CONSUMERS' DEMAND!
Herman Tiu Laurel
2/13-19/2012
The top “electrocutioner” of the country sitting as chief executive officer (CEO) of the Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) announced on February 9, 2012 that “Meralco sees higher 2012 income” compared to its P 14.5-billion of 2011.
In one report, the electrifyingly good news for Meralco was attributed by the big electrophorus electricus of Meralco thus,
“The utility firm’s chief executive mainly hinged such forecast on recent increase in their sales volume, which to his assessment signals green shoots of recovery in the economy.”
We heard this old fish wives’ tales before, that Meralco’s huge profit increase in 2009 of 114% or P6 billion from its 2008’s P2.8 billion, and surged 74% in 2010 to P 12.2 billion and P 14.5 billion in 2011 or around 25% more on what Meralco itself declares as 2% growth in volume sales.
Even Meralco, however, cannot lie all the time as it admits in several news reports in a very attenuated one-sentence statement that a significant portion of the profit is from rate increases.
“Significant” would be the understatement of the century. How Meralco gets these whopping rate increases is the subject of our many columns – Meralco-llusions with ERC.
The Electrocutor also explains that they expect a rise in profit due to projected “growth drivers” such as the “commercial and highly industrialized sectors.”
But as our regular power sector analyst Butch Junia reports “… based on Meralco’s RY 2012 average monthly expected revenues filed with ERC, residential customers will contribute 63.3% of the P3.96 nillion revenues.”
The non-residentials, i.e. the industrial and commercial customers, account for a mere 35.2%.
In terms of consumption, residential customers will get or use only 37% of total energy sales of P2.495 billion kwh.
While the lion’s share of 61% will be delivered to industrial and commercial customers, it is a “clear case of their paying less for more…”
Hence, the driver of Meralco’s profits is really the residential consumers who pay as high as P4.00/kwh versus the biggest commercial/industrial consumers which can pay as low as P0.10/kwh.
Now, who’s subsidizing what and filling Meralco’s money bag? If readers remember the late comedian Pugo’s one-liner, “Das a lotta nonsense,” now referring to the evil eye of Meralco propaganda.
“Growth” as the wool to pull over the public eye and spirit in the power plunder scheme has been used time and again.
It was at its height during Fidel V. Ramos’ time when surplus IPP (Independent Power Producer) capacity was contracted on the projected economic growth of Ramos’ Philippines 2000.
The Asian Development Bank (ADB) ritually warned FVR that contracted capacity was already exceeding even the best demand projection.
However, the pen on then multi-billion contracts was mightier than the words of warning.
The past decade when the Philippine power rates were challenging Mt. Everest, there were continuing voices warning of power shortages because of “growth” like Raul Concepcion, but the growth that came literally in trickles.
Even 6% growth is a standstill rate and it is a truism that at least 7% growth is needed for tangible results.
The disastrous 3.7% growth for 2011 does not auger well for rosy projection for 2011 which even the best International Monetary Fund (IMF) view is only 4.2% while other financial agencies like J.P. Morgan see only 4%.
Where is Meralco going to get a dramatic uptick in demand with such figures?
The country’s installed and so-called dependable generating capacity is total installed, 16,359 MW; and dependable, around13,500.
Of course, the first question that should arise is why not make all that power dependable? That’s over 20% to fill any growth in demand.
And then there’s this report from Jon Poquis in August of 2010 in a daily entitled “Power demand grows slower than GDP:”
…As an economy grows, consumption of electricity also grows, and usually at a faster clip.
That used to be the case: the more goods and services were produced, more electricity was consumed.
Now, it is different. Data from the Department of Energy show that power demand is growing slower than the national output.
About a decade ago, every percentage growth in gross domestic product was accompanied by a 2.8 percent growth in power consumption.
Now, the ratio is one percentage point to 0.68 percentage point. In effect, it now takes about a fifth less power to increase GDP by a percentage point.
Mylene Capungcol, director of the energy department’s electric power industry management bureau, said the steady drop in energy elasticity could be attributed to a shift in the focus of the Philippines to a more service-oriented economy.
Because of this, a sustained growth in GDP will not lead to a rapid surge in power demand, she added. “This implies that even if the economy sustains or increases its current growth, the demand for electricity will not necessarily follow at the same pace.”
The latest data on the economy show a contracting export sector declining for 13 straight months and the last, the worst in 18 months.
