Rural Electrification

Hideo Semba
JICA Study Team
 Contents

1. Objective
2. Workflow & Organization
3. Present Situation of Barangay Electrification
4. Proposed Plan of Barangay Electrification
5. Selection Method
6. Database
7. Summary
 Collaboration Work on Preparing
Rural Electrification (R/E) Plan

DOE : Main
R/E Plan Preparation

NPC-SPUG
NEA
JICA Team
Discuss Concept & Step for R/E Plan
Draw Work Flow for R/E Plan
Prepare Map for Project Monitoring etc
Basic Concept of R/E Promotion (On / Off Grid)

Significance of Electrification Rural Development

Construction of Grid Network Social Infrastructure

Issues
Huge Investment Low Demand in Rural Area
Long Time
Not Feasible

Advice
Efficient Combination of Grid
Extension and Stand-Alone System
 Objective and Situation of
Rural Electrification Plan

?
? Total
Total Electrification
Electrification of
of the
the Philippine
Philippine
?
? Promote
Promote Private
Private Investment
Investment inin
Missionary
Missionary Electrification
Electrification
?
? Commercialize
Commercialize // privatize
privatize existing
existing
SPUG
SPUG areas
areas
?
? Institutional
Institutional Relationship
Relationship
?
? Regulatory
Regulatory Aspects
Aspects
Source : NEA Documents
 Share of MEDP & DDP
Un-Energized
Un-Energized Barangay
Barangay
Total
Total :: 5,409
5,409
ECs
ECs :: 5,277
5,277
PIOU/LGU
PIOU/LGU :: 132
132

For Stand-Alone For Grid Extension

MEDP DDP
 Image of Cover Area of DDP & MEDP
MEDP
Un-electrified Pref. A : Rate
Nominated
Village (off-grid) 60% Village by Grid
Extension
Pref. D : Rate
55%
Pref. B : Rate
70%

Electrified Future
Village Grid Extension

Existing Future Supply Area

Existing by Grid Extension (on-grid)
Distribution Area
Grid Line
Pref.
Pref.CC::Rate
Rate DDP
40%
40%
 E.Cs SPUG PIOUs

Work
Viable / Unviable areas within CAPEX and OPEX Viable / Unviable areas within
its franchise area New Installation Plan its franchise area
Work
NEA Results
Viable Flow
Flow
NEA Verified?
Verify E.C. data
Viable / Un-viable Un-viable
15 / Mar 2003
to DOE Un-viable
PIOUDP
List(PIOU)
Results Viable
Verified?
DOE : Rural Electrification Plan
DUs Budget
Un-viable Un-viable SPUG NECDDP QTPs Fund
NEA Check List(NEA)
CAPEX
adjoining E.C PIOUDP
Un-viable OPEX Area of Yes
List(PIOU) New installation
plan Area of No
DU
Other EC Yes
QTP
interested?
MEDP 2004-2008

No
SPUGs
PDP July 2003 2004 MEP
Un-viable
NECDDP No DOE
List(NEA)
Prioritization
No

SPUGs ERC
MEDP 2003 Petition 2003 SPUG
Decision?
2003 MEP for U.C. to ERC Yes Missionary Electrification
Yes
15/Mar 2003 Project
 New Industry Relationships
JCPC
ERC PSALM DOE
Corp.

NPC NEA

WESM Industry
IndustryParticipants
S
Participants P
U
G

GENCOs Suppliers/ DUs

TRANSCO
Aggregators PUs ECs

LEGEND:
Oversight Regulation Coordination Ownership/ Policymaking Operation Supervision
Source : DOE Control
Presentation Competitive Regulated
 Rural Electrification Family
QTPs
QTPs DOE
DOE
Financing,
Financing,Project
Project Policy
PolicyDirection-Goal
Direction-GoalSetting,
Setting,
Implementation
Implementation&& Program
ProgramManagement,
Management,
Operation
Operation Coordination
Coordination

ERC
ERC
Rate
RateDesign,
Design,
Licensing
Licensingof
ofQTPs
QTPs Rural
Rural
Electrification
Electrification

