July 15, 2019 | 10:40 pm
THE
Department of Energy (DoE) said the guidelines for indigenous communities to
derive financial benefits from hosting of power generation plants and projects
will soon take effect, and encouraged these communities to make appropriate
preparations.
In a statement Monday,
Energy Secretary Alfonso G. Cusi said the issuance of the guidelines is a
“symbolic way” to mark the 25th year of implementation of the Energy
Regulation (ER) 1-94 Program.
He said the DoE
“recognizes the right of our tribal and indigenous communities to optimize
available social development opportunities and preserve their critical role as
the stewards of our energy resources, particularly where the power plants
and/or the energy resource development projects are located.”
The Department Circular
DC2019-06-0010 prescribes the “Administrative Operating Guidelines for the Availment
and Utilization of Financial Benefits by the Indigenous Cultural
Communities/Indigenous Peoples, pursuant to DoE Department Circular No.
DC2018-03-0005.”
Under the circular, the
National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) is to endorse all legitimate
indigenous cultural communities/indigenous peoples (ICCs/IPs) beneficiaries to
the DoE within 30 days from receiving from them all the necessary requirements.
The DoE will then
notify the concerned generation company and/or energy resource developer of the
inclusion of the host ICCs/IPs for the remittance of their financial benefits.
The policy enables the host to use the funds for social development projects.
Mr. Cusi said the
arrangement with the ICCs/IPs further strengthens the DoE’s commitment “to
boost their participation, cooperation and sustained partnership in power
development projects.”
The DoE circular was
published on July 12, 2019 and will take effect 15 days from its publication
date.
Under the ER 1-94
Program, communities hosting power generation facilities or energy resources
are entitled to one centavo per kilowatt-hour of the total electricity sales of
generation companies or energy resource developers.
One of the major
changes introduced by the guidelines is the direct remittance of financial
benefits to host communities for their immediate utilization. The move to
streamline the release of funding was meant to eliminate the bureaucratic
process that hampers socio-economic development of the communities hosting the
power plants. — Victor V. Saulon
‘Solar Para sa Politika’
By Bienvenido S. Oplas, Jr.
Among the
promises of the Solar Para sa Bayan Corp. (SPBC) franchise bill now awaiting
President Rodrigo Duterte’s signature are 24/7 electricity in far away
villages, and cheaper electricity because the sun’s rays are free.
True, the sun’s rays
are free, but the solar panels, the power conditioning unit, main panel, AC and
DC disconnect, other components are not free. Transportation and installation
in far away areas and connection to the grid are not.
Add to that the cost of
a battery to extend the power for few hours at night, plus the cost of backup
diesel gensets since solar does not generate power at night and hardly produces
power on days with thick clouds and rain. Solar components plus battery plus
gensets cannot be cheap and power stability is not assured.
In a site inspection by
the Philippine and Rural Electric Cooperatives Association Inc. of some barangays
in Occidental Mindoro served by SPBC in November 2018, they found that
residents experienced an average of two- to three-hour brownouts plus frequent
on-and-off power outages every day, resulting in damaged appliances, and that
the rate charged started at a low P2.34/kilowatt hour (kWh) which later rose to
around P11/kWh.
Instead of favoring one
particular energy firm, we need more big conventional power plants. Compared to
more stable economies in Asia, the Philippines has among the lowest installed
power capacity and, by extension, among the lowest electricity generation. Our
capacity in 2016 was just one-half of that in Thailand, Vietnam, and Taiwan.
People who want “green
energy” and do not want to use electricity from fossil fuels without putting up
a rooftop solar system (and cut or murder nearby tall trees that provide shade
and reduce solar output) can actually get their wish via the retail competition
and open access (RCOA) provision of the EPIRA (Electric Power Industry Reform
Act) of 2001 (RA 9136). Contestable customers can choose their own licensed
retail electricity suppliers (RES) and specify that they should be provided
only renewable energy like hydro, geothermal, biomass, solar, or wind. The
price might be higher but they get what they want. This will also send a signal
to power investors to develop more renewables because customers are willing to
pay the higher price without the need for subsidies from all electricity
consumers nationwide, without need for new legislation.
We need more market
competition in power generation and retail supply. We need more big power
plants, conventional and renewables, more gencos and let them compete for
customers.
We should not have
enacted a law that gives a guaranteed price for renewables for 20 years via
feed in tariff (FIT) as this violates market competition and disempowers
consumers — they cannot say “No” to additional charges like the FIT-Allowance
slapped into their monthly electricity bill for 20 or 25 years.
The law is there — RE
Act of 2008 (RA 9513) — and it resulted in the upward price distortion in
energy prices.
We should not add more
energy distortions by having that “Solar para sa Politika” franchise bill
become a law. President Duterte should veto it.
Finally, the Supreme
Court should lift its TRO on the Energy Regulatory Commission resolutions on
RCOA’s implementation. The threshold for contestable customers should have been
down to 500 kilowatts or lower by now. The number of competing RES should be
plentier by now. And the choices of consumers for their power generators and suppliers
should be many, not few and restricted.
No comments:
Post a Comment