values was $40.3 trillion in 1996 and it rose to $120 trillion in 2016 or an expansion of more than three times in just two decades.

ASEAN-5 refers to Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. G7 countries are the US, Canada, Japan, UK, Germany, France and Italy.

Table 1 numbers show the following:

1. Emerging and developing Asia (including China and India) is now the world’s biggest economic bloc with GDP size of $38 trillion in 2016, overtaking the G7. The expansion of GDP size in just two decades was six times, an astonishing feat. The per-capita GDP also expanded almost five times, the fastest in the world.

2. ASEAN-5 GDP size of $6.5 trillion in 2016 was larger than the combined economies of the CIS or developing Europe or Sub-Saharan Africa. Per capita GDP expanded more than two and a half times over two decades which is larger than that attained by many other economic blocs. 

Table 2 numbers further show that:

3. While emerging and developing Asia is only the 3rd largest bloc in the exports of goods and services in the world, selling $3.9 trillion in 2016, the size of exports has expanded 7.2 times after only two decades, the fastest in the world. In terms of price inflation, the region also showed consistent price decline and stability at only 2.9% in 2016, the lowest among developing blocs in the world.

4. Sub-Saharan Africa and MENA remain burdened with high prices and slow expansion in exports.

Giving local consumers and manufacturers more economic freedom where they can buy and sell the various goods and services that they need and produce means empowering the whole economy. Price declines and price stability are proof that freer trade is working and are instrumental in stabilizing the supply of various traded goods and services.

There are winners and losers in free trade, the same way that there are winners and losers in protectionism. But overall, “net gains” from trade trump “net losses” from protectionism because locals are deprived by policies that limit choices and options.

It is important therefore, that emerging Asian economies like the Philippines should never lose sight of the potentials of free trade and resist protectionist aspirations that penalize the consumers while protecting local vested business interests.

Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr. is the President of Minimal Government Thinkers and a Fellow of SEANET; both are members of Economic Freedom Network (EFN) Asia.

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

See also: 

BWorld 124, On Grab, Uber, traffic and LTFRB, May 05, 2017 

BWorld 125, On the retail competition and open access (RCOA) and EPIRA, May 05, 2017 

BWorld 126, Why mining is appropriate for certain areas and provinces, May 06, 2017

IPR and Innovation 35, Letter to WIPO on World IP Day

On April 28, 2017, the World Intellectual Property Day was celebrated. The Property Rights Alliance (PRA), publisher of the annual International Property Rights Index (IPRI), sent a letter last April 25 to the head of WIPO, below. MGT is one of four ASEAN-based free market think tanks that signed the letter.

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

Celebrating the 2017 #WorldIPDay

Open Letter To

WIPO DirectorGeneral Dr. Francis Gurry

We the undersigned are proud to celebrate World IP day with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). Intellectual property (IP) rights play a crucial role in growing economies, driving innovation, and saving lives. Robust IP systems provide the greatest incentives for innovators to create the next generation of goods and services, artists to produce original works, and entrepreneurs to enter the marketplace. They also allow for the sharing of knowledge and technological advancement. Invention comes out of the shadows with good intellectual property protections.

IP Rights Grow the Economy

IP-intensive industries are the cornerstone of modern economies. Between the U.S. and E.U., IP-intensive industries employed between 30%-38% of their workforces—more than 127 million jobs. As a matter of fact, these industries are responsible for generating nearly 40% of the combined US & EU gross domestic products.

IP-intensive industries in these economies paid workers 46% higher wages than those employed in comparable jobs in non-IP-intensive industries. Similarly, per capita income in countries with robust property right is 21 times more than per-capita income in countries with weak protections.

IP Rights Drive Innovation

Human ingenuity is boundless, and IP rights create an environment where human creativity can be unleashed. In 2015, a record 2.9 million new patents were filed worldwide—ranging from groundbreaking technological processes to cures of catastrophic disease to modernizations of everyday conveniences.