NEA/ECs,
NEA/ECs, PIOUs
PIOUs
Project
ProjectIdentification,
Identification,
NPC-SPUG
NPC-SPUG Implementation,
Implementation,
Petitioner
Petitionerof
ofShare
Shareof
ofMEDP
MEDPfrom
fromUCUC Monitoring
Monitoring
Project
ProjectImplementation,
Implementation,Operation
Operation
 Historical Performance of Rural
Electrification (1999 - 2002)

Number of Energized Barangay

Year Target Actual Cumulative Remaining Rate
Number Number Number Number (%)
1999 900 755 32,281 9,731 76.9

2000 1,621 1,36 33,647 8,352 80.1

2001 1,353 1,244 34,891 7,108 83.1

2002 1,636 1,699 36,590 5,409 87.1

Source : O-I Law Terminal Report

 Source : DOE

ECs Electrification Level by Regions

As of Jun 2003
99% 98%
99% 95%
91% 92% 90% 90% 91%
100%
89% 90%
84% 82%
90%
80%
80% 68%

70%
57%
60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

ARMM
Region 10

Region 11

Region 12
Region 1

Region 2

Region 3

Region 5

Region 6

Region 7

Region 8

Region 9
Region 4-B
CAR

Region 4-A

CARAGA
 Proposed Number of Rural Electrification

Total Number of Un-Energized Barangay : 5,409

Year Target Remaining Cumulative Rate
Number Number Number (%)
2003 1,619 3,790 38,209 91

2004 1,258 2,532 39,467 94

2005 1,304 1,228 40,771 97

2006 1,228 0 41,999 100

As of Jun 2003
 Rural Electrification Promotion
by Organization
40
0 Un-electrified Barangays (2003 - 2006)

914

600 2,406

78
811
560
NEA NPC-SPUG DOE PIOUS/LGUS PNOC-EDC IPPs Adopt a Barangay Others
 Appraisal of Universal Charge

NPC-SPUG Proposed ERC Approval Final UC

CY 2002 CY 2002 CY 2003

Total Levy (P/kWh) 0.0831 0.0168 0.0373

Operating Cost (OPEX) 0.0256 0.0168 0.0143
Capital Expense (CAPEX) 0.0575 0 0.0230

140 44
Barangay Barangay

CAPEX JUL-DEC 2003

 Present Fund Source

ER1-94 (PHP 0.01/kWh) by GENCOs

Barangay Electrification Program (BEP)
NEA Subsidy to ECs
UC for NPC-SPUG / QTPs
PNOC Fund (Geothermal Service Contract)
Other Donors (ODA, Loan etc)
Organization to promote
O-I LAW
Project Team

Expanded Rural Electrification (ER) Team

Oversight Technical
Committee Working Group
DOE NEA
NEA DOE
NPC-SPUG NPC-SPUG
PNOC-EDC PNOC
PNOC
NEDA
DOF
 Example of Selection Procedure

Grid Extension vs PV System

20 Years Total Cost 20 Years Total Power
Initial Investment Generated (kWh)
O & M Cost etc

Generation Cost (PHP/kWh)

Lower Cost System is considered

 9W Fluorescent lamp x 2hrs x 3Lamps = 54Wh
(AM6:00~7:00 x 1Lamp,
PM7:00~8:00 x 2Lamps, PM8:00~10:00 x 1Lamp)
24W TV 2hrs = 48Wh

Total Power Demand:102Wh

50
40
Demand[Wh]

30
20
10
0
1

11

13

15

17

19

21

23
Time

Lamp1i9Wj Lamp2i9Wj Lamp3i9Wj TVi24Wj

 25km from Grid Line
Grid Extension VS PV(Aurora)
P1000/kWh
1.40
Grid 170 households
Grid 50 households
1.20
Grid 100 households
Grid 250 households
1.00 PV

0.80

0.60

0.40

0.20

0.00
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
2.20
2.30
2.40
2.50
kWh/day/household
 10km from Grid Line
Grid Extension VS PV(Aurora)
P1000/kWh
0.60
Grid 170 households
Grid 50 households
0.50 Grid 100 households
Grid 250 households
PV
0.40

