Failing Miserably

According to the Bloomberg New Energy Outlook (NEO), renewable energy will lord over the power mix by 2050.

The NEO notes that since the 1970s, fossil fuels have dominated with 60 to 70 percent of the global power generation, but this would soon come to an end.

By 2050, almost 50 percent of total power globally will come from solar and wind technology. Together with hydro, nuclear and other renewables, the total contribution of zero carbon power will be 71 percent.In contrast, fossil fuels will only account for 29 percent, down from its current 63 percent contribution.

The shift to 50 percent renewable energy power scenario is driven by the falling prices of solar PV, wind, and battery technologies. The average PV plant costs will fall by 71 percent by 2050 according to experts. My own personal experience has shown that. Wind is also expected to drop to 58 percent.

Saltwater-Battery-feature-image

A major shift to renewable energy is possible due partly to falling prices of battery storage. Photo c/o Edgy Labs

Battery capacity will receive a total of $548 billion in investments, which will account for its expected price drop. One of my business partners has invested in the flywheel battery storage technology and is experiencing a surge in demand for his batteries.

Indeed, the world is heading towards greater use of sustainable energy. How I wish we can say the same for our country.

It is no secret that the Philippines seems to be heading towards the opposite direction as one of our senators pointed out recently. In fact, just recently the Department of Energy (DOE) has recommended the importation of dirtier fuel, Euro-2 compliant type of fuels. The Philippines is now importing Euro-4 compliant, a much higher quality fuel. Euro 2 is cheaper because its quality is poorer. You get what you pay for.

Senator Loren Legarda, a staunch advocate of renewable energy, has lamented that the Philippines is failing miserably in implementing the Renewable Energy law passed 10 years ago.

In a speech, she stressed that “While many initially thought that the adoption of the RE law in December 2008 represented a firm and decisive policy position on the country’s shift to cleaner and indigenous forms of energy, stakeholders, to date, continue to grapple with mixed signals from those charged with implementing the RE law.”

Legarda added that the Philippines had increased its coal imports at a yearly average of 12.8 percent from 1989 to 2015.

From 2015 to 2016, coal imports volume was even higher by 16% from 17.3 metric tons to 20 metric tons.

She also lamented the growth of installed capacities of coal-fired plants which climbed by 87% from 3,967 MW in 2005 to 7,419 MW in 2016. Another 10,423 MW is in the pipeline.

In contrast, there has been a decline in the renewables’ share in 2016 from 32% from 33.5% in 2005, while coal climbed from 25% in 2005 to 35% in 2016.

Time and time again, renewable energy advocates like myself openly call out to the government to take serious measures to fulfill what the RE law requires.

Other countries including neighbors such as India are making significant progress in their goals to shift to greater use of renewables. Unfortunately, the Philippines is nowhere near its goal of sourcing 30 percent of power from clean sources.

Legarda said it well when she reminded us that it had taken 18 years to pass the law, but it seems harder to implement it: “It was hard then, but even more so now, to convince naysayers on the importance of renewable energy in the country’s development agenda…To date, those charged with implementing these policy mechanisms seem to want to continue the debate on matters decided upon by legislators ten years ago.”

Hopefully, those in charge see the need of implementing the RE law swiftly. Our recent experience with the monsoon rains in the second week of August, which left Metro Manila and nearby areas flooded should convince us that we need to take care of the environment. This includes following laws intended to spare us from the effects of climate change. Plus, of course, we need renewable power for a more sustainable economic growth.

References:

New Energy Outlook 2018: https://bnef.turtl.co/story/neo2018?teaser=true

http://www.bworldonline.com/legarda-cites-slipping-renewable-energy-share/

Such Folly

sulu pinterest

Modular nuclear plant for Sulu? Renewables is a much better option. Photo c/o pinterest

The local government unit (LGU) in Sulu is said to be looking at putting up a modular nuclear power plant (NPP).

