Wjec Philippines PDF

Pre-Feasibility Study for
Rural Electrification Program by Renewable Energy
In The Mountainous Region of Northern Samar
in the Philippines
STUDY REPORT
March 2007
Engineering and Consulting Firms Association, Japan

West Japan Engineering Consultants, Inc
This work was subsidized by Japan Keirin

Association through its Promotion funds from
From Manilla
CATARMAN
CATUBIG RIVER
NORTHERN SAMAR
SAMAR ISLAND
LEYTE ISLAND
Location Map
Contents
Executive Summary S-1

Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Objectives 1
1.2 Scope of Works 2
1.3 Study Area 2
1.4 Study Schedule 2
1.5 Study Team Member 3
Chapter 2 Socio-Economic Development in Communities Hosting Renewable energy 4

2.1 Economic Development and Energy in the Philippines 4
2.2 Renewable Energy Development in the Philippines 5
2.3 Major Issues 14
2.4 Government Policies and Programs 14
2.5 Impact to Host Communities 8
Chapter 3 Rural Electrification 19

3.1 Current Condition of Rural Electrification 19
3.2 Promotion Policy of Rural Electrification 22
3.3 Issues of Rural Electrification 23
3.4 Effects of Rural Electrification 25
Chapter 4 Outline of the Surveyed Area 29

4.1 Outline of Northern Samar Province 29
4.2 Electrical Power Situation in Northern Samar Province 30
Chapter 5 Pre-Feasibility Study of Rural Electrification by Renewable Energy 34

5.1 Current Situation of Rural Electrification in Coverage Area 34
5.2 Assumption of Electric Demand associated with Rural Electrification 41
5.3 Assumption of Electrification associated with Expansion of Distribution Line 46
5.4 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Renewable Energy 51
5.5 Selection of Candidate Barangays for Electrification by Renewable Energy 60
Chapter 6 Rural Electrification Plan by Renewable Energy 61

6.1 Potential of Micro Hydro Power Plant 61
6.2 Hydro Power Generation Plant at Barangays 61
6.3 Micro Hydro Power Plant 62
6.4 Biogas Power Plant 66
Chapter 7 Profile of the Project 69
Appendix 1 Schedule for Field Investigation

Appendix 2 Interviewed Persons List
Appendix 3 Photos
Figure List
Fig-5.1 Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII 35

Fig-5.2 Status of Barangay Electrification in Northern Samar 36
Fig-5.3 Diagram of Transmission Line in Philippines (Northern Samar Area) 37
Fig-5.4 Breakdown of Consumer Numbers in NORSAMELCO (as of 2004) 39
Fig-5.5 Demand Forecast of NORSAMELCO 40
Fig-5.6 Assumption of Electric Demand by Rural electrification (daily load curve) 45
Fig-5.7 Expansion Plan of Distribution Line 48
Fig-5.8 Outline of 3kW Stirling Engine (ST-5) 57
Fig-6.1 Micro Hydro Power Turbine Types 63
Fig-6.2 Turbine Selection Diagram 64
Fig-6.3 Biogas Generating System 68
Table List
Table-1.1 Study Team Members 3

Table-2.1 Hydropower Measurable Targets 9
Table-2.2 Indicative Hydropower Capacity Addition 10
Table-3.1 1999 2006 Implementation Plans of O-Ilaw Program and ER Program 20
Table-3.2 Electrification Level by Region (As of 31, October 2006) 21
Table-3.3 Barangay Electrification Level by Franchise Holder (As of October 2006) 21
Table-3.4 Rural Electrification by Method (1999 2002) 25
Table-4.1 Electricity Demand 31
Table-4.2 Annual Power Purchase 32
Table-4.3 Supply Demand Profile 32
Table-4.4 Level of Electrification 33
Table-5.1 Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII 35
Table-5.2 Status of Barangay Electrification in Northern Samar 36
Table-5.3 Outline of NORSAMELCO (As of 2006 Oct.) 38
Table-5.4 Energy Distribution of NORSAMELCO(2004) 39
Table-5.5 Electric Tariff of NORSAMELCO(2004) 39
Table-5.6 Income Statement of NORSAMELCO(2004) 40
Table-5.7 NORSAMELCO Development Plan 41
Table-5.8(1) Current Situation of Electrification of Barangays in Catubig 43
Table-5.8(2) Current Situation of Electrification of Barangays in Las Navas 44
Table-5.9 Assumption of Electric Demand by Rural electrification 45
Table-5.10 Electrification Plan of Barangay 46
Table-5.11 Number of Household and Distance of Distribution Line 48
Table-5.12 Electrification Cost by Expansion of Distribution Line 50
Table-5.13 Electrification Cost by Each Method of Power Generation 53
Table-5.14 CDM Project by Usage of Biogas in Philippines (Registered CDM Project) 54
Table-5.15 Current Situation of Firming of Livestock and Poultry in Catubig 55
Table-5.16 Specification of Stirling Engine 58
Table-5.17 Assumed Amount of Rice Chaff for Generating 58
Table-6.1 Potential of Micro Hydro Power at Catubig Service Area 61
Table-6.2 Basic Specification of Hybrid Power Generating at Each Barangay 65
Table-6.3 Basic Specification of Biogas Power Generation 67
Table-6.4 Comparison of Biogas Generating in Philippines and Japan 68
Abbreviations
DOEDepartment of Energy
NPCNational Power Corporation
NPC-SPUGNational Power Corporation Small Power Utilities Group
NIANational Irrigation Administration
PNOCPhilippine National Oil Corporation
PNOC-EDCPhilippine National Oil Corporation-Energy Development Corporation
TRANSCOTransmission Company
NEANational Electrification Administration
PSALMPower Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation
ERCEnergy Regulatory Commission
EPIRAElectric Power Industry Reform Act
PEPPhilippine Energy Plan
WESMWholesale Electricity Spot Market
IPPIndependent Power Producer
NEDANational Economic and Development Authority
NORSAMELCONorthern Samar Electric Cooperative, Inc.
SIDCSorosoro Ibaba Development Cooperative
LGULocal Government Unit
NGONon Government Organization
DILGDepartment of Interior and Local Government
EREnergy Regulation
RWMHEEReforestation and Watershed Management, Health and Environment Enhancement
RECRural Electrification Cooperative
BAPABarangay Alternative Power Association
LUWASLocal Unit Water and Sanitation Systems
RAICRegional Agri-Industrial Center
PDIPProvincial Development Investment Program
PDMPProvincial Development Management Plan
PDCProvincial Development Council
RPSRenewables Portfolio Standard
JICAJapan International Cooperation Agency
JBICJapan Bank For International Cooperation
Executive Summary
To sustain the governments efforts in providing a better quality of life to the Filipino
people, the eradication of poverty remains a top national concern and a big challenge to the
present administration in the Philippines. The Philippine government set plans that would attain
its target of completing the energization of all barangays by year 2008.
The Northern Samar province in the Eastern Visayas region, which is the study area for this
feasibility study on rural electrification, is one of the underdeveloped areas in the Philippines.
Its per capita income level is less than 50% of the average per capita income level in the
Philippines. Since the electrification rate of households in the northern mountainous area is only
less than 20%, it has targeted to increase the electrification rate in order to boost the growth of
agricultural activity and the development of the tourism industry.
JBIC has decided to fund the Exclusive Agricultural Development Project in the Catubig
watershed area in the municipalities of Catubig and Las Navas in Northern Samar. This project
aims to increase agricultural productivity, particularly of rice and other crops, increase the
income of residents and improve health and sanitary conditions. This will be addressed by the
development of an agricultural infrastructure centered on an irrigation system. This project will
commence in 2007 and will be completed in 2008. It is envisioned that there will be an
improvement in the quality of life of the people belonging to the poor sector upon the
development of the base infrastructure. Moreover, the acceleration of rural electrification is also
expected.
This study covers the feasibility of rural electrification by renewable energy, such as micro
hydro power supplied from the potential of the Catubig River and irrigation facilities and
biomass power energy supplied from agricultural products. The increase in agricultural
products is an expected outcome of the Exclusive Agricultural Development Project in the
Catubig watershed area.
As a result of this study total construction cost of rural electrification by hybrid system
between micro hydro power for the base load and biogas power for the peak load is estimated as
most competitive other than the cost of other alternatives such like expansion of distribution line
to the beneficiary, soro micro hydro power, soro biogas power and rice chaff power.
- S-1 -
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background and Objectives
To sustain the governments efforts in providing a better quality of life to the Filipino
people, the eradication of poverty remains a top national concern and a big challenge to the
present administration in the Philippines. The Philippine government set plans that would attain
its target of completing the energization of all barangays by year 2008.
Two-thirds of the poverty group, which comprises about 40% of the population in the
Philippines, are engaged in the farming and fishing industries. Realization of rural
electrification is expected to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor, help eradicate
poverty in rural areas, provide a better quality of life and produce new sources of income.
The Northern Samar province in the Eastern Visayas region, which is the study area for
this feasibility study on rural electrification, is one of the underdeveloped areas in the
Philippines. Its per capita income level is less than 50% of the average per capita income level
in the Philippines. Since the electrification rate of households in the northern mountainous area
is only less than 20%, it has targeted to increase the electrification rate in order to boost the
growth of agricultural activity and the development of the tourism industry.
The main industry in this province is agriculture, with major crops including rice, corn,
coconut, banana and cassava. Although agriculture is the provinces main income source,
self-sufficiency in rice has not been attained. Therefore, rice has been imported from the
adjoining Leyte province.
Poor health and sanitary conditions, including that of the rural sewerage systems, have
brought some diseases to the residents, thereby contributing to the slow progress in the province.
Furthermore, since the roads in this area are unpaved, agricultural products can not be easily
transported during the rainy season. These factors contribute to the low income level in the
province.
JBIC has decided to fund the Exclusive Agricultural Development Project in the
Catubig watershed area in the municipalities of Catubig and Las Navas in Northern Samar. This
project aims to increase agricultural productivity, particularly of rice and other crops, increase
the income of residents and improve health and sanitary conditions. This will be addressed by
-1-
the development of an agricultural infrastructure centered on an irrigation system. This project
will commence in 2007 and will be completed in 2008. It is envisioned that there will be an
improvement in the quality of life of the people belonging to the poor sector upon the
development of the base infrastructure. Moreover, the acceleration of rural electrification is also
expected.
This study covers the feasibility of rural electrification by renewable energy, such as
micro hydro power supplied from the potential of the Catubig River and irrigation facilities and
biomass power energy supplied from agricultural products. The increase in agricultural
products is an expected outcome of the Exclusive Agricultural Development Project in the
Catubig watershed area.
1.2 Scope of Work
This study covers the feasibility of a scheme for implementation of this project, site
survey and collection of data on the following:
z Site Survey at Power Plant site