0.30

0.20

0.10

0.00
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
2.20
2.30
2.40
2.50
kWh/day/household
5km from Grid Line
Grid Extension VS PV(Aurora)
P1000/kWh
0.30
Grid 170 households
Grid 50 households
0.25 Grid 100 households
Grid 250 households
PV
0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05

0.00
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
2.20
2.30
2.40
2.50
kWh/day/household
 0.5km from Grid Line
Grid Extension VS PV(Santiago)
P1000/kWh
0.08

0.07 Grid 109 households

Grid 50 households
0.06 Grid 150 households
Grid 200 households
0.05 PV

0.04
0.03

0.02
0.01

0.00
0.05
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
1.10
1.20
1.30
1.40
1.50
1.60
1.70
1.80
1.90
2.00
2.10
2.20
2.30
2.40
2.50
kWh/day/household
<Result (example)>
Household : 170
Distance from Grid : 25km
Load > 0.3kWh/Day.HH : Grid Extension
Load< 0.3kWh/Day.HH : PV system

Distance from Grid : 10km

Load > 0.1kWh/Day.HH : Grid Extension
Load< 0.1kWh/Day.HH : PV system

Distance from Grid : 5km

Load > 0.07kWh/Day.HH : Grid
Extension Load< 0.07kWh/Day.HH : PV
system
Distance from Grid : 0.5km
Grid Extension is cost feasible.
<Result (example)>
Household : 50
Distance from Grid : 25km
Load > 0.8kWh/Day.HH : Grid Extension
Load< 0.8kWh/Day.HH : PV system

Distance from Grid : 10km

Load > 0.4kWh/Day.HH : Grid Extension
Load< 0.4kWh/Day.HH : PV system

Distance from Grid : 5km

Load > 0.2kWh/Day.HH : Grid Extension
Load< 0.2kWh/Day.HH : PV system

Distance from Grid : 0.5km

Grid Extension is cost feasible.
 Length of Grid Extension VS PV(Aurora)
(Demand :0.1kWh/day)
P1000/kWh

0.7
Grid 170 households
0.6 Grid 50 households
Grid 100 households
0.5 Grid 250 households
PV
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
1 5 10 15 20 25
km
<Result (example)>
Assumption of Consumption : 0.1kWh/Day.HH
Household : 250
Distance > 15km : PV system
Distance< 15km : Grid
Extension
Household : 170
Distance > 10km : PV system
Distance< 10km : Grid
Extension
Household : 100
Distance > 5km : PV system
Distance< 5km : Grid Extension

Distance< 3km
Grid Extension is cost feasible
 Factors for Consideration

Distance is far from grid line and demand is

small, stand-alone system like PV system has
advantages.

General assumption is used for this examples.

Actual assumption (Location, Distance, Access
etc) is needed to adopt for specified Barangay.

Typical sample is available by changing

assumptions.
 Potential of Renewable Energy

Insolation Precipitation Wind Power

 Utilization of Renewable
Energy Resource

Insolation 4.5 to 5.5 kWh/m2

Yearly Average in Philippine

Far from Grid Line & PV system is useful

Insolation High

Far from Grid Line Micro-Hydro system

Rainfall
Geographical Condition is useful

Wind Power Energy Potential is High Wind system is

useful
Database for DOE
Electrification Ratio Map

Objective Easily &

Visually
For Smooth Project Monitoring
For Future Plan

1st Stage
Municipality Level & Each Regions &
Each ECs Level Data ECs Completed

2nd Stage JICA Team DOE will

Sample follow!!
Barangay Level (Masbate)
 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction

REGION 1
Example Map
 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction

1. Adams
2. Bacarra
3. Bangui
4. Burgos
5. Carasi 8
6. Dumalneg
4 3
7. Laoag City
6
8. Pagudpud
9. Pasuguin
1
10. Piddig
11. Sarrat
12. Vintar
9
13. Badoc
14. Batac
15. Currimao 2
16. Dingras
12
17. Espiritu 7 5
10
18. Marcos 22 11
19. Nueva Era
20. Paoay
16 23
21. Pinili
20
22. San Nicolas
14 18
23. Solsona 15
17
21

