(The Philippine Star)
(Part 1)
The cost of electricity
in the Philippines
For the consumers, the
cost is measured in pesos per kilowatt-hours that appear in the monthly bills.
There have been record
high increases following petitions before the Supreme Court and due to clearing
prices set at the country’s trading floor for electricity, the Wholesale,
Electricity Spot Market or WESM.
Experts believe,
however, that the true cost of electricity could be higher because not many
people take into account the impact of coal, which is the main source of power
in the Philippines
To illustrate, in 2013,
coal-fired power plants accounted for 5,568 megawatts in installed capacity,
whereas oil-based power plants come in a far second with an installed capacity
of 3,353 MW.
Natural gas power
plants, meanwhile, have a total installed capacity of 2,862 MW, while
geothermal account for 1,868 MW of installed capacity.
The Philippines
The renewable energy
sources, meanwhile, account for 3,521 MW for the hydropower plants; 33 MW for
the wind; 119 MW for biomass and one MW for solar.
The data is based on a
report from the Department of Energy as of March 2014.
While coal plant owners
insist that the use of coal is much cleaner than before, Climate Change
commissioner Naderev Saño, as well as environmental groups like Greenpeace, say
that there is no such thing as “clean coal.”
“Coal will always be
dirty because even with technology to control air pollution, the process still
produces coal ash, which when disposed improperly can contaminate the
environment with heavy metals,” Saño told The STAR.
He also explained that
the water used for scrubbing smoke stacks or in the ash ponds have to be
disposed and pose a dangerous risk to human health.
“When viewed from a
value chain perspective, coal has to be extracted from coal mines, usually
through open pit mining that leaves irreversible damage and creates black
wastelands. As such, there can be relatively “cleaner” coal technologies but it
can never be truly ‘clean,’ Saño said.
As such Saño said, coal
burning for power generation remains the main reason for heat-trapping gases
that cause anthropogenic climate change.
Saño recognized that
there have been gains in reducing the pollution coming from coal plants, but
noted that these are still not enough.
“As a technology, there
have been gains in reducing the pollution coming from coal plants but the
band-aid measures at the end of the pipe have very prohibitive costs and only
in countries with strict air quality regulations would the pollution control
investments make business sense,” he said.
Because coal is a
cheaper option compared to other forms of fuel, many opt to rely on this fuel.
“Unfortunately, these
environmental and public health concerns are externalities and are not
considered in the economic equation. For many developing economies like the Philippines
The non-government
Greenpeace, as expected, maintained that there’s no such thing as clean coal.
“They always claim that
there is clean coal. The truth is there is no such thing as clean coal. The
technology that is used is more advanced in order to lessen the emissions, but
in truth there are still emissions. The emissions may be lower, but that
doesn’t mean the emissions are gone. There are other factors too such as coal
ash. The process might be cleaner, but it doesn’t mean you can actually claim
it’s clean coal. It’s a misnomer,” said Greenpeace climate change campaigner
Reuben Muni.
Muni believes the
solution is for government to promote renewable energy (RE), which authorities
say are dependent on the specific energy source such as sun and water.
“That’s another myth on
RE. A lot of the myths being peddled by the coal industry are just myths. One
of the common misconceptions is that there is only one source but if you talk
about power generation by RE you can talk about the energy mix. For example,
you can have both solar and wind in one place. In some places, that’s possible.
It’s also possible to have solar and hydro in one place.
What is lacking is
information, which is why some communities think it’s impossible,” he said.
“What the government
should do is to push for the development of RE,” he added.
The Department of Energy
(DOE), however, is doing exactly that. It provides incentives to RE proponents
under the so-called feed-in-tariff (FIT) system.
The FIT regime
is a form of incentive for renewable energy players.
Feed-in tariffs offer
cost-based compensation to renewable energy players among other perks.
The FIT rate
approved by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), the power regulator are as
follows: P9.68 per kilowatt-hour for solar; P8.53 per kWh for wind, P6.63 per
kWh for biomass and P5.90 per kWh for hydropower projects
Aside from providing
incentives to RE proponents, Greenpeace’s Muni said the government should also
stop approving coal contracts.
“Definitely, the
government should stop approving coal fired power plants. It’s also possible to
revoke permits issued for new power plants. They can do more than that especially
in terms of information. There is a lot of misinformation. They should also
have a one-stop shop for RE applications to speed up the process,” Muni said.
I think that the
government should really prioritize RE especially development of RE facilities
not just large scale but community based RE facilities. It’s the more suitable
model.
No comments:
Post a Comment