Whenever the costs of energy increase dramatically as they’ve done these last weeks, the typical responses echoed from energy authorities revolve around basically the same crusted refrain, so much that they’ve become not only predictable but verge on cliché.
It is not surprising to expect prepackaged responses. The clichés reflect the capacities of those who govern. As they hardly vary, never mind the specific peculiarities of every episode, we’ve come to expect governance close to catatonic, ineffective and impotent.
The only difference is in the delivery. Some are shouted, complete with arguments exclaimed like invectives. Others are spewed like retaliatory gunfire, as if the concerns of a severely concerned public are neither warranted nor justified.
In these responses there are three major categories. The first is a declaration that the authorities will summon energy respondents to shed light on their pricing. The second is to parrot the crusted provisions of the deregulation laws. The third is one we’ve chosen to tackle in our continuing analysis of what fails energy governance.
Simplistically, the third is a response to the question, “Short of constantly hauling energy companies to a command conference only to be slapped back on all four cheeks with the tenets of deregulation, what else can energy authorities do?”
As predictable as the first two responses are, the third evokes long-term measures to establish energy security through renewables. The stock reply is dejà vu. We’ve heard it before and we are hearing it again. Again and again.
We all know that there is a major wind farm in the north that is moderately alleviating supply constraints, providing as it does some degree of base-load capacity.
We also know that in the south, the Deep South for that matter, there are mini-solar facilities introduced through a program funded by the Americans, a former American independent power producer that has since divested from our economy and an American equipment supplier. That it is concentrated in the south makes sense when we see the growing population of American servicemen in sharp contrast to the increasingly exponential and above-average death rate of locals, innocent villagers, Christians and non-Christians.
In between our northern shores and the porous south, in that large swathe of real estate between Ilocos and Basilan where most of the energy consumers are, there is not much of viable renewable power to justify the rhetoric of the energy authorities who justify their employment in a largely deregulated energy regime.
If through deregulation in both the oil and electricity-generation sectors, energy authorities are practically useless, then their redeeming importance must lie in renewables development. Unfortunately, their prioritization of renewable-energy sources as a main feature of their remnant career is perplexing. Sans wind turbines in Ilocos and solar energy in Basilan, why haven’t renewable facilities blanketed an economy several times victimized by high energy costs from the more traditional sources?
To answer, let us briefly review the detail of renewable-energy facilities as they are actually operating or realistically proposed.
On the question of petroleum substitutes, while we’ve started on a 10-percent ethanol level for motor-vehicle fuels, most, if not all, of the supply is imported and subject to the vagaries of the exchange markets and the vulnerabilities of ethanol suppliers.
On the matter of wind farms, while these are fashionable and are, indeed, indigenous and renewable with competitively low operating costs, it’s up-front capital requisites remain prohibitively high. At a tad over $1 million per megawatt, because viable capacities do not yet extend beyond 70 megawatts, economies of scale are limited.
Moreover, one of the hidden capital expenditures (capex) are sunk costs for research and development (R&D) where at least two years of pre-operating wind studies, wind behavior and wind orientations are needed whether the project pushes through or not.
Simply add these to the $1-million-per-megawatt capex and a developer would need extremely deep pockets to be competitive against a similar fossil-based facility. Note that diesel-fired facilities can technically be constructed within months and would be up and running while the R&D costs of wind farms wallow in a state of economic uncertainty.
As for solar power, one of the largest facilities is in Cagayan de Oro, where the privately operated plant augments power from sources that include hydroelectric, coal and bunker-C. The facility is not a base-load plant and requires co-generation, as most solar facilities cannot handle industrial demand.
In areas of Mindanao where solar facilities are primary power sources, generators are small and can only handle limited household uses. For instance, solar generators cannot operate air conditioning, ironing or even color-television sets. In some remote areas where solar energy finds its niche, financially constrained users tend to hock the batteries integral to a solar-energy system. One calamity and these are readily exchanged for food and medicine or the materiality of a sudden birth, death or marriage in the family.
Indigenous coal-fired facilities, while not renewable, are often misconceived as part of the energy-security mix. This is not surprising given that some officials push for its proliferation despite its lethal toxicity. Unfortunately, local coal does not only have lower heating rates than those imported, but it is also more toxic even as officials cite using “clean coal” technology or circulating fluidized beds (CFB) thought to control sulfur and nitrogen oxides.
That may be true, but there is no such thing as “clean coal,” the nomenclature being part of a paid publicist’s lexicon under the general heading of “greenwashing.” CFB facilities are not only 1.5 times more expensive than regular coal-fired plants, they also fail to control arsenic, cyanide, mercury and cadmium emissions which can be far more toxic than sulfuric acid or nitrates.
So why do energy officials continue to harp on renewables despite the fact that they’ve done little to make these viable? Perhaps because when they walk their talk, huff and puff, they may actually be pushing for methane as an alternative fuel.
< Prev Next >Click
No comments:
Post a Comment