z Present condition and action assignment of rural electrification
z Feasibility study of rural electrification by renewable energy
1.3 Study Area
This study was conducted in the municipalities of Catubig and Las Navas, which are
located in the Northern Samar province, the mountainous region of north Samar Island.
To gather more information on case examples for renewable energy generation, the
study team visited a biogas power plant site, which is currently undergoing construction in the
Batangas province, and an existing micro hydro power plant in the Laguna province.
1.4 Study Schedule
Two site surveys were conducted for this study. The first survey was conducted to have
a meeting, gather information and collect data from the concerned government units and branch
offices during the period October 10, 2006 to October 14, 2006.
-2-
The second survey was conducted to have a meeting with concerned government
officials and visit the proposed site and some unenergized barangays in Northern Samar, the
existing micro hydro power plant in Laguna and the biogas power plant site in Batangas. This
second survey was carried out from December 3, 2006 until December 12, 2006. The detailed
schedule of the site surveys is shown in the attached documents.
1.5 Study Team Member
Members of this study are listed below.
Table-1.1 Study Team Member

No Name Specialty
1 Takatoshi Nagao Project Manager, Project Implementation Plan

Masahiko
2 Study of Renewable Energy
Kaneko
3 Yusuke Inoue Electric Power Facility Plan
4 Kei Katayama Rural Electrification Plan
5 Hiroki Aso Regional Development Plan
-3-
Chapter 2 Socio-economic Development in Communities Hosting
Renewable Energy
2.1 Economic Development and Energy in the Philippines
The link between energy and the economy has never been more evident than now when
energy-related events tend to impact on a countrys economic performance. An increase in
prices of oil, for example, is bound to immediately affect the prices of basic commodities and
utilities such as water and electricity. The trickling effect goes on a wider scale as oil is a
primary input to run our transport facilities. Electricity is also a basic requirement to sustain our
industrial, commercial, and to a certain extent, agricultural activities. There is no doubt,
therefore, that energy is a fundamental tool in any countrys development and a priori in the
improvement of the peoples quality of life. Being aware of this fact, the government ensures
that energy development is preceded by a rationalized and integrated energy-environment and
economic planning approach.
The Philippine Energy Plan (PEP), which has a revolving time frame of ten years, is
guided and remains consistent with national development plans such as the Medium-Term
Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) and Medium-Term Philippine Investment Plan
(MTPIP). It is also cognizant of the countrys commitment to international agreements such as
the UN Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol and more recently, the
Johannesburg Plan of Action for Sustainable Development. The PEP, with the most recent
edition being the 2006 PEP Update, is annually modified by the Department of Energy (DOE)
and its attached agencies to integrate vital developments in the global and domestic economy.
Thus, any PEP update carefully considers macro-economic planning set by the relevant
government agencies in the Philippines such as the National Economic and Development
Authority (NEDA) for the Gross Domestic Product, Gross National Product and Gross Value
Added rates; National Statistics Office for the population growth and the Central Bank of the
Philippines for the foreign exchange rates. On the other hand, crude oil prices are taken from
international benchmarks.
Such is the link between energy and the economy that the Arroyo administration has
included energy independence as one of the components in its Five-Point Reform Package
together with macro-economic stability, good governance, job creation and social development.
With Philippine prospects for growth pegged at 5.5 percent in the next three years, all sectors in
government including energy are called upon to contribute their respective shares in ensuring
-4-
the countrys sustainable growth. The DOE, the countrys energy policy making body,
commits to this over-arching goal as affirmed in its mission statement, to wit: improving the
quality of life of the Filipino by formulating and implementing policies and programs to ensure
sustainable, stable, secure, sufficient, accessible and reasonably-priced energy.
These are fleshed out in the two major goals as outlined in the Philippine Energy Plan
2005-2014 and affirmed in the 2006 PEP Update, to wit: attaining energy independence or a
sustained self-sufficiency level of 60 percent by year 2010 and beyond; and, promoting the
effective implementation of power sector reforms to bring about fair and reasonable energy
prices in a competitive environment.
In realizing the 60 percent self-sufficiency goal, the energy sector has laid out plans that
will accelerate the exploration, development and utilization of indigenous energy resources,
intensify renewable energy development; increase the use of alternative fuels; and, enhance
energy efficiency and conservation measures.
In the context of the study, the discussion will focus on the strategy of intensifying
renewable energy development. Anchored on the governments Renewable Energy Policy
Framework (REPF) 2003-2013, the goal is to double the capacity share of renewable energy
sources within the REPF time frame through the following specific objectives:
a) Be the number one geothermal producer in the world

b) Double hydro capacity by 2013
c) Be the number one wind energy producer in Southeast Asia
d) Become the solar manufacturing hub in Southeast Asia
e) Expand contribution of biomass, solar, and ocean energy by 131 MW
2.2 Renewable Energy Development in the Philippines
Hydropower
Hydro energy, as defined in the REPF, is generated from the movement of masses of
water. Hydroelectric power plants convert energy contained in flowing water, such as rivers
and streams, into electricity. They are classified according to various capacities as follows: a)
-5-
micro-hydro 1 to 100 kW; b) mini-hydro 101 kW to 10 MW; and c) large hydro- more than
10 MW.
Hydropower generation started in the country in the early 1900s in the northern
mountains of Luzon. This was followed by the construction of the Botocan hydroelectric plant
in Laguna in the 1930s but which was commissioned only during the 1940s as a result of the
war that crippled operations in the country. During the same decade and the 1950s, more
hydroelectric plants were commissioned by the state-owned National Power Corporation (NPC).
Below is a listing of the early hydro power projects built by the NPC, the Manila Electric
Company (MERALCO), the countrys largest electric utility provider, and some private
institutions, such as the Villa Escudero Plantation and Resort (Tiaong, Quezon ) and Camp John
Hay Development Corporation (Baguio City):
a) Early Micro-hydros
1) VILLA ESCUDERO HP
Operator/Owner : Villa Escudero Plantations
& Resort
Capacity : 75 kW
Year of Operation : 1937
2.) CALIBATO HP
Operator/Owner : PHILPODECO
Capacity : 80 kW
-6-
b) Early Mini-hydros
1) CAMP JOHN HAY MHP

Operator/Owner : John Hay Development Corp.
Capacity : 560 kW
2) BALOGBOG MHP
Capacity : 650 kW
3) PALACPAQUIN MHP
Capacity : 400 kW
c) Large Hydros
1) BOTOCAN HP
Operator/Owner : MERALCO /NPC (1979)
Capacity : 16.96 MW
2) CALIRAYA HP
Operator/Owner : NPC
Capacity : 32.0 MW
Initial Year of Operation : 1941
Complete Operation : 1950
-7-
Current Situation
In accordance with the REPF goals, the Philippines seeks to double its existing
hydropower capacity from 2,518 MW in 2002 to 5,468 MW in 2013 through indicative capacity
addition of 2,950 MW.
Performance Assessment
In the countrys quest for alternative clean sources of energy and correspondingly
reduced dependence on imported fuels, hydropower generation presents a vital option. In 2004,
hydropower resources contributed 15.9 percent to the countrys total power generation with the
commissioning of the 345-MW San Roque Hydropower plant in Pangasinan and 350-MW
Kalayaan 3 and 4 in Laguna. Fuel oil displacement of the sector reached 14.8 million barrels
of fuel oil (MMBFOE). Currently, the country has 134 hydropower plants in operation,
broken down into 21 large hydropower plants, 52 mini-hydropower plants and 61
micro-hydropower plants.
-8-
Measurable Sectoral Targets
By 2014, the hydropower sector targets a cumulative installed capacity of 3,991 MW

from hydropower resources, as outlined in the Philippine Energy Plan update 2006 (Table-2.1).
This corresponds to about 780 MW of additional capacity from the current capacity of 3,219.1
MW, and is much smaller that the target capacity addition as defined in the REPF. Generation
of electricity will reach 14,741 GWh by 2014, thereby displacing 25.4 MMBFOE.
Table-2.1 Hydropower Measurable Targets
2005 2006 2010 2014