A report by The Inquirer quoted Energy Department’s spokesperson and undersecretary Felix William saying, “Yes, Sulu. It’s actually small. They are looking at a modular facility.” The undersecretary, however, admitted that a modular nuclear plant is a remote possibility.

And Fuentebella is right to say so. After all, the suggestion is a folly.

For one, what we have are outdated legislative and regulatory frameworks to guide us in developing a nuclear power plant. Whoever suggested building a nuclear power plant in Sulu seems to have forgotten that our regulatory framework covering NPPs were created more than 50 years ago. However all these were either repealed or downgraded during President Cory’s time. In particular, Philippine Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) was downgraded to a Philippine National Research Institute (PNRI). PAEC was regulating the nuclear power development and operations including licensing of engineers.

The existing legislative framework in the regulation of nuclear technology in the country are the Science Act of 1958 and the Atomic Energy Regulatory Act of 1968 or RA 5207 where there are two different regulating agencies in the use of radiation, namely the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute (PNRI) and the Bureau of Health Devices and Technology (BHDT) under the Health Department.

The PNRI is in charge of regulating nuclear and radioactive materials while the BHDT governs the electrically generated radiating emitting devices in all the fields. Unfortunately, our current framework fails to define the regulatory responsibilities of nuclear plants. Neither of these bodies have the competence nor authority to regulate nuclear power.

Who then would issue a license to build and operate the nuclear facility since there is no licensing agency anymore? We need to create a new law that would define the responsibilities of each regulating agency in charge of nuclear power.

And even if we can pass a law quickly, there remains the question of human resources. In the first place, how much expertise do we have on nuclear technology locally? This leads me to my second point.

The Philippines lacks the technical skills for a nuclear power plant. There is a shortage of qualified experts and experienced workers in running an NPP. Those involved in building the Bataan power plant may no longer be around or have retired from work altogether.

This a known fact. The absence of qualified people is a gap that some lawmakers tried to address when they proposed the re-opening of the Bataan Power plant.

For example, House Bill 580 or the “Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) Operability Act” filed by the late Senator Mirriam Santiago had a provision mandating the creation and implementation of a training program for the management and operation of all technical aspects of the BNPP.

The same bill also proposed for the University of the Philippines (UP) to form a Nuclear Power Engineering Department under the College of Engineering, which should only be to “offered for enrollment to the top twenty percent (20%) of engineering graduates” of the university. The proposal also called for a separate course in UP that will specialize in nuclear power industry regulation.

The late senator obviously knew what she was proposing. Her senate bill recognized the lack of qualified people to build, run and regulate NPPs in this country and the need to recruit the brightest minds to handle nuclear energy. Up to this day, there remains a shortage of people to run and regulate nuclear power.

In the absence of local experts and experienced personnel, who will then build and run the NPPs? Are we to turn to foreigners and rely solely on their expertise? This raises the question of whether we should entrust the operations of a power plant entirely in the hands of foreigners. Our current laws, unless exempted by another law, prohibits foreigners from practising their profession in the country.

Plus, let us not forget that Sulu remains to be a conflict area where bombings and gunfights are constant. Keep in mind that an accidental release of radioactive material from a nuclear could cause death, acute health effects and even long-term environmental consequences. Putting a nuclear plant in the middle of a war zone may have dire repercussions. The idea of putting a nuclear power plant in a location with persistent bombing and shooting is absurd.

So, where did the suggestion of using a modular nuclear power plant come from? Was this the idea of a person or entity who has yet to hear the benefits of renewable energy? Have we forgotten that the Philippines including conflict areas in Mindanao are well endowed with natural resources that can be utilized to generate power?

We should focus on what is doable. Banking on indigenous renewable energy and distributed generation is the sensible alternative rather than the modular nuclear power plant.

Taking Action

All over the world, calls are being made to shift from traditional forms of energy to more sustainable ones in the hope of saving our environment and making energy available for all. In response, various sectors have taken drastic actions and are making great progress in their shift to renewable energy.