To thrive, innovation must be protected. Enforcement of IP rights prevent production of counterfeits that undermine economic growth and finance criminal organizations. This underground economy is responsible for nearly 2.5% of global imports, threatening iconic retail brands and next-generation medicines alike. Copying is not the same as inventing.

IP Enhances Lives

Each patent offers an innovative approach to solving a human problem. Around the world 1.2 million people die in traffic accidents, and commuters waste years of their lives on the road. Now, over 33 companies around the world are investing billions of dollars, hiring thousands of researchers and

engineers, and inventing new driverless car technologies aimed to reduce traffic deaths and save time, a truly non-renewable resource.

However, the intellectual property that delivers these benefits and many others has never been more at risk. Even within the United Nations system, initiatives such as the High-Level Panel on access to medicines threaten to undermine the very protections that are so necessary to solve today's global challenges. WIPO must play a more active role in informing international debates.

Therefore, the undersigned call on WIPO to 1) review the ways that IP enhances economic development and access to new products; 2) proactively work with countries to stabilize, grow, and enhance their IP regimes and protections; 3) support IP as a property right and a right to enhancing human growth and development, and oppose adoption of policy to the contrary such as the UN High-Level Panel report. 

World IP Day is an opportunity to celebrate that which is uniquely human: constant innovation, reinvention, and curiosity. Intellectual Property fuels the economy, drives innovation, and saves lives. We look forward to working with WIPO to advance this understanding of intellectual property rights,

and to produce complimentary efforts aimed at accelerating the adoption of robust IP protections across the world that make intangible futures tangible.

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

See also:

IPR and Innovation 32, On TPP, medicines patent and tobacco trademark, February 29, 2016 

IPR and Innovation 33, More on the panel on property rights, ALF 2016, March 09, 2016 

IPR and Innovation 34, When 95% of WHO's EML are off-patent, May 08, 2016

BWorld 26, IPRI 2015 in APEC economies, November 19, 2015 

BWorld 45, Asia Liberty Forum and property rights, February 29, 2016BWorld 81, Property rights are human rights, September 30, 2016.

BWorld 126, Why mining is appropriate for certain areas and provinces

* This is my article in BusinessWorld on April 21, 2017.

Biodiversity of living things is more common in the tropics compared to those in the northern and southern hemisphere. Geological diversity of nonliving things is more common in the Pacific countries as there are more volcanic and earthquake movements in the “Pacific Rim of Fire” than the rest of the planet.

That is why for almost all commodities -- copper, gold, molybdenum, silver, nickel, bauxite, zinc, lead, etc. -- countries in the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) are the dominant suppliers and exporters. Volcanic gases and molten rocks are the main producers of mineral products below the ground.

There is a good study on the mineral potentials of APEC economies published more than two years ago. Some definitions of the terms used in the table below:

1. Mineral rent is the difference between the value of production for a stock of minerals at world prices and their total costs of production.

2. Mining Contribution Index (MCI) is calculated based on aspects of mining and metals contribution to national economies, composite for three variables: (a) Mineral export contribution in 2010 as percent of total merchandise exports, (b) Increase/decrease in mineral export contribution 2005 to 2010, and; (c) Mineral production value as a percentage of GDP in 2010.

The above numbers show the following:

1. Countries on the “ring side” of the Pacific Rim generally have higher MCI -- Australia, Chile, Papua New Guinea, Peru -- than those a bit far from the Rim. Thus, while China has the biggest mining rent in 2013, it has low MCI.

2. The Philippines’ low mining rent and output is mainly a result of the policy and taxation environment that is generally not attractive to more big corporate mining but the country has high MCI. It is the world’s 2nd biggest producer of nickel, next only to Indonesia.

3. Employment in mining is generally low relative to total population because the industry is very capital intensive. Workers hardly use spades and other manual tools; they use huge trucks, loaders, bulldozers, and other machines. Thus, the Philippines’ 0.22% that is being looked down by many anti-mining groups as being “not job-creating enough” is actually higher than those in Indonesia, Canada, Mexico and USA.