Installed capacity 3,219.1 3,219.1 3,219.1 3,991.1
(MW )
Luzon 2,209.8 2,209.8 2,209.8 2,509.8
Visayas 11.61 11.61 11.61 61.61
Mindanao 997.65 997.65 997.65 1,427.65
Gross Generation 8,374 8,563 12,996 14,741
(GWh)
Luzon 4,422 4,611 8,896 8,819
Visayas 35 35 35 188
Mindanao 3,917 3,917 4,065 5,734
Total Imported Fuel 14.44 14.76 22.41 25.42
Oil Displacement
(in MMBFOE)
Indicative Projects
Potential sites for mini and micro-hydro projects are evenly distributed in all the
countrys administrative regions. These were identified by the DOE, NPC and the National
Electrification Administration (NEA). In 1995, the DOE conducted a water resource inventory
study to validate NEAs and NPCs identified potential sites for promotion to private investors.
Meanwhile, a study conducted by the United States Renewable Energy Laboratory (US-NREL)
likewise revealed that micro-hydro potential sites are well distributed all over the country. The
study gained the support of the local government units (LGUs), non-government organizations
(NGOs), electric cooperatives (ECs) and the state-university based Affiliated Non-Conventional
Energy Centers (ANECs) by also conducting local identification projects.
-9-
Table-2.2 Indicative Hydropower Capacity Addition
Potential Year
Region Project Location
Capacity (MW) Available
CAR Pasil HEP Kalinga 22.0 2011
Talubin MHP Mt. Province 5.6 2012
Can-eo MHP Mt. Province 5.9 2012
Agbulu HEP* Apayao 360.0 2012
Nalatang HEP* Benguet 75.0 2014
Binongan HEP* Abra 175.0 2014
I Upper Agno MHP* Pangasinan 5.0 2008
II Adalam HEP Quirino 46.0 2010
Diduyon HEP* Quirino 345.0 2011
Abuan HEP* Isabela 60.0 2013
Ilaguen HEP* Isabela 88.0 2014
III Dinalugan MHP Aurora 0.5 2007
Debutunan MHP Aurora 0.5 2010
IV-A Kanan HEP* Infanta, Quezon 113.0 2008
IV-B Batang-Batang MHP Palawan 3.5 2006
Langogan MHP* Palawan 6.8 2010
Babuyan Island MHP* Palawan 5.6 2010
Catuiran HEP* Mindoro Oriental 18.0 2011
Aglubang HEP* Mindoro Oriental 13.6 2011
Cabinbin MHP* Palawan 0.8 2013
V Kapipian MHP Catanduanes 3.0 2006
Colasi MHP* Camarines 0.96 2008
Dugui MHP* Catanduanes 3.5 2009
Cawayan II MHP* Sorsogon 2.5 2012
Hitoma MHP* Catanduanes 3.0 2012
VI Igbolo MHP* Iloilo 4.0 2010
Timbaban HEP* Aklan 23.5 2011
Villasiga HEP* Antique 16.5 2012
VII Pacuan HEP Negros Oriental 33.0 2007
Siaton MHP* Negros Oriental 5.4 2011
Okoy HEP* Negros Oriental 12.0 2012
Sicopong HEP* Negros Oriental 17.8 2012
VIII Bugtong MHP* Samar 1.0 2009
Amandaraga MHP* Eastern Samar 4.0 2012
IX Lower Dapitan MHP Zamboanga Norte 3.8 2006
Salug Daku 1 MHP* Zamboanga Sur 2.5 2008
Salug Daku 2 MHP Zamboanga Sur 2.5 2008
Middle Dapitan MHP Zamboanga Norte 4.4 2008
Upper Dapitan MHP Zamboanga Norte 3.6 2011
Ingin MHP* Zamboanga Norte 3.0 2012
* With feasibility study
- 10 -
Potential
Year
Region Project Location Capacity
Available
(MW)
X Tuasan MHP Camiguin 0.5 2008
Misamis
Larangan MHP Occidental 8.5 2008
Culaman MHP Bukidnon 10.0 2008
Odiongan 3 MHP* Misamis Oriental 10.0 2008
Cabulig MHP* Misamis Oriental 3.5 2009
Tagoloan HEP* Bukidnon 68.0 2010
Impasugong HEP Bukidnon 68.0 2010
Odiongan 2 MHP* Misamis Oriental 5.0 2012
Liangan HEP Lanao Norte 11.9 2012
Bulanog Batang HEP* Bukidnon 132.0 2012
Agus III HEP* Lanao Norte/Sur 225.0 2014
XI Sibulan A Davao del Sur 16.5 2008
Sibulan B Davao del Sur 24.0 2008
Taytayan MHP Compostela Valley 0.6 2009
Tandik MHP* Compostela Valley 5.0 2010
Siguil B Sarangani 15.0 2010
Talaingod MHP Davao del Norte 10.0 2010
Suwawan HEP Davao City 40.0 2011
Tamogan HEP Davao City 60.0 2011
Camanlangan MHP Compostela Valley 1.0 2012
Balutakay MHP Davao del Sur 0.2 2012
XII Magpet MHP* Cotabato 10.0 2007
Libungan MHP North Cotabato 10.0 2010
Pulangi V HEP* North Cotabato 300.0 2012
XIII Taguibo MHP Agusan Norte 7.0 2008
Lake Mainit HEP Agusan Norte 22.0 2009
Pugo HEP* Agusan Norte 18.0 2010
ARMM Kanapnapan Fall MHP Lanao Sur 10.0 2008
* With feasibility study
The 2006 Plan Update identifies 70 hydropower projects with a total potential capacity
of 2,603.5 MW (Table-2.2). This is composed of 34 large hydropower projects, 27
mini-hydropower projects and nine micro-hydropower projects. About 37 of these indicative
projects have existing feasibility studies.
- 11 -
Wind Power
Wind energy refers to the energy that can be derived from the wind, which can then be
converted into useful electrical or mechanical energy. In the Philippines, there are six regions
identified with wind electric potential. These include the following:
1. Batanes and Babuyan Island

2. Northwest tip of Luzon (Ilocos Norte)
3. Higher interior terrain of Luzon, Mindoro, Samar, Leyte, Panay, Negros, Cebu,
Palawan, Eastern Mindanao and adjacent islands
4. Well-exposed east-facing coastal locations from Northern Luzon southward to
Samar
5. The wind corridors between Luzon and Mindoro (including Lubang Island)
6. Between Mindoro and Panay (including the Semirara and Cuyo Island
The first large-scale wind power plant in the Philippines and in Southeast Asia is
located in Bangui, Ilocos Norte. This 25-MW plant is developed by Northwind Power
Development Corporation.
During the first wind contracting round in 2004, 16 potential wind power sites were
offered to private investors. The estimated total capacity of these sites is 345 MW. Six
pre-commercial contracts (PCCs) were since then issued by the Department of Energy (DOE) to
various developers.
Nineteen additional wind power sites with an estimated total capacity of 3,270 MW
were identified during the second batch. Six private investors signified their interest in
developing some of these sites.
Solar Power
Solar energy is defined as energy derived form solar radiation which can be converted
into useful thermal or electrical energy. Considering that the Philippines is situated near the
equator, there is a nationwide potential for harnessing solar energy. Presently, there is a
960-kW CEPALCO solar power plant which is located in Cagayan de Oro in Mindanao and
connected to the grid.
- 12 -
There are eight solar energy programs, seven of which are funded by foreign donors.
As part of the Solar Electrification Project, a 28-kWp centralized photovoltaic (PV) plant was
also installed in Pangan-an Island, Cebu to supply electricity to about 200 households.
The Solar Power Technology Support (SPOTS) Project was designed to install solar
energy systems in about 80 Agrarian Reform Communities (ARCs). There are 5,600 solar
energy systems completed in 154 barangays under this program.
The Environmental Improvement for Economic Sustainability (EIES) Project also

promotes the use of photovoltaic systems for rural-based electrification through the installation
of 15,000 Solar Hybrid Systems (SHSs) in the target regions, which include Regions I to VII,
the Minadanao area and the Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR). This project is being
implemented by PNOC, in coordination with the DOE. As of the first quarter of 2006, 9,191
SHS have already been installed.
Biomass
The Philippines has significant biomass resources which can be harnessed to develop
energy systems. The DOE has identified a biomass (bagasse) potential of 250 million barrels
of fuel oil equivalent (MMBFOE) in the country. In terms of capacity, the country has a total
installed capacity of 235.7 MW from the different regions, with Western Visayas having the
biggest potential of 127.8 MW.
While the documentation of biomass energy systems is still an ongoing activity, the
DOE has listed down several ongoing biomass projects including the 30-MW Talisay Bioenergy
Project and the 50-MW Bioenergy Project.
There are likewise ongoing studies for the 25-MW Bais City Project, the 25-MW Capiz
Bioenergy Project, the 5-MW La Suerte Rice Hull Project and the 5-MW Inter City Rice Hull
project.
The DOE foresees the expansion of RE contribution (biomass, solar, micro hydro and
ocean) by 250 MW by year 2013.
- 13 -
2.3 Major Issues
The capital-intensive nature, long gestation period (average of seven years) and related
issues of social acceptability of large hydropower projects remain to be the sectors biggest
challenges. On the other hand, micro-hydro development for off-grid electrification is
hindered by high upfront costs and the need for government support and intervention.
Socio-environmental concerns
There is considerable resistance for the development of large hydropower projects due
to the potential for upstream flooding, destruction of agricultural areas and animal habitats and
disruption of communities in the affected areas. These factors have affected the attractiveness
of large hydropower projects.
Shift in type of development
Given the many issues plaguing large hydropower projects, the logical step is to focus
on smaller, more manageable run-of-river projects. However, such shift will have to consider
some challenges, such as a decrease in new potential capacity given the smaller scale of the
projects, intermittent supply of power and an anticipated decrease in power generation during
the summer months.
Commercialization of hydropower technology
There is a need to develop and commercialize suitable micro-hydro technology in the

Philippines, even as hydropower technology for large and small projects is proven and mature.
The Philippines remains to be dependent on imported electro-mechanical equipment for
micro-hydro projects. The costs of these equipment vary based on kilowatt capacity. For
instance, a 5-kW equipment with controls and metering devices costs US$11,000 while a
100-kW equipment costs US$64,500.
2.4 Government Policies and Programs
The aggressive development of the countrys renewable energy (RE) resource potential
comes as the second most critical strategy in attaining the Philippine government advocacy for
energy independence. In recent years, the steady increase in the contribution of geothermal
- 14 -
and hydropower resources to the power generation mix has lessened the countrys dependence
on imported fuels. In the governments rural electrification efforts, renewable energy sources
such as solar, micro-hydro, wind and biomass resources are seeing wide-scale use. Thus, it has
become the governments policy to facilitate the energy sectors transition to a sustainable
system with renewable energy as an increasingly prominent, viable and competitive option.
Along this context, the government is strongly working for the passage of House Bill
1068 entitled An Act to Promote the Development, Utilization and Commercialization of
Renewable Energy Sources to further boost renewable energy in the country. The proposed
bill, now on bicameral discussions, aims to promote the development of RE to further reduce
the countrys reliance on generation systems powered by imported fuels while minimizing
exposure of the economy to price fluctuations in the international markets. The bill will also
ensure the increase in RE use through the provision of fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to RE
developers, including mandatory generation, priority dispatch for intermittent generation and
establishment of a trust fund. Likewise, the zero rating provided for RE-generated electricity
under the recently-implemented Reformed Value Added Tax Law (R-VAT) or Republic Act
9337 will enhance the competitiveness of RE-sourced electricity.
Specifically, for hydropower projects, the enactment of Republic Act No. 7156,
otherwise known as the Mini-Hydroelectric Power Incentives Act, in September 12, 1991
institutionalized attractive incentives for mini-hydro development, and consolidated under the
then Office of Energy Affairs the responsibility and authority for hydropower development in
the country. The law was meant to address the financial issues plaguing the industry then in
the wake of the peso depreciation experienced by the country in the late 1980s. Summarized
below are the important provisions of RA 7156 which are enforced to date:
a) Special privilege tax rates Tax payable by developers/grantees to develop