The achievements of the private and public sector in transitioning to greener forms of power in recent years are significant. The numbers for 2017 alone are a testament to both sectors commitment to add and use more renewable energy.

Last year was a record-breaking year as renewable power generation capacity had its biggest annual increase of nine percent with an estimated 178 GW added capacity, according to REN21’s study, Renewables 2018 Global Status Report.

More renewable power was added than fossil fuels as renewables accounted for 70 percent of the overall combined global generating capacity. Investments in RE for 2017 reached $279 billion, up from the recorded $274 billion in 2016 as well.

The figures from corporate buying of renewable energy are admirable, too.

For one, the International Renewable Energy Agency report, Corporate Sourcing of Renewable Energy: Market and Industry Trends showed that firms across 75 countries sourced a total of 463 terawatt-hours from renewables in 2017. This volume is enough to power up a country equivalent to the total demand of France.

The report found out that half of the 2,400 large companies analyzed for the study are voluntarily and actively buying or investing in self-generation of renewable energy for their operations. Plus, 200 of these firms source at least 50 percent of their power needs from renewables. “Renewable energy sourcing has become a mainstream pillar of business strategy in recent years,” IRENA Director-General Adnan Z. Amin stressed.

Environmental and sustainability concerns, social responsibility, reputation management, and economic and financial objectives are the top reasons cited by corporations on why they are making the shift to renewable power. “While environmental concerns initiated this growing trend, the strengthening business case and price stability offered by renewables can deliver a competitive advantage to corporations, and support sustainable growth,” Amin added.

There’s definitely an increased appetite for renewable energy as other countries are also gearing up to accommodate more renewables such as in the case of Vietnam.

Recently, Vietnam Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc reiterated his country ’s commitment to shift to renewable power in an interview with Reuters.

He announced that Vietnam is set to increase electricity generated from renewable sources to 101 kWh billion by 2020 and to 186 kWh billion by 2030 from 58 billion kWh recorded in 2015. The country also aims to reduce the use of coal and petroleum products by 40 million tons by 2030.

Phuc said that the government has already prepared incentive mechanisms as well as policies to promote local and foreign investments into renewable energy development.

The chief executive stressed that this shift is needed despite the country’s push for more economic growth,“It is important that we will not pursue economic growth at the expense of the environment,” Phuc noted.

turkey

Soma Kolin power plant in Turkey’s western province of Manisa. Survey says more Turkish favor greener forms of energy despite the country’s dependence on coal
Photo c/o: http://www.aa.com.tr

There also seems to be greater awareness and appreciation for renewables among citizens in other countries. Turkish, for example, favor greener forms of energy than coal despite Turkey’s dependence on this form of power. The country sources more than 70 percent of power need from fossil fuels since the government named coal as its preferred fuel for the growing energy demand.

A survey conducted by climate information hub İklim Haber and research company Konda revealed that more than half of its citizen oppose the building of additional coal-fired plants as 75 percent of the participants are worried about climate change.

In the Philippines, our government claims to have the appetite for more renewables in our power mix. But that hunger is not correctly matched by government’s actions. It is highly likely that we will remain starved for cleaner forms of energy for now as we have moved down our renewable energy targets.

The Energy Department had announced the target of sourcing 35 percent of our overall power needs from RE by 2030. This goal, however, has been recently pushed back to 2040. This is not surprising as data from BMI report showed that there would be a 10 percent increase of coal in our energy mix in the next decade from below 50 percent in 2017 to more than 55 percent by 2027.

That is unfortunate since now is an excellent time for the Philippines to add more renewables and to take advantage of the falling costs of renewable power prices. Plus, of course, we need stable energy at reasonable prices as we try to industrialize. But then, again, we will remain hungry for cheaper and sustainable forms of power for now.

