Clean energy needs builders, not scapegoats

Filipinos have every right to worry about electricity prices. So when the government awards large energy projects that consumers will ultimately pay for, the public deserves clear answers: Are these projects needed? Are the rates fair? Was the process properly reviewed? Are consumers protected?

- MARY ANN LL. REYES

These are the right questions, and a recent story on the third Green Energy Auction (GEA-3) deserves credit for raising them. To be clear, this is one report from one media outlet, not a groundswell of public accusation. But because a single story can influence how the public reads an entire auction, its framing is very important. Questioning the process is journalism. Insinuating collusion is an accusation that demands proof, not pattern-matching.

The Department of Energy is currently implementing a 10-year GEA program that will offer at least 25 gigawatts of additional renewable energy capacity through annual competitive auctions beginning this year, with project deliveries starting next year and running through 2035. It aims to expand the country’s renewable energy portfolio, strengthen long-term power supply reliability, and support national targets of 35 percent renewable energy share by 2030 and 50 percent by 2040.

GEA 3 covers renewable energy technologies that are not eligible for feed-in tariff incentives, such as geothermal energy, impounding hydropower and pumped-storage hydropower.

Only three geothermal plants qualified for the 100-MW procurement target, while only three bidders participated in one pumped-storage hydropower lot.

Collusion has a precise meaning: companies secretly agreeing to fix prices, rig bids, or divide the market. It is not proven by similar prices alone, nor by the fact that only a few big companies joined.