potential sites for hydroelectric power and to generate, transmit and sell electric
power shall be 2.0 percent of their gross receipts.
b) Income tax holiday for seven years from the start of commercial operation.
c) Tax and duty free importation of machinery, equipment and materials Exemption
from payment of tariff duties and value-added tax (VAT) on the importation of
machinery and equipment within seven years from date of award of contract.
- 15 -
d) Tax credit on domestic capital equipment For developers who buy machinery,
equipment, materials and parts from local manufacturers, tax credit is granted in an
amount equivalent to 100 percent from the value of VAT and customs duties that
would have been paid to import said machinery, equipment, etc.
e) Special realty tax rates on equipment and machinery Realty and other taxes on
civil works, equipment, machinery and other improvements of a registered
mini-hydroelectric power developer shall not exceed 2.5 percent of their original
cost.
f) VAT exemption Exemption from payment of 10 percent VAT on gross receipts

derived from the sale of electric power whether wheeled via NPC or electricity
utility lines.
In relation to the issues presented earlier, the following are some action plans that the
DOE has indicated to pursue:
a) Information, Education and Communication to enhance public acceptability
Prior to the implementation of the hydropower projects, the DOE shall involve
all stakeholders in the decision-making process which could also include
consultations with cultural communities (since hydro projects are mostly in the
hinterlands). This would ensure that rights of the affected peoples are taken into
consideration. At the same time, project risks are easier to ascertain through the
joint conduct of social preparation activities.
b) Promotion of alternative hydro development
The run-of-river schemes of construction will allow for a balance of river

ecosystems while providing communities dependent on the river for their livelihood
to co-exist with hydropower projects. In addition, the government would place
greater emphasis on projects with social and environmental issues by treating these
problems as an integral element, along with economic and financial considerations
in the decision-making process.
- 16 -
c) Commercialization of hydropower technology
With additional incentives as stipulated in the proposed RE Bill, the

commercialization of locally made hydropower equipment can be attained. The
following measures are proposed to hasten commercialization:
1) Establishment of a Market Service Center
The Center will assist RE producers to obtain legal papers and permits
required for RE projects. Likewise, under the UNDP-assisted CBRED project,
there are provisions for various financing assistance options available to
developers of renewable energy projects. The Center is also envisioned to be
the repository of database for all hydropower projects.
2) Pursuit of technical cooperation with other countries
For small-scale hydropower development, the basic strategy for

commercialization is to encourage electro-mechanical manufacturers to set up
facilities in the Philippines and reduce the cost of importation of turbine
equipment. There are several local turbine fabricators in the country that can
be trained to enhance their capability to manufacture turbine equipment. The
DOE will likewise continue to seek technical and bilateral cooperation with
other countries that offer the latest expertise and technology transfer to replicate
some successful demonstration projects.
- 17 -
2.5 Impact to Host Communities
The DOE continues to fulfill its social commitment to communities hosting energy
projects through Energy Regulations (ER) 1-94 of Republic Act (RA) 7638 or the Department
of Energy Act of 1992. Other enabling legislations include the following: Republic Act 7160
or the Local Government Code and Republic Act 9136 or the Electric Power Industry Reform
Act (EPIRA) of 2001. Energy projects include energy-generating facilities or energy resource
development activities.
Section 289 and 294 of the RA 7160 provides that the LGU shall receive 1.0 percent of
the gross sales of the preceding calendar year or 40 percent of the total collection of royalties,
taxes and other fees earned from the development and utilization of energy resources, whichever
is higher. Eighty percent of this allocation shall be applied solely for the reduction of
electricity costs where such resources are located while the remaining 20 percent will be used
for local development and livelihood projects.
On the other hand, ER 1-94 requires generation companies and/or energy resource
developers to set aside Php 0.01/kWh of their total electricity sales as financial benefits to the
host communities. Funds can be accessed by proposing projects under any of the following
classifications: electrification fund (EF); development and livelihood fund (DLF); and,
reforestation, watershed management, health and/or environment enhancement (RWMHEEF).
The allocation of the fund is as follows: 50 percent of one centavo for EF and 25 percent each
for DLF and RWMEEF, respectively.
The non-monetary advantages, on the other hand, include the prioritization of load
dispatch, training and skills development, preference in employment, preference in procurement
of local supplies and sound environmental management.
The grant of financial benefits was subsequently strengthened in Section 66 of the

EPIRA and Part A, Rule 29 of the EPIRAs Implementing Rules and Regulations. The
guidelines expanded the coverage with the inclusion of energy generating facilities having
capacities of 10 MW and below.
- 18 -
Chapter 3 Rural Electrification
3.1 Current Condition of Rural Electrification
Rural electrification in the Philippines has been adopted as a key policy of the national
government as it can improve the living standards of the people and reduce poverty by the
creation of new income sources in rural areas. In 1960, the Philippine government declared its
stance in tackling rural electrification as a national policy, and established the Electrification
Agency (EA). In 1969, the National Electrification Act was enacted and the EA was
reorganized to form the National Electrification Administration (NEA), with the task to
seriously undertake rural electrification. As power distribution in the Philippines had been
carried out by private companies, the business was concentrated in highly populated urban areas
where economic efficiency is greater. Therefore, the difference between urban and rural areas
was growing larger. To solve this situation, NEA initiated the promotion of rural
electrification through the Rural Electrification Cooperatives (RECs1) to be established in the
local areas pursuant to the Act2.
Spurred by a substantial amount of subsidies from the national government and the
support agencies, rural electrification dramatically advanced in the 1970s, and the number of
RECs reached the current 119 in 1980. However, there were some RECs with weak financial
foundation and many had poor collection of electricity charges. Thus, electrification has been
carried out with many financial issues.
By 1997, electrification was completed for all municipalities, but the barangay level
electrification remained only at roughly 72%. In order to keep promoting rural electrification,
the Philippine government launched the O-Ilaw program in 2000 and the Expanded Rural
Electrification (ER) program in April 2003. These programs were initiated to meet the
objectives to complete electrification of all barangays by 2008 (initial target was 2004, which
was changed to 2006 and re-changed to the current target), and to reach 90% household
connection rate by 2017. It is said that there are 41,995 barangays in the Philippines, and
roughly 8,300 (19.8%) were un-electrified as of the end of 2000. The national government is
trying to accelerate electrification by increasing the annual target for electrification to 1,500
barangays (Table-3.1).
1 REC changed its name to Electric Cooperative (EC) in 1993.

2 JICA Report of SW mission on "Rural Electrification in the Philippines (June 2004)" page 27
- 19 -
Table-3.1 1999 2006 Implementation Plans of O-Ilaw Program and ER Program
CUMULATIVE
ANNUAL BARANGAY
YEAR NO. OF
TARGET ELECT. LEVEL
BARANGAYS
1999(actual) 755 32,281 76.90%
2000(actual) 1,366 33,647 80.10%
2001(actual) 1,253 34,900 83.10%
2002 1,636 36,536 87.00%
2003 1,664 38,200 91.00%
2004 1,700 39,900 95.00%
2005 1,095 40,995 97.60%
2006 1,000 41,995 100.00%
TOTAL 7,095 - -
(Source: DOE, http://www.doe.gov.ph/Rep/O-ilaw/oilaw.htm)
In the Philippines, a subject barangay is deemed electrified either (1) electricity is

supplied to 10 or more households in that barangay, or (2) feeder lines have been installed in the
un-electrified barangay (electricity supply is possible, but to be electrified or not is up to the
customer). But recently DOE reformed its definition (1) electricity is supplied to 30 or 40
households in that barangay by sustainable energy such as solar power, battery charge station
(BCS), diesel power and others or (2) feeder lines have been installed in the un-electrified
barangay. Definition described in (2) is the same as the last one but the number of beneficiaries
of electrification was increased. However, even if 100% electrification is achieved on the
barangay level, many households are yet to be electrified. In fact, an average 30 to 40
households in a barangay are connected, meaning that the barangay is electrified even if only a
part of the barangay is actually served with electricity3.
As of October 2006, of the total 41,945 barangays4, electrification has been completed
in 39,590 barangays, giving an electrification rate of 94.4% (Table-3.2). Electrification rates
are largely different among regions: Luzon region 97.1%, Visayas region 96.0%, and Mindanao
region 87.0%. Comparison of the electrification rate by power distributor, which is
responsible for electrification implementation, shows 93.8% for ECs, the largest in number,
followed by 98.5% for MERALCO, and 97.7% for private business/municipality/others
(Table-3.3).
3 Japan Electric Power Information Center, Inc "Overseas Electric Utility Industries 2003 Philippines" pp. 543
4 The October 2006 data says the total number of barangays is 41,945.
- 20 -
Table-3.2 Electrification Level by Region (As of 31, October 2006)
Electrified Unelectrified Ratio