References:

Renewables 2018, Global Status Report, http://www.ren21.net/gsr-2018/
http://www.vir.com.vn/vietnam-well-positioned-to-develop-renewable-energy-says-pm-59892.html

http://www.climatechangenews.com/2018/06/05/83-turks-favour-renewable-energy-coal-survey-finds/

http://www.irena.org/newsroom/pressreleases/2018/May/Corporate-Sourcing-of-Renewables-Growing-Taking-Place-in-75-Countries

A Timely Reminder

Three years ago, Pope Francis made a strong appeal to the world to address the growing problem of climate change. In his 180-page encyclical, the pope stressed that “Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day.”

Pope Francis recently made the same appeal with investors, oil executives and Vatican experts during an unprecedented conference at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.

The pontiff had stressed that climate change must be addressed soon and the world has to use a power mix that will combat pollution, promote social justice, and combat pollution. “But that energy should also be clean, by a reduction in the systematic use of fossil fuels. Our desire to ensure energy for all must not lead to the undesired effect of a spiral of extreme climate changes due to a catastrophic rise in global temperatures, harsher environments and increased levels of poverty,” the pope said.

He reminded his audience that development must not come at the expense of the environment “Civilisation requires energy, but energy use must not destroy civilisation.”

The head of the Catholic Church has never wavered in his appeal to the world to make the planet a better place by saving the environment. His recent plea is also timely as studies and reports show that the world has to do more in fighting the effects of climate change.

The recent United Nation (UN), a yearly report entitled ‘The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2018” concluded that climate change along with inequality and conflict are the primary factors in growing hunger and displacement around the world.

The figures in the report showed that the world has a long way to go in combating the effects of climate change including the health hazards. After all, the World Health Organization once tagged climate change as “the defining issue for the 21st century.”

The UN study revealed that in 2016, around the world, 91 percent of the urban population were breathing dirty air or air that failed to meet the WHO Air Quality Guidelines. What’s worse is that more than half of the said population were exposed to air pollution levels that are at least 2.5 times higher than the safety standard. It is not surprising then that around 4.2 million people died due to high levels of ambient air pollution.

The same report showed that renewable power’s share in the final energy consumption had a moderate increase from 17.3 percent in 2014 to only 17.5 percent in 2015.

That’s a sad figure, especially when the more significant use of renewable energy can save lives. Let us remember that both coal and oil power have greater death prints, or what energy expert James Conca defines as the “number of people killed by one kind of energy or another per kilowatt hour (kWh) produced.”

In fact, the mortality rate of coal, which is derived by dividing the trillion kilowatt hour of use, is 100,000 when we get 50 percent or our energy needs from this source. Likewise, oil has a mortality rate of 36,000 for every eight percent of the energy it supplies.

Apparently, the growth of renewables in the world’s energy mix had been slow and more people are literally dying because of it. Clearly, more must be done to combat climate change, which includes developing and using more cleaner forms of energy.

Let us heed the Pope’s call, shall we?

References:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/09/pope-francis-tells-oil-bosses-world-must-wean-itself-off-fossil-fuels

http://sdg.iisd.org/news/sdg-report-2018-finds-conflict-climate-change-inequality-hindering-progress/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/#16e2ea1b709b

 

 

 

 

Shared Business View

Addressing climate change is the responsibility of all. Luckily, big global brands are doing their share and choosing to make the shift to cleaner forms of energy.

 For example, last April, tech giants Apple and Google announced that their operations are already running on 100 percent renewable energy. Fortunately, other firms are also stepping up and working double time to source their power needs from greener sources of energy.

 In fact, there are more than 100 influential global companies who have publicly committed to 100% renewable energy through the RE100 initiative. This collaboration of the world’s biggest brands, mostly tech companies was launched in 2014 and have ever since been working on achieving their goals of powering up their operations with renewables.