The Philippines is one of the most mineral-rich countries in the planet, the archipelago being largely a product of volcanic movement rising from below the sea millions or billions of years ago. Thus, mining potential is very high even utilizing only a small portion -- less than 1% -- of the country’s total land area.

Recently, DENR Secretary Gina Lopez has launched a series of lectures and public fora advocating “more investments in biodiversity than in mining.” This is after she ordered the closure of 22 mines and suspended five others, and ordered a P2-million bond by mining companies per hectare of “disturbed” agricultural lands before they can haul their mineral stockpiles.

The Secretary has not produced any realistic numbers of biodiversity investments while the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines (CoMP) has projected at least $30 billion of big mining investments in the next 10 years if the policy environment has improved and stabilized.

In my agro-forestry farming experience in a farm in Bugallon, Pangasinan since two and a half decades ago, I saw how mahogany trees we planted would grow well in a relatively rich soil but would have stunted growth, many even die, just about 50-100 meters away in land with high silica deposit and potentials. This further shows that mineral-rich lands and mountains are generally less conducive for agriculture and even for forestry because the soil has very low nitrogen and phosphorous levels.

The government should optimize the high mining potential of the Philippines -- to create more jobs, generate more exports and economic output, give more community projects that mining companies are mandated to provide.

Big government presence in mining is justified only in laying down rules that apply to all, big and small-scale miners. Big mining companies in particular are expected to strictly follow existing rules especially those provided by the Mining Act of 1995.

Beyond that, there should be less government interventions and taxation, there should be less political harassment and business uncertainty, especially with many mining closures and suspensions.

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

See also: 

BWorld 122, Six more myths in the mining debate, April 13, 2017 

BWorld 123, Drug-related murders and criminal justice in Asia, April 23, 2017 

BWorld 124, On Grab, Uber, traffic and LTFRB, May 05, 2017 

BWorld 125, On the retail competition and open access (RCOA) and EPIRA, May 05, 2017

China Watch 24, PH Defense Secretary's visit at Pagasa island

On April 21, 2017, PH Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana and top officials of the AFP went to Pagasa island, near Subi Reef that CN has illegally occupied. I say "illegal" because the UN PCA (The Hague, Netherlands) ruling says that CN's claims at the SCS/WPS have no international legal basis.

Good move, Defense Secretary. Please do this more often. If CN will shoot down your plane and kill you, you will be a new hero.

The CN communist government remains arrogant. And any PH government official who will placate China despite its continued belligerence and arrogance should be exposed. Including the President if he continues his lick-a__ attitude to the commie government in Beijing.

The report says, "The plane, during such incidents, is told it is entering Chinese territory." Pagasa island is "Chinese territory" haha. And PDu30 is silent, not slam-dunking with his usual "PI nyo/Pakyu" China.

Taiwan, Vietnam, other countries also claim some of those islands and atolls at the SCS, but they are silent, did not make any challenged to the visit of the PH Defense Secretary. In the case of CN, their claim to the area is wholesale -- political, legal, military, etc. See other news -- "CN protests PH defense chief's Pagasa island visit", but we don't hear or read a similar "VN or TW protests..."

China will soon swallow its own pill. VN, US, others will not recognize CN claim on those artificial islands. That is why Defense Sec. Lorenzana's move is good, something that PDu30 never did. He recently ordered the AFP to occupy PH islands in the disputed territories, palusot after his many kowtow statements to China. After a series of public defeatism with the commies across the sea, he needs to shake his "joke only" image with respect to China. 

About the PH fishermen who were driven away by CN boats, I bet Du30 will reprimand instead the Pinoy fishermen, something like "sinabi ko nang wag lumapit sa isla ng China eh. Atin yan dati, ngayon sa kanila na". 

PNoy was right in asserting the international rule of law on the seas, PDut is wrong to ignore it, and FVR sides with PNoy.

News headlines below were published April 21-24, 2017.

Meanwhile, I am reposting comments from a friend, Bernard Ong. He posted these April 21 and 23.