Area Barangays
Barangays Barangays (%)
Philippines 41,945 39,590 2,355 94.4
Luzon 20,476 19,888 588 97.1
Visayas 11,443 10,982 461 96.0
Mindanao 10,026 8,720 1,306 87.0
(Source: DOE)
Table-3.3 Barangay Electrification Level by Franchise Holder (As of October 2006)
Electrified Electrification
Franchise Holder Number of Barangay Challenge
Completed Level (%)
119 Electric Cooperatives 36,080 86% 33,752 93.8 2,251
MERALCO 4,314 10% 4,251 98.5 66
24 Private Investor 1,625 4% 1,587 97.7 38
Owned/ LGUs/ Others
Total 41,945 100% 39,590 94.4 2,355
(Source: DOE )
- 21 -
3.2 Promotion Policy of Rural Electrification
Rural electrification has been carried out by concerned organizations led by the DOE, in
accordance with the O-Ilaw Program and the ER Program. First, the Secretary of the DOE
formulates an electrification objective for the year, which is allocated to the concerned
organizations by the Program Team (PT) comprised of the DOE and other parties. Then, the
5
RECs and private power companies conduct actual implementation . The PT was formed
through DOE Special Order No. 2000-01-03 in January 2000 (revised by S.O. No. 2001-04-010
in 2001). Its responsibilities include the overall planning, promotion, monitoring and
evaluation of rural electrification. The PT is composed of officials from the DOE, NEA,
PNOC and NPC. The Program Management Office (PMO) based in the DOE serves as the
implementing arm of the PT.
The O-Ilaw Program allows for a menu of options for participation from which donors
or prospective partners can choose. The O-Ilaw Program components include the following6:
(1) Regular electrification program of government agencies

a) Department of Energy and its related agencies
(i) Locally-funded projects on electrification using new and renewable energy sources
(ii) Grant-in-Aid Programs
(iii) Electrification projects under ER 1-94 Fund7
b) National Electrification Administration/Rural Electric Cooperatives
c) National Power Corporation
d) Philippine National Oil Company through its Environmental Improvement for
Economic Sustainability (EIES) Project
e) PNOC-Energy Development Corporation
f) Department of Agrarian Reform through its Solar Power Technology Support (SPOTS)
Project for Agrarian Reform Communities
(2) Electrification projects of Private Investors-Owned Utilities such as Meralco, Davao Light
and Power Company, etc.
(3) Electrification projects of LGU-owned utilities
5 Japan Electric Power Information Center, Inc "Overseas Electric Utility Industries 2003 Philippines" p. 544
6 The Philippine Department of Energy Website http://www.doe.gov.ph/Rep/O-ilaw/oilaw.htm
7 Financial Benefits to Host Communities under ER 1-94. One-centavo per kilowatt-hour (P0.01/kWh) of the
Electricity Sales which shall apply to Generation Facilities and/or energy resource development projects (50% for
Electrification Fund, 25% for Development and Livelihood Fund and 25% for Environment Enhancement Fund).
- 22 -
(4) The Independent Power Producers (IPP) Program
(5) The Adopt-a-Barangay Program
(6) Electrification through the Renewable Energy Service Company (RESCO) concept
As seen from these programs, the O-Ilaw Program and the ER Program offer
participation in rural electrification projects to organizations other than government agencies
and electric power suppliers. The funds come from different sources such as the national
general budget, ER 1-94 fund, LGU budget, and subsidies from NGO or overseas. IPPs are
also invited to participate with some expectation placed on their financial capability. Some
examples of rural electrification implemented using the ER 1-94 fund are the PNOC-EDC's
electrifying roughly 10 barangays near Ormoc on Leyte Island in 2000, the US Southern
Energy's barangay electrification project near the coal-fired thermal power plant in Quezon, and
8
the Malaysia's East Asia project in Cebu .
Rural electrification is basically carried out by an entity which holds the power
distribution rights in the relevant area (Franchise Distribution Unit, e.g., EC). However, in the
area where such FDU has declared no electrification plan in the foreseeable future in view of
economic efficiency, electrification is implemented by the Missionary electrification project.
Missionary electrification is undertaken by entities other than ECs, and they also expect private
companies to participate. The entity implementing electrification in that area is called the
qualified third party (QTP). If there are no QTPs, the NPC-SPUG will implement the project
as a last resort. As Missionary electrification projects are for areas with little or no
profitability, continuous subsidies are needed and the fund from a universal charge is
appropriated. Universal charge is imposed on every electricity end-user as a part of the
electricity charge, and its rate is decided by the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC).
3.3 Issues of Rural Electrification
For power distribution, the country is divided into a total of 138 service districts; 119
ECs, 16 private power distributors, and 3 municipal electric power suppliers. Of the ECs, only
15 (12.6%) have achieved 100% barangay electrification, and 75 (63.0%) have not reached 90%.
None of the ECs have achieved 100% household connection rate9.
8 Japan Electric Power Information Center, Inc "Overseas Electric Utility Industries 2003 Philippines" p. 544
9 JICA "Survey of Donor Trend for Overseas Electrification (Philippines) September 2003" page 123
- 23 -
Electrification has two methods, one is to extend transmission/distribution grids and the
other is to utilize dispersion type power sources. At the end of 2000, roughly 4,000 (approx.
45%) of about 8,300 barangays were located quite a distance from the existing grids 10 .
Investment efficiency in these areas is significantly low. The grid extension is difficult due to
dispersed locations of villages and electrification cost is high because of the low income level.
Such areas have no choice but to depend on the off-grid dispersion-type power sources.
Mini-hydropower is utilized in areas where hydropower potential exists. Other areas utilize
mini grids that use new or renewable energy sources such as solar light, wind power and
biomass. Individual electrification by solar home system (SHS) is also promoted.
Table-3.4 shows the electrification methods used from 1999 to 2002. Of the 5,082
barangays, 4,159 or 81.8% were electrified by grid extension, and the remaining 923 or 18.2%
ere through mini grid. Roughly 70% of the mini-grid electrification was through new or
renewable energy sources11.
Whether electrified by grid extension or by mini grid, the barangays to be electrified in

the future have a small power demand, making the electricity supply cost high. As the income
of the people living in such barangays is small, an electrification project is quite unattractive to
the power distributors. A big issue for the future is how electrification should be promoted in
such areas from the perspective of livelihood improvement of the residents.
The DOE has other data useful for planning future electrification. Roughly 1,700
barangays, approx. 18% of roughly 8,300 un-electrified barangays, are located in the provinces
where power plants have already been constructed. These power plants mainly supply energy
for the demand outside the province. It is desirable for them to contribute to promoting the
electrification of un-electrified barangays in one way or another. ER1-94 fund was established
to this end. As aforementioned, pursuant to this system, power producers are obliged to set aside
one centavo (0.01 peso) per kWh of energy generation to the DOE fund. 50% of this fund is
disbursed to energize the un-electrified barangays surrounding the power plants. It is also
possible for a power producer to construct a power-distribution grid, and in such a case, the ER
1-94 fund will be refunded later on12. At any rate, it has a significant value in planning the

11 JICA Report of SW mission on "Rural Electrification in the Philippines (June 2004)" page 32
- 24 -
future direction of rural electrification to physically or institutionally utilize the existing power
plants for electrification of areas surrounding the power plants.
Table-3.4 Rural Electrification by Method (1999 2002)
Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total

Extension of Grid 713 1,078 1,010 1,358 4,15981.8%
Isolated Small Gird 42 288 245 348 92318.2%
Solar (PV) 42 56 212 310 62012.2%
Micro Hydro 15 3 6 24 (0.5%)
Hybrid 2 2 4 (0.1%)
Generator Set 215 28 32 275 (5.4%)
Total 755 1,366 ,255 1,706 5,082 (100.0%)
(Source: JICA Report of SW mission on Rural Electrification in the Philippines (June, 2004) p. 32)
3.4 Effects of Rural Electrification
During the survey of last year, we visited the area in Pasil, Kalinga Province, which was
electrified through micro hydro by JICA. We interviewed one customer and the details are as
given below:
(1) Place visited: Residence of Mr. Constantio Rosito

(2) Location: Dangtalan (former Balangao), Pasil
(3) Summary:
i) State of electrification: The electrification of this area was carried out in December
2004, through micro hydropower to provide 15 kW, by JICA and DOE. Almost all
of the 180 households in this area are connected. Power is supplied from 5 p.m. to 8
a.m. the next morning. The operation is undertaken by the Barangay Alternative
Power Association (BAPA).
ii) Electric appliances owned: Mr. Rosito is in the police service of Balbalan, the
adjacent town. His house has fluorescent lamps (8 W x 5: 40 W), a refrigerator (93
W), a rice cooker, a TV, a VCR, etc. As they are not used simultaneously, the total
demand is less than 200 W. Fluorescent lamps of 8 W are recommended so that
electricity can be used by as many households as possible. One lamp costs 170
pesos. At another household whose head is a carpenter, a power saw (800 W) and a
- 25 -
power planer (500 W) were purchased after electrification. The electricity charge is
computed using a calculation formula according to the demand. They pay 180 pesos
per month. Though there is no meter installed now, BAPA is looking into installing
meters, which have already been provided free of charge by the DOE. As no meters
are installed, some residents complain that they may be overcharged. The BAPA has
two charge collectors.
iii) Lifestyle changes after electrification: People's lifestyle has significantly changed
after electrification. The biggest change is the use of kerosene. They were using
kerosene lamps and 4 liters of kerosene in 15 days costing 140 pesos. Electricity
turned out to be cheaper. Changes occurred in children's life. The time used for
studying lessened during the first 6 months after electrification because they were
watching TV and videos. Recently, however, they got bored of those activities and
started to study longer than before. There are 6 children in the family, 2 in junior
high school, 3 in elementary school, and one toddler. The same thing seems to be
happening in other households. Roughly 30% of the households own a TV and a
VCR. Satellite broadcasting system can be installed for 750 pesos. The problem
of micro hydropower is the voltage fluctuation. At one time, the heater of the
dummy load at the power plant broke down causing a rise in voltage and shutting the
lights off.
The effects of rural electrification on residents are systematically summarized in the

2004 Ex-Post Evaluation Reports regarding the Philippine NEA Rural Electrification Project13
implemented by the Japan Bank for International Cooperation from 1994 to 2001. The Report
states that the rural electrification in the Philippines brought about the following effects14.
[Impact of Project]
For this evaluation, a survey was conducted to study the positive and negative impacts
of this project on local residents. 47% of the residents interviewed answered "very
satisfied," and 46% answered "satisfied," showing as much as 93% of the residents are
satisfied with the project. Asked what impact of electrification they recognized, they
13 L/A was concluded in August 1994. Yen loan amount 11.4 billion yen (loan disbursed amount 9.7 billion yen).
Implementing agency: National Electrification Administration (NEA)
14 JBIC Ex-Post Evaluation Report 2004 "NEA Rural Electrification Project"
http://www.jbic.go.jp/english/oec/post/2004/pdf/2-26_full.pdf
- 26 -
responded that the project provided not only pastimes and convenience through lighting
and other electric appliances but various positive changes such as few fires, improved
working and educational environment and improved communications among family
members and neighbors. The negative impacts of this project were the debts incurred by
household appliance purchases and electricity payment (13%) and the diminished
traditional sense of values (3%).
a) Increase in employment opportunities and income

In the barangays electrified under the project, some residents started new businesses or
increased their income utilizing electricity. Other examples include being able to
operate the sundry store till late at night, making ice lollipops in the freezer for sale, and
opening of a bakery.
b) Improvement in educational environment