Last year, other influential non-tech companies have also joined the drive to use greater RE  such as General Motors, Kimberly Clark, General Mills, Starbucks and Target. In total, some 2.78 gigawatts worth of renewables were bought by the RE100’s members in 2017.

These large global brands remain relentless in their pursuit of achieving their targets. This year, members of RE100 are set to break their record by purchasing 1.96GW of renewables. If sustained, corporate RE buying could surpass the peak of 3.12GW recorded in 2015 as reported by the Business Renewable Center.

 One of RE100’s members, Microsoft also made the headlines this April by announcing the largest solar power deal in the US corporate history after buying some 315 megawatts from sPower. The purchase will power the tech firm’s datacenter and cloud business operation in Virginia. To date, Microsoft has already invested a total of 1.2 GW of RE, an amount that can light up roughly 100 million bubs

The declining costs of renewables and companies’ desire for a sustainable energy solution are what drive big business to commit and purchase cleaner forms of energy according to  Kevin Haley, marketing manager at the Rocky Mountain Institute’s Business Renewable Center. “The corporate renewables market is now seeing deals from all industry sectors…… they believe they need to be part of the sustainability solution.”

Addressing climate change is just one of the reasons why large global brands are signing up for more RE purchases. There’s another reason: cost-effectiveness.

These brands’ leadership recognize that sustainable sources of energy will save them money in the long run.  Business leaders understand that choosing to invest in RE will save them money as it eliminates the risk of price volatility of fossil fuels.

 For example,  Urs Hölzle, Senior Vice President, Technical Infrastructure of Google stressed that  “Electricity costs are one of the largest components of our operating expenses at our data centers, and having a long-term stable cost of renewable power provides protection against price swings in energy.”

Autodesk’s President and CEO, Lynelle Cameron echoes the view of Hölzle when she said: “By powering our business with 100% renewable electricity we will not only reduce our carbon footprint but give ourselves a competitive advantage as we protect ourselves against future rises in energy costs.”

For years, I have been trying to convince a great number of people that RE is not necessarily the more expensive energy option. It is refreshing to know that big businesses around the world share my views.

Sadly, many in the Philippines fail to recognize the benefits of renewable energy and still subscribe to the notion of the least cost option, which only considers the upfront costs. We are still caught in the belief of many energy planners and even our regulators that RE will cost us more, and refuse to realize that price spikes and depletion of fossil fuels will set us back.

Lowering energy costs while saving the environment are the two benefits of choosing greener power. Global companies and governments around the world are already seeing the potential of renewable energy and making big bets on cleaner forms of power as RE technology prices drop fast. What else can we do to convince many Filipinos that RE is the key to sustainable and cheap energy?

References:

 https://www.cnet.com/news/renewable-energy-solar-wind-lures-us-big-businesses/

 https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/04/microsoft-just-signed-the-largest-corporate-solar-agreement-in-us-history/

 ACCELERATING CHANGE: how corporate users are transforming the renewable energy market. RE 100 Annual Report 2017

 

 

Hampering Our Growth

Southeast Asian countries are at different stages of economic development and will have higher demand for energy. In fact, according to the Global Energy & CO2 Status Report published by the International Energy Agency or IEA, Southeast Asia (SEA) accounted for eight percent of global energy growth last 2017.

An earlier report released by the same agency, the Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2017  revealed that the region’s energy demand is likely to grow by roughly two thirds and account for a tenth of the world demand by 2040. Installed capacity is set to increase from 240 GW in 2017 to 565 GW by 2040 with coal accounting for  40 percent of the growth. This will push Southeast Asia to become a major importer of fossil fuels by 2040. The IEA predicts that the region’s annual net import bill will be over $300 billion, which is equivalent to four percent of the SEA’s total gross domestic product.

The IEA, however stressed that the region can still avoid incurring such a huge net import amount if governments implement policies that will reduce the demand for energy and increasing the use of renewables. Based on IEA’s estimates, Southeast Asia can lower the import bill by $180 billion if  the region increases Renewable Energy’s share in the mix by 20 percent.

