In the President’s recent State of the Nation Address (SONA), grand promises resonated loudly. Yet, even at this early stage, hints from his appointed officials within key agencies suggest these ambitious goals could quickly unravel, potentially leaving Filipino consumers more frustrated than ever with another cycle of empty pledges.

The President unequivocally mandated connecting over 2.5 million more households and spotlighted the persistent anguish of Filipino consumers over exorbitant electricity rates. The pressing question remains: will these promises ignite genuine change, or merely dissipate into another hollow act of political gaslighting?

While the President alluded to potential solutions like the net metering program – a costly option, feasible only for those with deep pockets who can afford six-figure solar panel installations – and mentioned expanding lifeline rate coverage for marginalized consumers, the grim reality persists: the majority of Filipinos continue to shoulder some of Asia’s highest electricity rates. This, while the nation’s power utilities still neglect to invest in modernized infrastructure such as smart grids.

Contrast this with Japan and Singapore, which have aggressively poured 5-10 times more investments into cutting-edge technologies, primarily undergrounding their transmission and distribution lines to fortify against extreme weather events and eliminate the visual clutter of overhead cables. Meanwhile, the Philippines remains ensnared in its infamous “spaghetti-like” web of power lines in Metro Manila and most parts of the country. Furthermore, both Japan and Singapore have transitioned to smart grid systems – a future-proof luxury in power infrastructure development that the Philippines only dreams of.

Industry players frequently cite Philippine power rates as being among the highest in Asia, often comparing them to Japan and Singapore. However, they conveniently overlook one glaring truth: those countries boast modern, highly advanced systems, while we're still grappling with crumbling, outdated infrastructure. All this, while the profits of our servicing power utilities continue to soar. Therefore, it’s patently unjust to burden Filipinos with exorbitant electricity bills when we’re still miles behind on technological upgrades.

So, the next time someone attempts that comparison, they’d do well to think twice! Our neighbors pay higher for convenience and reliability; we pay exorbitant rates, yet we barely have a choice. It’s akin to Japan and Singapore paying for an authentic Chanel, while we pay nearly the same price for a counterfeit or largely inferior product.

While President Marcos' vision for lower electricity rates sounds appealing in concept, the plain fact is that, given the current pace of the Philippine power system, this dream is slipping further out of reach with each passing day of his administration.

In a TV interview, outgoing ERC Chairperson Monalisa C. Dimalanta candidly acknowledged that new gas contracts are poised to drive power rates even higher. Meralco’s franchise area alone is projected to experience a significant increase of ₱2.46 per kWh within the three-year span of the Marcos administration – a sharp, tormenting signal of how Filipino consumers will continue to foot the bill for a system that will only become more expensive.

As if things weren't dire enough, Energy Secretary Sharon Garin similarly revealed that the DOE is set to roll out a policy by August or September mandating priority dispatch for power plants utilizing Malampaya gas. This move could spike rates by over $2.00 per kWh in the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM), especially if these capacities aren't secured by power supply agreements.

Under this administration, more costly technologies like nuclear and offshore wind are also being advanced. With each high-priced push, it’s becoming all but certain that Filipino consumers will bear the brunt of elevated electric bills in the years to come.

And while nuclear advocates may promise long-term savings, the reality is that the steep upfront investment costs will initially send power costs through the roof before rates can potentially stabilize in the coming decades. It is crucial, therefore, that consumer expectations are meticulously managed, and the path toward energy security is explained without the usual deceptive tactics of promising lower rates – a fallacy that already duped Filipino consumers with the failed promises of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act.

Dimalanta opined that a surefire way to slash electricity rates by at least $1.38 per kWh is the removal of VAT on power – a simple yet tangible step that could offer Filipino consumers much-needed relief from ever-escalating electricity tariffs.

The President claimed in his SONA that upon taking office in 2022, 5.0 million households were still without electricity, and that his administration had since electrified 2.5 million of them.