The project electrified the educational institutions in the barangays, such as nurseries
and elementary schools, as well as the general households. In the 16 barangays
interviewed, a total of 13 nurseries and elementary schools and 4 high schools were
electrified. In the general households, fluorescent and incandescent lamps that are much
brighter than the formerly used kerosene lamps allow for the children to study at night.
c) Improved convenience and increased pastimes

After electrification, most households purchased fluorescent lamps, light bulbs and
other lighting fixtures (93% of the surveyed). Other electric appliances purchased that
can serve to enhance convenience and ease the burden of household chores are
refrigerators (26%), irons (16%), washing machines (8%), electric rice cookers (5%), and
electric pumps for domestic water (4%). They also bought entertainment items, such as
TVs (54%), VCRs (24%), radios/radio cassette players (30%), karaoke machines (13%),
and video games (2%). The residents' lifestyle changed from working in the field during
the day and coming home to sleep after the sunset to talking under the light, or visiting
neighbors to watch TV or video, or singing karaoke together. Many households replied
that their communication within the family or with the neighbors had improved.
d) Securing less expensive, safe light source

Prior to electrification, most of the households were using kerosene lamps as a light
- 27 -
source. After electrification, fluorescent lamps of 20 to 40 W or incandescent lamps of
40 to 60 W are used. A 60-W incandescent lamp is 7 to 70 times brighter than a
kerosene lamp, while the former is roughly a half to one-ninth of the latter in cost. The
kerosene lamps often caused a fire when toppled. Other problems with kerosene lamps are
bad smell from smoke, health damage including coughs and eye irritation, and soot.
Many residents think that, now that they use fluorescent or incandescent lamps, they are
worry free from fire and damage by kerosene lamp smoke.
- 28 -
Chapter 4 Outline of the Surveyed Area
4.1 Outline of Northern Samar Province
Northern Samar is part of the Eastern Visayas Region, which hosts five (5) other
provinces, namely: Leyte, Southern Leyte, Biliran, Eastern Samar and Western Samar.
Northern Samar province occupies a total land area of 3,498 square kilometers.
Northern Samar is located on the eastern part of the Philippine Islands. It is bounded by
San Bernardino Strait on the north, Samar Sea on the west, Pacific Ocean on the east, and the
provinces of Samar and Eastern Samar on the south.
It ranks thirty-fifth (35th) in size among the 74 provinces of the Philippines and accounts
for practically 1.2 percent of the total land area of the country. About 52 percent of the total
land area is covered by forest and 42 percent is classified as alienable and disposable.
Northern Samar is the gateway to the Visayas and Mindanao from Luzon. It can be
reached by 14 hours bus travel through the Maharlika Highway passing Bicol Region and
traversing the San Bernardino Strait via ferryboat in the primary ports of San Isidro and Allen.
Presently, it is already accessible to Manila via Asian Spirit Airlines servicing four flights a
week. It can also be reached by boat from Manila and Cebu via Calbayog City, Catbalogan
- 29 -
and Tacloban City. Some inter-island shipping companies have scheduled travel to the ports
of San Jose and Laoang.
Northern Samar covers 25 municipalities, 569 barangays and 94,410 households.

Catarman is its capital town. The province registered a total population of 500,639 in 2000
(2000 Census of Population and Housing), posting an annual growth rate of 2.11 percent. Its
population density is recorded at 143 persons per square kilometer. Majority speak the
Waray-waray dialect.
In terms of income, the province is classified as second class. Among the

municipalities, majority or 62.5% are fifth class municipalities. Only two are considered second
and third class municipalities (Catarman and Laoang).
The major industries in Northern Samar are agriculture and fishery. Coconut, abaca,
palay and root crops are the major agricultural crops of the province while bangus, crabs and
prawns are among its major fish/seafood products. Other industries include furniture and
handicraft making, hat and mat weaving, brick making, oil manufacturing and soap making.
Northern Samar falls under the intermediate type climate, which has no distinct dry and
wet seasons. The rainiest months are October to January, while the driest is the month of May.
4.2 Electric Power Situation in Northern Samar
Eastern Visayas is dependent mainly on geothermal resource, Leyte Province being the
host of the largest producer of geothermal energy in the country. The region hosts two (2)
geothermal power plants: the Leyte Tongonan 1, 2 and 3 geothermal power plants the Leyte
Geothermal Power Plant (LGPP 1) with total installed capacity of 112.50 MW and dependable
capacity of 99 MW, and the Tongonan 2 & 3 (Leyte A) with a total installed capacity of
610.80 MW and dependable capacity of 578.40 MW. The LGPP total power generation in
2005 stood at 1,929.62 GWh while Leyte A generation reached 604.04 GWh for the same year.
Excess power generation from these plants are exported to Cebu and Luzon through the
Leyte-Cebu grid and the Leyte-Luzon grid, respectively.
Northern Samar is being serviced by an electric cooperative - the Northern Samar

Electric Cooperative (NORSAMELCO) - in supplying the power requirements of the province.
In 2005, the EC sold a total of 36,271 MWh of electricty to its customers. The residential
- 30 -
sector is the major user of electricity of the province with a 92.5 percent share in the total
electricity demand for the same year. The electricity utilization level of the sector is expected
to post an annual average growth rate of 9 percent for the 10-year period (2006-2015). On
the other hand, the commercial sector only registered a 5.36 percent share in 2005 with an
annual growth rate of 2 percent within the 10-year period, while the rest is shared by the
industrial sector and other users of electricity, such as public buildings and street lights.
Table-4.1 Electricity Demand

Electricity Demand
No. of Custom ers 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Residential 33510 37670 41948 46001 50378 54995 59714 64131 68395 73001
Commercial 1985 2067 2128 2192 2279 2335 2391 2421 2450 2481
Industrial 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Others 818 869 888 905 930 956 962 969 982 996
Total 36,313 40,608 44,966 49,099 53,588 58,287 63,068 67,521 71,829 76,479
NORSAMELCO has no existing bilateral supply contract with the National Power
Corporation (NPC) for the delivery of its power requiement. As such, there is no firm supply
of power for the province. The EC depends on its annual non-contracted purchase of power
from NPC, which is not sustainable since it would be determined by the availability of supply
from NPC not contracted with other utilities. Given this condititon, the annual supply power
deficit would be the annual power purchase of the province. System losses acounted at an
average of 18% from 2001 to 2005. Projected system loss for the next 10 years is seen at a
decreasing rate from 14% in 2006 to 5% in 2015. Meanwhile, peak demand stood at an
average of 7.4 from 2001 to 2005, which is expected to demonstrate an increasing trend within
the 10-year period from 8% in 2006 to 17% in 2015. The system peak occurs at around
7:00 p.m. The over-all system load factor is low at 58% due to the dominance of residnetial
consumers. To meet the required 13.2% reserve margin , the the electric cooperative needs
additional capacity of 1 MW from 2006 to 2009 and 2 MW from 2010 to 2015.
- 31 -
Table-4.2 Annual Power Purchase
Annual Pow e r Purchas e
Purchas e
Ye ar
(MWh)
2001 25,871
2002 30,790
2003 34,235
2004 39,224
2005 40,550
2006 42,734
2007 45,967
2008 49,776
2009 54,235
2010 59,106
2011 65,391
2012 72,459
2013 78,001
2014 83,267
2015 89,302
Table-4.3 Supply Demand Profile

30.00
Supply - Demand Profile

(MW)
20.00
10.00
0.00 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2 0 10 2 0 11 2 0 12 2 0 13 2 0 14 2 0 15
A dd'l C a p t o m e e t a t le a s t 13 .2 % R M 0 .9 2 1.0 6 1.0 6 1.0 6 1.11 1.19 1.2 9 1.4 1 1.5 4 1.7 0 1.8 5 1.9 9 2 .0 9 2 .2 4
Indic a t iv e S upply ( M W) 7 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .4 1 9 .0 5 9 .8 0 10 .6 7 11.6 3 12 .8 7 14 .0 2 15 .0 9 15 .8 4 16 .9 9
F irm S upply ( M W) 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0
P E A K LO A D ( M W) 7 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .0 0 8 .4 1 9 .0 5 9 .8 0 10 .6 7 11.6 3 12 .8 7 14 .0 2 15 .0 9 15 .8 4 16 .9 9
- 32 -
The barangay electrification level in 2005 stood at 67%, which can be translated to 380
barangays electrified. The electrification level represents one of the lowest in the country
and is mainly due to the remote nature of the remaining unenergized barangays in the province.
The absence of roads also makes it more difficult to extend the distribution lines to the
barangays. The municipality of Las Navas, for example, can be easier reached by cruising the
Catubig River, a main source of transportation for the village folks from the said town. The
EC has waived twenty-three (23) barangays from its coverage for possible Third Party
Agreements From its 546 coverage barangays (96% of the total number of barangays), the
EC could meet its target of 100% barangay electrification level by 2008. However, about
40% of the total household population would remain unelectrified until 2015.
Table-4.4 Level of Electrification

Level of Electrification
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Barangay Level (%) 83% 92% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96% 96%
No . o f B arangays Energized (On-Grid) 446 493 516 516 516 516 516 516 516 516
No . o f B arangays Energized (Off-Grid) 26 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Total 472 523 546 546 546 546 546 546 546 546
Household Level (%) 36% 37% 39% 41% 44% 46% 49% 52% 55% 58%
No . o f Ho useho ld Energized (On-Grid) 31,717 34,096 36,653 39,402 42,475 45,788 49,360 53,308 57,573 62,179
No . o f Ho useho ld Energized (Off-Grid) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Total 31,717 34,096 36,653 39,402 42,475 45,788 49,360 53,308 57,573 62,179
References:
1. Philippine Energy Plan 2005-2014

