"Something of monumental significance has come into the picture: Climate change."
A phrase that is often used in discussions regarding governance and policymaking is “kicking the can down the road.” It is a picturesque phrase, and it very aptly describes the situation where, instead of enacting needed policies, policymakers find reasons for not doing so and leave the tough decision making to their successors.
One area of economic policymaking where successive administrations have been engaging in kicking-the-can-down-the-road is the mix of this country’s energy supply. The need to decide on the composition of this country’s energy mix continues to be dodged; that tough decision is poised from one administration to the next. Kicking the can down the road may have been tolerable government behavior for a long time, but that is no longer the case. Something of monumental significance has come into the picture: Climate change.
The warming of the globe has put an end to the energy policymakers’ leave-it-to-the-next-administration mindset.
Several developments in recent years have placed Philippine energy policymaking at the crossroads. One is this country’s adherence to the Paris Climate Accord, which has now been strengthened by the US’ coming re-adherence to it. Another development is the increasing realization by the main financiers of this country’s coal-fired power plants – the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank – that their energy-sector lending should be supportive of the goals of the Paris Climate Accord.
A third development that has been causing energy policymakers to take a hard look at Philippine energy policy is this country’s steadily-increasing vulnerability to natural disasters caused by global warming: Typhoons, floods, droughts and rising temperatures.
Under the Paris Climate Accord, the Philippines has committed itself to a level of carbon emissions by 2030. Critics of the Department of Energy’s continued grants of authority for the construction of coal-fired plants say that, with the DOES’s present attitude toward coal-fired power plants, there is no way the Philippines can fulfill its commitment under the Paris agreement. As things stand, this country is not on the way to doing so.
Apart from their desire to be supportive of the Paris Climate Accord, the multilateral financiers of this country’s coal-fired power projects, especially ADB, are increasingly being targeted by the critics of present Philippine energy policy. The financiers are being told to put their money where their development principles are.
The severe weather disturbances of 2020, especially Rolly and Ulysses, have put even more pressure on the Department of Energy to review its policy on coal-fired plants with a view to reducing regulatory approvals for such projects. With every year that passes, and with every new Rolly and Yolanda, the pressure intensifies.
This presents a very serious dilemma for this country’s energy policymakers. Coal-fired plants will have to provide the baseload for Philippine energy supply in the medium term if an energy deficit is to be avoided. But they realize that the changing global situation requires them to move energy policy increasingly in the direction of renewable energy.
It is a dilemma they will have to resolve soon.