Nevertheless, the numbers appear to contradict this narrative. A 2022 Power Situation Report by the DOE placed unelectrified households at 2.4 million upon the Marcos administration’s assumption into power. Fast forward to 2024, and the updated National Total Electrification Roadmap (NTER), jointly released by the DOE, NEA, and National Power Corp., pegged that figure down to 2.02 million, referencing the number of households still needing electrification within the 2025-2028 duration of the Marcos administration. If the goal is stretched to 2033 (considering the increasing population), the number could soar to 3.568 million.

Now, it’s a mystery who provided the President with the inflated figure of 5.0 million unelectrified households upon his assumption into power in 2022 – especially when previously published DOE reports contradict this data. If 2.44 million households were still without power in 2022, and the government is supposedly still working to electrify 2.5 million, then the math tells a different story: one where the administration’s electrification efforts have barely progressed. Hmm, looks like someone might have been playing a little “dagdag-bawas” (manipulating the figures) to create an illusion of action?

In a post-SONA interview, NEA Administrator Antonio Mariano Almeda highlighted that the household electrification goal is a “moving target” that will largely hinge on funding availability. It's worth noting that with an estimated yearly requirement of ₱18 billion, NEA has only been receiving a paltry ₱2 billion annually, with just a planned increase to ₱5.6 billion next year. At this rate, it’s difficult to envision the full accomplishment of nationwide electrification by 2028.

“The target of 2028 will all depend on the government resources. Now, we are fully cognizant of the fact that the budgetary requirement might be slashed for some other priority agencies,” he stated.

Garin correspondingly stated that the ₱36.2 billion proceeds from the privatization of the Caliraya-Botocan-Kalayaan (CBK) hydro facility could provide a much-needed boost to electrification funding, but the reality is far more complicated. Under EPIRA, these proceeds are legally bound to pay down the massive debts the Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corp. (PSALM) assumed from NPC, and that level of financial obligation still stands at a staggering P246 billion as of the end of May this year.

Secretary Garin somehow recognized some obvious flaws in the proposed law creating the Philippine Atomic Regulatory Authority (PhilAtom), the very agency tasked with overseeing safety in nuclear power developments. Even at this early stage, serious concerns are already bubbling up: Is the government’s reckless rush to push for nuclear power outpacing its ability to properly regulate and safeguard the public from the risks of these targeted installations?

One crucial issue is the funding PhilAtom would need to operate, which has been proposed to come from the universal charges (UC) collected by PSALM.

Garin affirmed, “there’s a conflict there,” and she declared that it will be the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) that will allocate that UC-underpinned funding to PhilAtom.

Even at this stage, however, legal experts at the ERC are firmly warning that UC funding allocation for PhilAtom is a risky proposition, as universal charges are earmarked under EPIRA for other specific purposes. Diverting these funds would not only prompt legal hurdles but could also severely impact electrification efforts in off-grid areas. Plus, it's crucial to note that the UC fund is relatively depleted at this point.

Garin further noted that consultation with key stakeholders – particularly the power generators who were sidelined during the PhilAtom legislation – will finally take place in the crafting of the implementing rules and regulations, to be spearheaded by PhilAtom itself. But one can’t help but ask: why was that fundamental step overlooked in the first place? And even more troubling, such lapses may have gone unaddressed had the media not called attention to them.

President Marcos is expected to sign the PhilAtom bill into law any day now, despite the apparent slip-ups. Hence, for concerned Filipinos, the only hope left is that this administration won’t treat nuclear power development as another reckless experiment. If the legislative process had been that sloppy, how can we trust them to be thorough and cautious in the far more critical task of regulating the development and operation of nuclear power plants?

In the continuing leadership restructuring within the energy sector, industry talks are swirling that lawyer Justin Batocabe is set to join the DOE in the coming days as its new Spokesperson with an Assistant Secretary title, while Atty. Richard Nethercott is likewise being speculated to step into one of the Undersecretary roles.

Batocabe is currently director of the Social Welfare Institutional Development Bureau of the Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD), while Nethercott serves as the President of the Independent Electricity Market Operator of the Philippines (IEMOP), the operating entity of the spot market.

In parallel, Garin hinted at prospective changes in the attached agencies, emphasizing that courtesy resignations had already been demanded from the chief executives of NEA, NPC, PSALM, National Transmission Corp., and PNOC along with its subsidiaries.