And the challenges are not abating as the U.S. and European Union (EU) situation (notwithstanding the rosy mainstream U.S. jobs figures which we can show in future articles to be touch-up jobs) continues to worsen.
Likewise, the Middle East markets even for our OFWs.
With these traditional markets in turmoil, the Asian markets are also affected.
The oil situation is the most worrying as threats around the Straits of Hormuz are already raising Brent crude prices which will dampen economic activity the world over.
So, we can sum up the prospects for real growth in Philippine power demand for 2012 – another 2% at best and certainly not anywhere near enough to justify another 20% increase in profits on alleged increase of volume of sales.
And the DoE’s similar myth spinning as the Electrocutioner? Almendras is obviously sucking up to the oligarchs who want to set up new, exorbitant IPPs for the entire country.
One example is the “re-powering” of the Sucat power plant mothballed to create the shortages before and now to be revived to a private operator.
People should learn by now that the fishy electric eels are only good for Unagi at a Japanese restaurant, not for the home. It’s about time we take Meralco’s gigantus electrophopous electricus to the Gaisujin-sama (chef), and prepare smaller ones like DoE’s Almendras for sashimi.
More about Almendras, including apparent senatorial plans that as in kissing babies and yielding concessionary statement such as “President Aquino promises to look into power crisis” in next columns.
(Tune to 1098AM, Mon. to Fri.; 5 to 6pm; watch GNN, Destiny Cable, Saturday 8:15pm Struggle against the Rule of Farce”; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com)
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
People Power reversed!
YESTERDAY, TODAY & TOMORROW
Linggoy Alcuaz
2/13-19/2012
Fifteen days, four weeks, a month, have passed of the Impeachment Trial of Chief Justice Renato “Rene” Coronado Corona at the Senate.
In the period between the railroading of the Impeachment by the Lower House on December 12, 2011 and the January 16, 2012 opening of the trial, Corona had already been convicted by the majority in both media and public opinion.
However, by the third week of the trial, due mainly to the incompetence of the prosecution, the mood had swung.
According to the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s survey two weekends ago, the majority of those surveyed now believed that Corona would be acquitted.
We had been predicting that the initiators of the Impeachment, PNoy, the Liberal Party, Evil Society and the Lower House, would be hard put to secure 16 votes from among the 20 – three sitting Senators to convict Corona.
We believe that if 12 to 15 senators vote for conviction, there would be a moral conviction by a simple majority of the senators and at the same time a legal and echnical acquittal.
Sixteen votes or two – thirds of the total number of 20 – four seats are required under the 1987 Constitution to impeach an impeachable official.
We have been saying that PNoy, the LP, Evil Society and the Lower House will not accept defeat in the form of an acquittal. Therefore, they have been planning a Plan “B.”
Plan B is akin to and based on Edsa Uno and Dos where the Plan A or original plans were:
(a) To defeat President Marcos and Senator Tolentino in the Friday, February 7, 1986 snap presidential and vice presidential elections. However, Marcos allegedly cheated Cory and Doy;
(b) To oust President Estrada by impeaching and convicting him from the October 2000 “jueteng” expose, to the Speaker Manny Villar impeachment prayer express until the end of the impeachment trial. However, on January 16, 2001 the prosecutors in the impeachment trial walked out.
The first plan in the present situation was to quickly impeach Corona and either:
(a) Scare him into resigning before the Trial started or;
(b) Proceed with the trial and present enough evidence and generate enough political reasons to secure a conviction by the Constitutional requirement of 16 votes.
Thus, while the Lower House prosecutes the case in the Senate impeachment court, its spokesmen persecute the impeached Chief Justice in a trial by publicity.
The Plan B in all three situations involves:
(a) A critical situation that has captured the attention and imagination of the entire country, reaches a climax or a very high point;
(b) A trigger occurs at the highest and most opportune point;
(c) A call is made to assemble at a significant and symbolic place;
(d) The mobilization of a big number of demonstrators reaches a critical point;
(e) A faction of the AFP, PNP and civilian bureaucracy withdraws support from the top official being ousted. In the case of the February 7, 1986 snap elections and the February 22 – 25 People Power at Edsa I, this occurred before the Civilian Mobilization; and finally,
(f) The official concerned abandons his post.
In the Corona trial, the high point has been reached several times. However, it is the series of failures of the prosecution panel that has also depressed the situation from the high point to a mediocre level.