13 19

REGION 1-1 Illocos Norte

 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75% 8
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable 2
Municipality Border 6
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction
4
1. Bantay 10
2. Cabugao
5
3. Caoayan 7
1
4. Magsingal 9
11
5. San IIdefonso 3
6. San Juan
26
7. San Vicente
20
8. Sinait
21
9. Sta. Catalina
10. Sto. Domingo 31
11. Vigan
25 14
12. Alilem
13. Banayoyo
27 19
14. Burgos 13 24
15. Candon 15
18
16. Cervantes
17. Del Pilar 17
18. Galimuyod 30 23
19. Lidlidda
22
29 28
20. Nagbukel 16
21. Narvacan
22. Quirino 33
23. Salcedo
24. San Emilio 34
12
25. San Esteban
26. Santa
27. Santiago
28. Sigay
29. Sta. Cruz
30. Sta. Lucia
31. Sta. Maria 32
32. Sugpon
33. Suyo
34. Tagudin

REGION 1-2 Illocos Sur

 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction
3

1. Bacnotan 4 7
2. Balaoan 2
3. Bangar
4. Luna
5. San Gabriel
6. Santol 6
1
7. Sudipen
8. Agoo
5
9. Aringay B3
10. Bagulin
11. Burgos B1
12. Caba 10
13. Nagulian
14. Pugo
15. Rosario
16. Sto. Tomas
B2 13 11
17. Tubao
B1. San Fernando City
B2. Bauang
B3. San Juan 12

17
8
14
16

15

REGION 1-3 La Union

 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction

1. Agno
2. Alaminos
3. Anda
4. Bani
5. Bolinao
6. Burgos
7. Dasol
5
8. Infanta
9. Mabini

4
2

6 9

REGION 1-4 Pangasinan 1

 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction

1. 1. Sual
2. Aguilar
3. Basista
4. Binmaley
5. Bugallon
6. Labrador
7. Lingayen B3
8. Mangatarem
9. Urbiztondo
10. Bayambang 1 13 B4
11. Malasiqui
B2
12. San Carlos City
6 4
13. Mangaldan
7 B1
14. Alcala
B5
15. Bautista
5 12
B1. Calasiao
B2. Dangupan City 11
B3. San Fabian 2 3
B4. San Jacinto 14
B5. Sta. Barbara 9 10
15
8

REGION 1-5 Central Pangasinan

 MAP OF ELECTRIFICATION RATIO

Legend
90% and above
89% to 75%
74% to 50%
Under 49%
Data unavailable
Municipality Border
Electric Utilities Jurisdiction

1. Mapandan
2. Binalonan
3. Laoac
4. Pozorrubio
5. Sto. Tomas
6. Urdaneta City
7. Villasis
8. Asingan
9. Balungao
10. Natividad 4 13
12
11. Rosales
12. San Manuel 2 10
B1
13. San Nicolas 16
14. San Quintin
3 8
1
15. Sta. Maria
16. Tayug 14
6 15
17. Umingan
B1. Manaoag 17
7

5 9
11

REGION 1-6 Pangasinan 3

 Barangay
Masbate Island
Level

Municipality
Level

Example
We can manage
Barangay level
 Advantages of Mapping

By utilizing this map, the following issues are found

visually:
Lower electrification rate Municipality is
given priority for electrification.
Un-energized Barangay which is far from
the grid line is given priority for
introducing stand-alone systems.
Advice for Future Promotion

Rural Electrification Framework

Completion
Building Database
Strengthen Organizations

Obtain Funding
Regulatory Framework
 Summary
1. Work Flow
Work flow was drawn by cooperation of R/E families. This work flow
will utilize for future planning.
2. Rural Electrification Program
DOE and Team discuss 5 years rural electrification planning concept.
Examples of electrification selection procedure is indicated. The
output of other activity and this study is taking into account, DOE
start to prepare MEDP.
3. Present Situation of Rural Electrification
Information were collected and analyzed. Based on those
information, electrification ratio map were made for DOEs database.
4. Selection Method of Electrification
Rough calculation results were indicated. However, for specified
Barangay, more practical assumption (Location, HH, Access,
Distance, Consumption etc ) is required.