(1) WHAT WOULD DU30 DO...

If the Chinese shoot down the plane carrying the Filipino Defense Secretary to our own territory in Pagasa Island...

I bet he sends his deepest apologies to China, checks with them if the deal for trains + loans + banana exports is still on, goes on an angry incoherent speech about how we should not have tested China's resolve, tells the military they should focus on Jolo instead, then bans future voyages on sea & air by Filipinos to that area to avoid 'provoking' the squatters.

Don't give me that "but he's sincere, will stake his life and honor" bullshit. Look at me in the eye & tell me I'm wrong. Kumander Topak is a traitor.

(2) WAITING FOR THAT RANT

China hits PH over Defense Chief visit to Kalayaan Island. Chinese fires at PH fishermen.

Now would be a good time for Kumander Topak to launch ito a "Put@ng ina. Amin yan. Sisipain ko sila" rant.

C'mon if you can do it to the US - the #1 military superpower in the world - launching your curses & insults at China should be easy.

Show us some of that "I am willing to die" and "I will stake my life, my honor, my presidency" drama. Don't forget the flag-draping & fist bump for added effect.

Sayang naman yung TIME Most Influential kung tiklop ka pala agad. Huwag ka matakot. China lang yan. Hindi yan UP Diliman.

Magparamdam ka naman. Ok ka lang ba dyan?

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

See also:
China Watch 21, Is a War Between US and China "Inevitable"? May 30, 2015 

China Watch 22, On many rich Chinese leaving their country, January 17, 2016 

China Watch 23, Bernard Ong on Du30 defeatism with the China communist govt, March 23, 2017 

BWorld 99, China insecurity and belligerence, December 30, 2016

BWorld 125, On the retail competition and open access (RCOA) and EPIRA

* This is my article in BusinessWorld on April 19, 2017.

Electricity distribution, unlike generation, is defined as a “public utility” and hence, is granted as a monopoly right via congressional franchise. There are more than 120 distribution utilities (DUs) such as Meralco and electric cooperatives.

To dilute this monopoly, the Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA) which was passed in 2001 came with Section 31, Retail Competition and Open Access (RCOA) that “shall be implemented not later than three (3) years upon the effectivity of this Act,” and Section 29, Supply Sector, “The supply of electricity to the contestable market ...” These are useful, anti-monopoly provisions, thanks to EPIRA.

The RCOA was finally implemented 12 years after, on June 26, 2013. The Department of Energy (DoE) and the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) issued orders to implement this beautiful provision.

But somewhere along the way, what should be a competitive scheme has become a “mandatory” order.

Some electricity consumers are unhappy because their choice to stay with their DUs -- especially if these provide them good service and prices -- has been done away with. This is why they went to the Supreme Court (SC) and asked for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against the RCOA.

Below is a summary of these orders (one from DoE, four from ERC, and one from the SC).

The SC TRO has mixed signals. It is good because (a) it stopped the “mandatory migration” to RES by contestable customers (CCs) and thus, they have the option to stay with their DUs or not, and (b) local RES will be allowed again. But it can also be bad because (a) it stopped the voluntary participation of CCs for 750kW (lowered threshold), and (b) some ERC Resolutions suspending earlier prohibitions to Retail Electricity Suppliers (RES) are also removed.

Government prohibitions should be kept to the minimum as much as possible.

These prohibitions would give people -- especially those with very low technical and financial capacities -- the right to become RES which might invite abuse of CCs.

Such prohibitions should not include more RES players, the right of CCs to stay with their DUs or not, and voluntary participation of customers at 750kW.

EPIRA has provided for more customer choices, strengthened consumer empowerment, and demonopolization of electricity generation and distribution. Let this spirit stay in the succeeding orders of the DoE and the ERC.

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

See also: 

BWorld 122, Six more myths in the mining debate, April 13, 2017 

BWorld 123, Drug-related murders and criminal justice in Asia, April 23, 2017 

BWorld 124, On Grab, Uber, traffic and LTFRB, May 05, 2017