The trigger could have been any of the following:
(a) A TRO from the SC stopping the impeachment process just as the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gurierrez had been temporarily stopped;
(b) A decision by the Senate impeachment court not to subpoena the bank records of Corona; and now
(c) A TRO from the SC stopping the opening of the FCD accounts.
So far presiding officer Senator Juan Ponce Enrile has been very careful not to provide any of the two sides the opportunity to walkout and bring the issue exclusively to the streets.
However, the Supreme Court’s preliminary injunction with TRO issued last Thursday afternoon will come to a head this Monday afternoon during and after the Senate caucus regarding the said SC order.
We should also note that a big anti-impeachment rally was staged during the en banc session last Thursday at the Supreme Court. The TRO and the rally confirm to us that Corona continues to fight.
On the other hand the anti-Corona rally at the Senate was much smaller. This is an indication that the impeachment issue has a very difficult time achieving a climax. We will see next whether the TRO can heat up the situation to a boiling point.
If the Senate decides to obey the TRO, tensions will subside. The situation is not at such a level that the conspirators including the Executive Branch and half of the Legislative Branch can mobilize against both the Supreme Court and the Senate combined.
However, if the Senate decides otherwise, a Constitutional crisis will ensue. Both sides will mobilize in the streets. However, what we will see will not be a lopsided mobilization like Edsa I, II and III.
Alongside the street confrontations will be the spectre of civil war.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, there are some major differences between the present situation and EDSA’s I & II:
(a) Unlike at the time of both EDSA’s I & II, there is no more Cardinal Sin;
(b) The Archdiocese of Manila has been broken up into one Archdiocese and several Dioceses.
(c) The perception before was that the Cardinal Archbishop of Manila was the leader of the entire Philippine Catholic Church.
The nine and a half years of the GMA Presidency educated us on the leadership dynamics of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines.
(d) The Church leaders who have been the most vocal against or about Impeachment are those who were the most vocal against GMA. The pro – GMA bishops have been relatively quiet;
(e) The Catholic Church is at odds with PNoy and the Lower House over the RH bill. It is still hurting from the PCSO’s SUV expose which turned out to be a big lie;
(f) Both EDSA’s I & II were against an incumbent president. Now, they are trying to oust a Supreme Court Chief Justice who does not command an AFP or PNP. He heads a Judiciary that is by design relatively passive but which has become uncustomarily active.
In both Edsa I and II, the INK was aligned with the ousted presidents, Marcos and Estrada. Now, it is perceived to be sympathetic to Corona.
The decision of the Senate impeachment court on whether to obey or disobey the TRO will be very crucial.
If PS Bank President Garcia is crucified this afternoon, a trigger may be provided for the other side. The paradigm of People Power may change from ouster and replacement to one of stalling, stopping and gridlock.
On top of a Constitutional crisis, we may have economic depression and stagnation.
Let our politicians beware! Those who grandstanded will earn the ire of the people as well as be blamed by the organized churches. The 2013 elections are just around the corner!
Linggoy Alcuaz
2/13-19/2012
Fifteen days, four weeks, a month, have passed of the Impeachment Trial of Chief Justice Renato “Rene” Coronado Corona at the Senate.
In the period between the railroading of the Impeachment by the Lower House on December 12, 2011 and the January 16, 2012 opening of the trial, Corona had already been convicted by the majority in both media and public opinion.
However, by the third week of the trial, due mainly to the incompetence of the prosecution, the mood had swung.
According to the Philippine Daily Inquirer’s survey two weekends ago, the majority of those surveyed now believed that Corona would be acquitted.
We had been predicting that the initiators of the Impeachment, PNoy, the Liberal Party, Evil Society and the Lower House, would be hard put to secure 16 votes from among the 20 – three sitting Senators to convict Corona.
We believe that if 12 to 15 senators vote for conviction, there would be a moral conviction by a simple majority of the senators and at the same time a legal and echnical acquittal.
Sixteen votes or two – thirds of the total number of 20 – four seats are required under the 1987 Constitution to impeach an impeachable official.
We have been saying that PNoy, the LP, Evil Society and the Lower House will not accept defeat in the form of an acquittal. Therefore, they have been planning a Plan “B.”
