Taking Online Courses (Part 2): Philippine Energy Situation: Is it aligned with the Paris Agreement of 2015?

Hi, guys! This is Part 2 of my Taking Online Courses blog.

As I've mentioned before, I am taking Politics and Economics of International Energy. It's a cool course which is being taught by a world renowned economist (I said this because he has a Wikipedia page), Prof. Giacomo Luciani.

This course is designed to be taken within 8 weeks and it focuses on discussions regarding all types of energy sources, the energy trends and scenarios based on the Paris Agreement of 2015, policies for decarbonisation, energy security, energy equity and of course, environmental sustainability.

All throughout the course, I was becoming more and more scared of all the possible outcomes in the future. I understand now that Climate Change is not something we can just shrug about or retort with a snide comment. It's goddamn serious and we're feeling the realness of it as the years go by. 

Because energy is something that we humans can't really live without these days, it's important to address the pressing issues of aligning our demand for energy with our environmental goals.

The Philippines, as a country which still relies heavily on coal (~45% in 2015 of our energy consumption is being supplemented by coal as per this site), is not helping to promote the call for change to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement. As a matter of fact, I think the current DOE Secretary is blind to the facts of where we, as a country, are going in relation to the Energy Trilemma Index. According to an article published by Philstar Global on September 1, 2019, the Secretary said that we are not going to close our doors to coal power projects and that:

“The Philippines, in the (Energy) Trilemma Index (of the World Energy Council), is number one in environment sustainability,  energy security and accessibility. These are the areas we need to improve,” he said.

I mean c'mon, I don't know what he's smoking but I might want to try that. The statement is confusing. We are number one? That's not what I saw in the full report of the World Energy Trilemma Index 2019. We're not number 1 in the world, not even in Asia, even in the most improved country.

I mean, I am all for energy security but saying that the Philippines 'will not implement a moratorium on coal power plant developments until we attained energy security' is just plain stupid. I know, in an economic point of view, using coal is by far cheaper than any other source of power and electricity because it can be locally produced or imported cheaply in SEA but are we willing to take the risk and brace ourselves on the consequences of coal's environmental impact?

I kinda agree to the sentiments of Murang Kuryente, a consumer group in the energy sector, who said that the Philippines is one of the few countries in the world that insists in constructing new coal-fired power plants despite the global consensus of turning against the use of coal. Hell, even Germany already promised that by 2038, coal will not be utilized anymore. These coal-fired power plant will be operated for 20-40 years. Imagine being one of the few countries in the world by 2060 who still utilizes coal and emits considerable amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. For shame, Philippines.

I also don't quite get the obsession with setting up a Nuclear Power-plant. I know that it's an opportunity to corrupt big amounts of public funds but I think that it's not the right direction for the Philippines especially if we're talking about "Pressurized Boiling Water Reactor". I mean, even I, a lowly, opinionated and not-so-smart geoscientist know that we're in for disaster if do try to build this kind of power-plants. I believe in our scientist but not so much to our fault system, lol.

BUT, if we're talking about smaller power-plant models, nuclear batteries that can last 30-40 years or even an investment on a Floating Nuclear Power Plant strategically situated in our territories in the West Philippines Sea, go for it. Just don't build the large nuclear power plants. That's a recipe for disaster considering the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan last 2011, even major European countries such as Sweden and Germany turned their back to this type of energy.

I mean, I am all up for diversification but please, focus more on renewable energy, natural gas (it has cleaner burn but very hard to transport and expensive to store) and advanced biofuels and even oil before we reach the Peak Oil demand.

We are now suffering considerable 'market failure' because pollution cost is not being imposed on emitters/polluters which we're supposed to do as early as the turn of the century. If we keep on sticking to our usual habits and don't find ways to limit or even eradicate our carbon footprints, a really bleak future is looming for the human kind.

As I've said to people I talk to in the internet, the earth will never end. Whatever happens, it will stand to harsh geologic events and climate change. The people in it will die, though, and that's what we need to prepare for if we don't change our ways.

Hasta la proxima.