2. Philippine Energy Plan 2006 Update
3. Renewable Energy Policy Framework
4. National Electrification Chronicle, 2003 - 2005
5. Official Website of Northern Samar (www.northernsamar.gov.ph)
- 33 -
Chapter 5 Pre-Feasibility Study of Rural Electrification by Renewable
Energy
5.1 Current Situation of Rural Electrification in Coverage Area
5.1.1 Current Situation of Rural Electrification in Northern Samar
An area for this investigation is located along the Catubig watershed area in Northern
Samar, in the municipalities of Catubig and Las Navas. Northern Samar is a province in the
Eastern Visayas region (Region VIII). As of July 2006, the level of energization for barangays
in Region VIII stood at 90.8%, with several electric cooperatives in Leyte, whose electric power
is supplied by geothermal power plant, attaining a 100% energization level. However, the
energization level in NORSAMELCO, which covers Northern Samar, is only 73.1%, the lowest
among electric cooperatives in Region VIII (Table-5.1, Fig-5.1). The energization level in
Catubig is 60.9% but in Las Navas, the level is a very low 11.3%. Thus, the acceleration of
energization has become a very serious problem (Table-5.2 , Fig-5.2).
- 34 -
Table-5.1 Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII
Electric Number of Barangays

Cooperatives Covered Energized %
Region VIII 4390 3984 90.8
DORELCO 499 494 99.0
LEYECO II 196 196 100.0
LEYECO III 285 285 100.0
LEYECO IV 245 242 98.8
LEYECO V 416 416 100.0
SOLECO 500 483 96.6
BILECO 132 132 100.0
SAMELCO I 427 366 85.7
SAMELCO II 524 482 92.0
ESAMELCO 597 472 79.1
NORSAMELC 569 416 73.1
(as of 2006,July,31)
(Source: NEA)
Fig-5.1 Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII

Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII (as of 2006,July)
100
Barabgay Base Electrification Ratio (%)
90
80
70
60
CO
V
IV
CO
II
O
CO
CO
AM I
III
II
I
SA CO
VI
LC
CO
CO
CO
CO
CO
EL
LE
EL
LE
n
RE
EL
YE
EL
YE
io
SO
AM
YE
BI
YE
M
g
DO
M
LE
LE
Re
LE
ES
LE
SA
RS
NO
- 35 -
Table-5.2 Status of Barangay Electrification in Northern Samar
(as of 2004.12.31)
Municipality Cooperative
Number of Barangays Potential Members House Connections
Energized Covered Energized % Households Total % Total %
Allen 20 19 95.0 3,217 2,140 66.52 2,529 78.6
Biri 8 2 25.0 1,317 376 28.55 397 30.1
Bobon 18 13 72.2 2,613 1,710 65.44 1,598 61.2
Capul 12 5 41.7 1,780 504 28.31 446 25.1
Catarman 55 37 67.3 9,228 7,465 80.90 8,145 88.3
Catubig 46 28 60.9 4,050 1538 37.98 1596 39.4
Gamay 26 12 46.2 3,119 992 31.81 1104 35.4
Laoang 56 33 58.9 7,968 3,707 46.52 3,905 49.0
Lapinig 15 5 33.3 1,396 441 31.59 476 34.1
Las Navas 53 6 11.3 4,286 451 10.52 479 11.2
Lavezares 26 20 76.9 3,635 1,565 43.05 1,624 44.7
Lope de Vega 22 5 22.7 1,621 309 19.06 374 23.1
Mapanas 13 7 53.8 1,326 472 35.60 471 35.5
Mondragon 25 14 56.0 3,987 1,985 49.79 1,927 48.3
Palapag 32 23 71.9 4,019 2,181 54.27 2,259 56.2
Pambujan 26 12 46.2 3,349 1,396 41.68 1,470 43.9
Rosario 11 7 63.6 1,196 596 49.83 629 52.6
San Antonio 10 10 100.0 1,423 723 50.81 665 46.7
San Isidro 14 13 92.9 3,591 2,155 60.01 2,291 63.8
San Jose 16 16 100.0 2,099 1,356 64.60 1,385 66.0
San Roque 16 10 62.5 2,493 1257 50.42 1288 51.7
San Vicente 7 3 42.9 1,178 195 16.55 196 16.6
Silvino Lobos 26 3 11.5 1,601 12 0.75 12 0.7
Victoria 16 13 81.3 1,873 956 51.04 945 50.5
Total 569 316 55.5 72,365 34,482 47.65 36,211 50.0
Source : Northern Samar Electric Cooperative (NORSAMELCO), Inc., Bobon, Northern Samar
Fig-5.2 Status of Barangay Electrification in Northern Samar

Status of Barabgay Electrification in Northern Samar (as of 2004)
100
90
Barangay Base Electrification Ratio (%)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Capul
Biri
Catubig
Laoang
Total
Lapinig
Mapanas
Lavezares
Palapag
Las Navas
Silvino Lobos
Rosario
San Antonio
San Isidro
Allen
Bobon
Catarman
San Roque
Mondragon
Pambujan
San Jose
San Vicente
Gamay
Lope de Vega
Victoria
- 36 -
5.1.2 Power Supply Facilities
NORSAMELCO supplies electricity to its customers through the Wright substation

(138kV/69kV), a transmission line system with 69kV and three substations (Dalakit, Lawaan
and Allen) from the Tongonan geothermal power plant unit 1 (Steam Development:
PNOC-EDC, Generating: NPC, Output 112.5MW). NORSAMELCO covers the Northern
Samar area after receiving the electricity at the substation and distributes electricity to its
customers. Electric supply to Catubig and Las Navas is transmitted from the Lawaan substation
(69kV/13.2kV, 3.75MW) through a 30 km long distribution line (Fig-5.3).
Fig-5.3 Diagram of Transmission Line in Philippines (Northern Samar Area)
Electricity is also supplied by photovoltaic (PV) solar systems, small diesel power
generating sets and battery charging systems (BCS) in Catubig and Las Navas. BCS put up
using Solar panel systems are supplied by PNOC-EDC and NPC. The cost for charging a
battery through the grid is 50-70 pesos while charging a battery through the PV solar system is
about 20 pesos. The diesel power system is supplied by private enterprises with a cost of 100
pesos per 10m per month and four operating hours (18:00-21:00, 5:00-6:00). Even though the
electricity rate is still expensive compared to the residents average income of 4,000-6,000
pesos per month, electricity demand is high as it increases the level of convenience in the life of
the residents. Even though the normal cost of the solar system panel is 75Wp per set, the
expensive 150Wp panel has nevertheless started to become popular.
- 37 -
5.1.3 Summary of NORSAMELCO
NORSAMELCO, the electric cooperative which provides electricity to the Northern

Samar area, was established in 1977. NORSAMELCO distributes power to a total of 23
municipalities and 316 barangays out of 24 Municipalities and 569 Barangays in an area
covering 3,498km2. The only remaining municipality without electricity will be energized by
2007. As of 2004, a total of 36,211 households out of the 72,000 households had a contract to
receive the electricity (Table-5.3). The breakdown of the consumer volume of NORSAMELCO
is 67% for residential, 18% for commercial, 9% for public building, 1% for industrial and 4%
for street light (Fig-5.4).
Table-5.3 Outline of NORSAMELCO (As of 2006 Oct.)

Item Unit Number
Peak Load kW 8,133
Load Factor % 64.8
System Power factor % 94.1
No. of Towns Covered 24
No. of Towns Energised 24
No. of Barangays Covered 569
No. of Barangays Energised 318
No. of Potential Consumers 72,365
No. of Actual Consumers 38,400
Energy Net Purchased (Monthly) kWh 3,717,908

System Loss % 21
Average Energy Rate (Buying) Peso/kWh 4.66
Average Energy Rate (Selling) Peso/kWh 6.23
Revenue (Monthly) Peso 18,331
(Source: NORSAMELCO)
The energy distribution of NORSAMELCO in 2004 was 31,249MWh which included

72.4% for residential (Table-5.4). The latest information shows that 3,717,900kWh per month is
distributed (as of October 2006) corresponding to 44,615MWh per year. As of 2006, the
maximum electricity demand was 8,133kW (Table-5.3). With more electrification projects on
line, NORSAMELCO foresees a problem of a larger system loss. At present, the average system
loss stands at 12%. In addition to technical losses, the other sources of losses may come from
defective electric meters, etc.
- 38 -
As of 2004, the electricity selling rate of NORSAMELCO was 6.13 pesos/kWh for
Residential, 5.41 pesos/kWh for Commercial and 5.60 pesos/kWh for Total (Table-5.5). As of
October 2006, the rate increased to 6.23 pesos/kWh. NORSAMELCO pays 4.66 pesos/kWh for
electricity it purchases from the NPC (Table-5.3).
Fig-5.4 Breakdown of Consumer Numbers in NORSAMELCO (as of 2004)
Industrial, 1% Street Light, 4%

Public Building, 9%
Commercial, 18%
(Source: NORSAMELO) Resident, 67%
Table-5.4 Energy Distribution of NORSAMELCO(2004)
Type MWh
Residential 22,632 72.4%
Commercial 5,141 16.5%
Industrial 183 0.6%
Others 3,293 10.5%
Total 31,249 100.0%
(Source:2005 Regional Social & Economic Trends)
Table-5.5 Electric Tariff of NORSAMELCO(2004)
Type Peso/kWh
Residential 6.13
Commercial 5.41
Industrial 5.45
Public Building 5.46
Street Light 5.57
Total 5.60
(Source:2005 Regional Social & Economic Trends)
According to the income statement of the electric cooperative, NORSAMELCO

recorded deficits in two years. It had a deficit of 1,550,085 Pesos in 2004 but the deficit has
been covered in recent years (Table-5.6). Fig-5.5 and Table-5.7 show the prospects for electric
- 39 -
demand and development plan, respectively, in NORSAMELCO. According to Fig-5.5 and
Table-5.7, the number of consumers and the maximum peak load will increase by 13% and 7%
per year, respectively. NORSAMELCO has formulated plans to attain its target of completing
the energization of all barangays by year 2008.
Table-5.6 Income Statement of NORSAMELCO(2004)

(Peso)
2004 2003
Operating Revenue 188,004,480 151,005,569
Operating Expense 180,266,376 144,958,715
Net Operating Income 7,738,104 6,046,854
Interest Charge 3,326,224 5,650,702
Depreciation Charge 8,291,743 5,871,375
Net Operating Income after Interest & Dep. -3,879,863 -5,475,223
Other Income 2,329,778 2,998,464
Net Income (Loss) -1,550,085 -2,476,759
(Source: NORSAMWELCO 2004 Annual Report)
Fig-5.5 Demand Forecast of NORSAMELCO