Plan B is akin to and based on Edsa Uno and Dos where the Plan A or original plans were:
(a) To defeat President Marcos and Senator Tolentino in the Friday, February 7, 1986 snap presidential and vice presidential elections. However, Marcos allegedly cheated Cory and Doy;
(b) To oust President Estrada by impeaching and convicting him from the October 2000 “jueteng” expose, to the Speaker Manny Villar impeachment prayer express until the end of the impeachment trial. However, on January 16, 2001 the prosecutors in the impeachment trial walked out.
The first plan in the present situation was to quickly impeach Corona and either:
(a) Scare him into resigning before the Trial started or;
(b) Proceed with the trial and present enough evidence and generate enough political reasons to secure a conviction by the Constitutional requirement of 16 votes.
Thus, while the Lower House prosecutes the case in the Senate impeachment court, its spokesmen persecute the impeached Chief Justice in a trial by publicity.
The Plan B in all three situations involves:
(a) A critical situation that has captured the attention and imagination of the entire country, reaches a climax or a very high point;
(b) A trigger occurs at the highest and most opportune point;
(c) A call is made to assemble at a significant and symbolic place;
(d) The mobilization of a big number of demonstrators reaches a critical point;
(e) A faction of the AFP, PNP and civilian bureaucracy withdraws support from the top official being ousted. In the case of the February 7, 1986 snap elections and the February 22 – 25 People Power at Edsa I, this occurred before the Civilian Mobilization; and finally,
(f) The official concerned abandons his post.
In the Corona trial, the high point has been reached several times. However, it is the series of failures of the prosecution panel that has also depressed the situation from the high point to a mediocre level.
The trigger could have been any of the following:
(a) A TRO from the SC stopping the impeachment process just as the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gurierrez had been temporarily stopped;
(b) A decision by the Senate impeachment court not to subpoena the bank records of Corona; and now
(c) A TRO from the SC stopping the opening of the FCD accounts.
So far presiding officer Senator Juan Ponce Enrile has been very careful not to provide any of the two sides the opportunity to walkout and bring the issue exclusively to the streets.
However, the Supreme Court’s preliminary injunction with TRO issued last Thursday afternoon will come to a head this Monday afternoon during and after the Senate caucus regarding the said SC order.
We should also note that a big anti-impeachment rally was staged during the en banc session last Thursday at the Supreme Court. The TRO and the rally confirm to us that Corona continues to fight.
On the other hand the anti-Corona rally at the Senate was much smaller. This is an indication that the impeachment issue has a very difficult time achieving a climax. We will see next whether the TRO can heat up the situation to a boiling point.
If the Senate decides to obey the TRO, tensions will subside. The situation is not at such a level that the conspirators including the Executive Branch and half of the Legislative Branch can mobilize against both the Supreme Court and the Senate combined.
However, if the Senate decides otherwise, a Constitutional crisis will ensue. Both sides will mobilize in the streets. However, what we will see will not be a lopsided mobilization like Edsa I, II and III.
Alongside the street confrontations will be the spectre of civil war.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, there are some major differences between the present situation and EDSA’s I & II:
(a) Unlike at the time of both EDSA’s I & II, there is no more Cardinal Sin;
(b) The Archdiocese of Manila has been broken up into one Archdiocese and several Dioceses.
(c) The perception before was that the Cardinal Archbishop of Manila was the leader of the entire Philippine Catholic Church.
The nine and a half years of the GMA Presidency educated us on the leadership dynamics of the Roman Catholic Church in the Philippines.
(d) The Church leaders who have been the most vocal against or about Impeachment are those who were the most vocal against GMA. The pro – GMA bishops have been relatively quiet;
(e) The Catholic Church is at odds with PNoy and the Lower House over the RH bill. It is still hurting from the PCSO’s SUV expose which turned out to be a big lie;
(f) Both EDSA’s I & II were against an incumbent president. Now, they are trying to oust a Supreme Court Chief Justice who does not command an AFP or PNP. He heads a Judiciary that is by design relatively passive but which has become uncustomarily active.
In both Edsa I and II, the INK was aligned with the ousted presidents, Marcos and Estrada. Now, it is perceived to be sympathetic to Corona.
The decision of the Senate impeachment court on whether to obey or disobey the TRO will be very crucial.
If PS Bank President Garcia is crucified this afternoon, a trigger may be provided for the other side. The paradigm of People Power may change from ouster and replacement to one of stalling, stopping and gridlock.
On top of a Constitutional crisis, we may have economic depression and stagnation.
Let our politicians beware! Those who grandstanded will earn the ire of the people as well as be blamed by the organized churches. The 2013 elections are just around the corner!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