The agency stressed that the increasing energy demand both pose as a challenge and an opportunity as governments can opt to go for affordable policy and technology options. ” The rapidly declining cost of wind and solar PV provides an opportunity to help meet growing electricity demand in a cost-effective and sustainable manner  while also helping spur local manufacturing industries.”

IEA also noted that attracting investments in RE will be crucial to meet the region’s energy requirements as Southeast Asia will need some $2.7 trillion to $2.9 trillion in investments by 2040.

For his part, International Renewable Energy Agency or IRENA director-general Adnan Z Amin noted that Southeast Asian countries should do a better job in attracting higher investments for RE development.

He stressed that despite the falling costs of RE technologies around the world, financing for RE in SEA countries remain a challenge given the lack of clear policy and regulatory frameworks for investors. He urges SEA countries’ leaders and regulators to come up with clear and reliable long-term policies to attract financing for the sector: “Basically what we’re lacking right now is a sense of government resolve and a sense of adequate, reliable policy framework that allows the private sector to come in…The market opportunity has to be created by policy and regulations.”

 

eco business

Southeast Asia can save $180 billion if more renewables are used by 2040. Photo c/o www.eco-business.com

 

Unfortunately, the observation of the IRENA president reflects the state of our policies and regulatory environment of the energy sector in the Philippines. The regulations here in the country are far from friendly to RE developers and do scare potential investors.

For one, the foreign ownership restriction in our constitution prevents investors from coming in to help us build more RE plants. As I have suggested in the past, it is time for us to consider allowing foreign investors to provide the equipment and technologies needed convert our resources into power while limiting their ownership on the natural resources. After all,  building RE power plants is an expensive undertaking and there are very few local businessmen who can afford to develop RE.

Aside from our problem in the foreign ownership, our regulators and even some of the players in the sector fail to realize the importance of renewables on the economy.  As I have been discussing thoroughly in this blog, we need to realize that the concept of least cost– where we only look at the upfront cost of building our power plants– hinders RE from becoming mainstream in the country.

We seem to forget that the risks of foreign exchange fluctuations, global fossil fuel prices and other market conditions will cost us more in the future. Our country cannot fully realize the benefits of RE unless we appreciate  the crucial role it plays in ensuring both energy security and equity. This is unfortunate for us as our country has been blessed with natural resources we can tap to help us achieve equitable economic growth.

Plus, the world is heading towards distributed generation and smart grids with the advancement of technology and yet the Philippines still rely on central generation. Unfortunately, we still lack rules on distributed generation and remain focused on distribution monopoly controlling the development of embedded generation. This hampers the development of RE.

Our government should pave the way for a more flexible design of a distribution system that can immediately supply the power demands and at the same time deliver the preferred sources of power to the customers.  Our distribution companies should have intelligent systems capable of accommodating renewable energy sources. We need to take a good look at our distribution system and make some drastic changes if we are serious in our desire to bring more renewables in our energy mix.

These are just are some of the problematic  issues that the sector needs to address and there are more.  Around the world, developments are taking place to accommodate greater use RE, and unless our country and regulators are able to address the myriad of problems hounding the energy and hampering more investments in renewable development, then the Philippines will surely be left behind by the rest of the world.

References:

Southeast Asia Energy Outlook 2017: https://www.iea.org/southeastasia/

Global Energy & CO2 Status Report
The latest trends in energy and emissions in 2017:https://www.iea.org/geco/

https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/asean-business/clear-reliable-policy-direction-in-asean-needed-to-attract-renewables-investment

A More Cost Effective Alternative

Even before he assumed office, US President Donald Trump vowed to bring back jobs to the coal sector. Shortly, after elections, he signed an executive order to overturn the Clean Power Plan to revive the coal industry.

