business mirror
THURSDAY, 19 APRIL 2012 21:42 MARVIN A. TORT / SWAY
Sought for comment on the business-sector support for coal for base-load power plants in the country, Greenpeace also said, “more coal plants would likely increase power costs as the prices of fossil fuels are on an upward trend,” and “would displace any chance for putting up [renewable energy or RE] and tie us up for another three decades.”
Greenpeace added that, “coal plants still require a steady supply of fresh water, which competes with other water uses, such as agriculture. In such a scenario, the problem in Mindanao would not only be one on energy, but on environmental, health and community impacts, as well.”
It, thus, insists that the government concentrate on RE projects, claiming these “can be set up faster than coal and would be cheaper in the long run.” It said that wind, solar, small hydro and biomass projects could be operational sooner than the three years it would take for a new coal-fired power plant.
Greenpeace even argues that encouraging high-capacity coal projects could result “in surplus energy production in off-seasons, which consumers would still have to pay for, bringing power costs up. This would erode Mindanao’s existing price advantage and drive investments further away.”
Frankly, as an ordinary power consumer, it is difficult to fully comprehend the technicalities of coal use and its impact on the environment. In fact, for most residential consumers of electricity, it doesn’t seem to be a big issue where power comes from and who generates it. The concern is limited primarily to the availability of supply and rate or price per kilowatt-hour.
There is no doubt that Greenpeace makes sense, and that it poses laudable arguments. But the Management Association of the Philippines or MAP also makes a good point: “Noting concerns on the effects of overbuilding base-load plants [which will basically be coal] on the environment, MAP believes the DOE should conduct a study on the proper generation mix that will give a healthy balance of renewable energy such as geothermal, biomass and other traditional fuels like coal.”
And perhaps, this is the key point: Balance. At this time, it remains uncertain to what extent the country could continue to grow and sustain its economy and its people without considering coal for power generation, even temporarily. What appears to be of primary concern now in Mindanao and the rest of the country is how to quickly improve and stabilize power supply.
As MAP noted, while it supports the actions the government is taking to resolve the Mindanao problem, “the government cannot do it alone, and members of MAP and the business community must take great pains to understand the true underlying circumstances and conditions so that we can formulate a sustainable and lasting solution to the Mindanao power situation.”
While the need for solutions is urgent, perhaps all sectors concerned should not hastily make decisions. There is a need to take a step back to study the situation, and perhaps some effort to make the public better understand what is truly at stake. Development should not sacrifice the environment protection, but the latter should not stymie economic development either.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB), in a recent report, noted that the country was now in a position to become an industrialized nation, as long as it could revive its manufacturing industry to propel the economy to not only higher economic growth but, more important, inclusive economic growth.
Norio Usui, senior country economist of ADB’s Philippine Country Office, said what the Philippines needed now were well-targeted public support for industries and products that could be upgraded and diversified. The government and the private sector should also aim to increase labor productivity, the economist said.
These could result in inclusive economic growth, or growth that is felt by all social incomes, with jobs available to result in higher incomes for all. And this could happen only if there is high labor productivity. Thus, ADB said urgent reforms must be undertaken to address long-standing challenges, such as underprovision of basic infrastructure, weak governance and an unfavorable perception of the country’s business environment.
“The Philippines has enormous potential to become a key production base within the region,” Usui said. “With tightening labor markets in some countries, recovery from natural disasters in others, and the appreciation of the Japanese yen, there are growing opportunities for the Philippines to attract foreign investors. Success is not always as distant as it seems.”
But the ADB proposition begs the question: how can businesses expand manufacturing and improve productivity and incomes without sufficient, stable and reliable supply of power at reasonable cost?
As Sen. TG Guingona, who hails from Mindanao, noted as early as two years ago, “Energy is key to development.” Thus, he said, the country must have energy independence and this must be built on “energy efficiency and local, preferably clean, energy resources.” He said the country’s “ability to use less energy for every unit of economic output saves the country money, and that this saving should be directed toward developing local energy resources that make the country less vulnerable to volatile international prices.”
This strategy, he added, will ultimately lead to lower costs of energy that will, in turn, not only free up income for households and businesses but will also make the country competitive as an investment destination for industries with large energy requirements. And that perhaps this best explains how to balance development with ecological concerns.
Comments to matort@yahoo.com article source
No comments:
Post a Comment