However, it seems like his efforts did not stop US utilities from shutting down coal-fired plants. Last year, 27-coal-fired plants with a combined 22 gigawatts (GW) capacity were announced for closure and early this year, energy companies have said that that they will close down at least five coal plants with more than a 1000 GW total capacity.

These announcements of closure are not surprising. Coal generation in the US has declined by 28 percent from 2012 to 2015 as more energy companies realized that shifting to Renewable Energy (RE) is the most cost-effective solution in bringing down power rates. In fact, several US utility companies are set to retire their coal plants and replace them with RE ones.

For example, the Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM), the largest energy company in New Mexico, which boasts of roughly half a million customers will start retiring coal by the year 2022. PNM, which generated approximately 56 percent of its power from coal in 2015 will begin shutting down coal plants as it plans to produce all its power from solar energy, natural gas and even wind power in a bid to improve their financials and lower rates.

PNM’s Integrated Resource plan for 2017-2023 released April last year concluded that phasing out coal completely was the best way for the firm to match the demand for power with the lowest cost in the coming years. According to PNM’s estimates, the company’s most cost-effective portfolio is to increase the use of renewables to 36 percent and 33 percent from natural gas by 2035 from 11% and 6% respectively in 2017.

Similarly, Wisconsin’s largest utility, We Energies decided to shut down its 1.2 GW Pleasant Prairie coal plant this year. The energy company with its 2.2 million customers, sourced 50.6 percent of its capacity from coal in 2015 and will replace a portion of the size with its 350 MW solar power plant by 2020.

Likewise, in Texas, Luminant, an energy firm that supplies some 18 GW of power has decided to close its 1.8 GW Monticello power plant in January as well as two other coal plants with a combined generation company of 2.3 GW and will replace the lost capacities from coal plants with wind power. So far, the firm can generate 21 GW of wind power and additional 14-27 GW solar power by the year 2030.

These are just some of the major utilities in the US that are now moving away from coal and shift to cleaner forms of energy, and there are more. After all, contrary to those opposed to RE, it is possible to go 100 percent renewables.

We do not have to look far to see such an example. Recently, the local government of Guimaras, the small island province in the Visayas announced its “Guimaras 100% Coal Free Declaration,” a ban on coal-fired plants in the province. In his speech, Guimaras Governor Samuel Gumarin said that “The people of Guimaras have embraced renewables over dirty, polluting energy. We want to show that a sustainable-development path, powered by renewable energy, is not only possible but more viable.”

guimaras

Windmills in Guimaras. The province declared a complete ban on coal power. Photo c/o http://www.evwind.es

 

Guimaras is not the only province in the country that favors RE. Last March, the Bohol local government through its Bohol Energy Development Advisory Group or BEDAG has decided to prevent the building of new coal plants in the province. In a statement, the BEDAG said: “the BEDAG and the entire Provincial Government of Bohol are fully intent on maintaining the sanctity and pristine condition of the environment.”

The development came after the provincial government via an SP ordinance has declared environmental impact as the most important consideration for the selection process for interested energy developers as part of the province’s energy development program. The provincial government will institutionalize its “No Coal” stand through an ordinance.

The above examples only show that it is possible to shift from coal power to cleaner energy. Unfortunately, while others are already shutting down coal-fired plants to lower energy costs, we in the Philippines are busy building them since 90 percent of the roughly 7300 MW capacity approved or already for construction by the Energy Department are coal-fired power plants. This despite calls from experts, world and business leaders to work extra hard to make the shift to greener forms of energy possible.

I wonder how long and what will it take to convince others that RE is the practical choice for all of us.

References:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/energyinnovation/2017/05/18/embracing-the-coal-closure-trend-economic-solutions-for-utilities-facing-a-crossroads/#1f05af1b1c99
http://www.iloilotoday.com/2018/02/guimaras-declares-coal-free-receives.html

http://www.boholchronicle.com.ph/2018/04/02/govt-blinks-no-to-coal-power-in-bohol/