100,000 16.0
90,000 14.0
80,000
12.0
70,000
No. of Consumers
Peak Load (MW)
60,000 10.0
50,000 8.0
40,000 6.0
30,000
4.0
20,000
2.0
10,000
0 0.0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
No. of Consumers Peak Load (MW)
- 40 -
Table-5.7 NORSAMELCO Development Plan
Item 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

No. of Costumers 39,044 44,014 49,617 55,942 63,075 71,124 80,329 90,447
Peak Load (MW) 9 9 10 11 12 13 13 14
Level of Electrification
Barangay Level 73% 82% 91% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
No. Barangay Electrified (On-Grid) 352 382 412 443 443 443 443 443
No. Barangay Electrified (Off-Grid) 63 84 105 126 126 126 126 126
Total 415 466 517 569 569 569 569 569
Projected Infrastructure Requirement
Distribution/ Sub-transmission Facilities 102 125 64 94
Expansion (ckt-kms) 102 125 64 94
Rehabilitation / Upgrade (ckt-kms)
Substation Capacity (MVA)
Reactive Power Compensation Plan (MVAr)
Capital Investment Requirements (Million Peso 48 87 26 31 9 8 8 9
(Source: Phillipnes Energy Plan 2004-2013 )
NORSAMELCO has adopted the QTP (Qualified Third Party) concept to implement
the extension of distribution lines to some of its franchise areas. The DOE has considered the
weakness of the financing base of NORSAMELCO. PNOC-EDC provides the electricity to
surrounding areas in Leyte as it operates geothermal power plants in the area. Therefore, there is
no claim from the beneficiaries of economical inefficiencies. However, intention of
development of distribution lines depends on the QTPs policy so that it is not so smooth to
implement. The DOE expects that development of distribution lines will be implemented not
only by PNOC-EDC but also by NPC-SPUG, NEA using public funds, and Mirant and KEPCO
using private funds.
5.1.4 Current Situation of Electrification in the municipalities of Catubig and Las Navas
A total of 28 barangays out of the 47 barangays in Catubig have been energized, while a
total of 26 barangays out of the 53 barangays in Las Navas have been energized. Both
municipalities consider electrification plans which will be implemented by QTPs (Table-5.8(1),
Table-5.8(2)). However, these plans may not be actually implemented because no measures are
taken such as assistance or penalty.
5.2 Assumption of Electric Demand associated with Rural Electrification
As mentioned in the Help for Catubig Agricultural Advancement Project (HCAAP), the
said project as financed through a yen-loan has been implemented. This project will bring
development of irrigation and drainage facilities in an area of 4,500ha and a highway with a
- 41 -
distance of 65 kilometers. As a result of this project, extensive improvements are expected so
that agricultural productivity will significantly increase from 1 ton/ha to 5 tons/ha.
This study provides for the feasibility of the effective utilization of renewable energy
resources in rural electrification. Renewable resources will be provided by micro hydro power
potential from the irrigation canal as developed by HCAAP, and by biomass energy, contingent
to increased agricultural production.
Once barangays are energized, residents will purchase electric products such as lights,
TV and refrigerator to make living conditions more convenient, and improve livelihood
opportunities. Residents will also be encouraged to buy electric equipment such as power planer
and electric saw which will generate savings on labor power and produce high-value added
products.
Once barangays are energized, household electrical goods such as household lights, TV,
and refrigerators will become common along with street lights and pumps for water well, Ice
manufacturing stores and rice mills will likewise be installed in the barangays (Table-5.9). Thus,
a peak load of 9.6 kW is estimated for all barangays with a condition that 50 households are
energized in one barangays. According to the daily power demand in the barangays (Fig-5.6),
the load factor is estimated as 48.8%.
- 42 -
Table-5.8(1) Current Situation of Electrification of Barangays in Catubig
Catubig
Barangay Population Household Electrification Plan Fund Source
1 Barangay 1Pobl 1,119 240
2 Barangay 2Pobl 441 83
9 Anongo 795 155 2007 PNOC-EDC
10 Bonifacio 332 61 2007 PNOC-EDC
11 Boring 182 35 Energized
12 Cagbugna 432 76 Energized
13 Cagmanaba 728 113 Energized
14 Cagugubngan 451 84
15 Calingnan 976 182 Energized
16 Canuctan 280 48 Energized
17 CM Recto 477 88
18 D Mercader 465 97 Energized
19 Guibuangan 368 73 Energized
20 Hinagonoyan 676 105 Energized
21 Hiparayan 694 125 Energized
22 Hitapian 1,004 180 Energized
23 Inobururan 141 25
24 Irawahan 704 128 Energized
25 Lenoy ahan 334 65 Energized
26 Libon 273 47 Energized
27 Mag-ongon 342 53 Energized
28 Magtuad 876 178 Energized
29 Manering 221 43 Energized
30 Nabuluo 337 63 Energized
31 Nagoocan 643 120 Energized
32 Nahulid 198 39 Energized
33 Opong 590 114
34 Osang 244 51 2008 NPC-SPUG
35 Osmena 290 66
36 P Rebadulla 339 56
37 Roxas 896 147 2007 PNOC-EDC
38 Sagudsoron 435 80
39 San Antonio 309 55 2007 PNOC-EDC
40 San Fransico 1,074 193
41 San Jose 2,348 435
42 San Vicente 1,671 327 2007 PNOC-EDC
43 Santa Fe 787 138 2007 PNOC-EDC
44 Sulitan 801 151
45 Tangbo 342 77 2006 NEA
46 Tongodnon 174 35 2006 Mirant
47 Viena Maria 224 37
Total 26,845 5,015
(Source: Census 2000, DOE materials)
- 43 -
Table-5.8(2) Current Situation of Electrification of Barangays in Las Navas
Las Navas
Barangay Population Household Electrification Plan Fund Source
1 Balugo 385 80 Energized
2 Bugtosan 436 83 Energized
3 Bukid 900 189 Energized
4 Geguinta 408 82 Energized
5 Geraodo 337 66 Energized
6 Guyo 387 73 Energized
7 H Jolejole 409 82 Energized
8 H Jolejole District 1,477 322
9 L Empon 332 69 Energized
10 Lourdes 793 151 Energized
11 Lumala-og 399 89 Energized
12 Mabini 491 92 Energized
13 Mac Arthur 326 56 Energized
14 Palanas 164 35 Energized
15 Quirino District 1,748 331 Energized
16 Rebong 557 101
17 Roxas 571 99 Energized
18 San Andres 380 82 Energized
19 San Jorge 756 149 Energized
20 San Miguel 1,116 207 Energized
21 Caputoan 209 41 Energized
22 Cuenco 290 54 Energized
23 San Fransisco 654 111 Energized
24 San Isidro 1,666 335 Energized
25 San Jose 259 44 Energized
26 Santo Tomas 155 31 Energized
27 Tagan-aan 316 60 Energized
28 Victory 565 102 Energized
29 Bugay 621 103 2006 Mirant
30 Bulao 935 196 2008 PNOC-EDC
31 Catoto ogan 219 44 2006 KEPCO
32 Dapdap 1,673 296 Energized 2006 NEA
33 Del Pilar 858 168 2006 NEA
34 Dolores 143 24 2006 KEPCO
35 Epaw 179 36 2006 KEPCO
36 Hangi 521 98 2008 PNOC-EDC
37 Imelda 296 54 2006 KEPCO
38 Lakandula 224 46 2006 KEPCO
39 Magsaysay 459 96 2008 PNOC-EDC
40 Matelarag 261 48 2007 PNOC-EDC
41 Osmena 206 40 2008 NPC-SPUG
42 Paco 305 63 2006 KEPCO
43 Perez 360 64 2008 NPC-SPUG
44 Poponton 526 104 2008 NPC-SPUG
45 Quezon 163 35 2008 PNOC-EDC
46 Quirino 841 159 2008 NPC-SPUG
47 Rizal 517 90 2008 PNOC-EDC
48 Rufino 200 35 2008 NPC-SPUG
49 Sag-od 188 33 2008 NPC-SPUG
50 San Antonio 228 45 2008 NPC-SPUG
51 San Fermando 921 184 2006 NEA
52 Tagab iran 1,157 224 2008 PNOC-EDC
53 Taylor 859 140 2006 KEPCO
Total 29,346 5,641
(Source: Census 2000, DOE materials)
- 44 -
Table-5.9 Assumption of Electric Demand by Rural electrification
(kWh/
Energy Denmand in Barangay <Demand> coverage (kW) (hour) Remarks
day)
Number of Households 50 Households
Household Light(40Wx4) 160 W 0.8 6.4 4 25.6 Peak
HouseholdTV 70 W 0.5 1.75 4 7.0 Peak
HouseholdsRefrigerator(50L 100 W 0.3 0.45 24 10.8 Peak & Base
(Refrigerator Availability) ( 0.3 )
Street Light (40WX25) 40 W 25 1 12 12.0 Peak & Base
Pump for Water Well 250 W 1unit 0.25 20 5.0 Non-Peak
Ice Manufacturer 1,250 W 1unit 1.25 20 25.0 Non-Peak
Rice Miller 3,000 W 1unit 3 9 27.0 Non-Peak
Total 112.4
Peak Demand 9.6 kW 44.6
Base Demand 5.0 kW 67.8
Fig-5.6 Assumption of Electric Demand by Rural electrification (daily load curve)
Daily Power Demand in Barangay (50 Households)
12
10
8
Demand (kW)
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
hour
HH Ref St Light HH Light HH TV Pump Ice Rice
- 45 -
5.3 Assumption of Electrification associated with Expansion of Distribution Line
Before initiating the study of electrification by renewable energy, a cost estimation

study to develop extension of distribution line for rural electrification is needed.
Unenegized barangays in Catubig and Las Navas are distributed in the south and east
areas. To study rural electrification by extension of distribution line in the vicinity of the
Catubig Service area, that study team needed to obtain the potential data. The population and
number of households of the barangays are shown in Table-5.10. The table includes energized
barangays as shown in Table-5.8(1) and Table-5.8(2). Barangays served by solar panel systems
and small diesel generators are considered by the government as energized.
Table-5.10 Electrification Plan of Barangay

No. Barangay Population Households
47 Rizal 517 90
53 Taylor 859 140
14 Palanas 164 35
48 Rufino 200 35
27 Tagan-aan 316 60
25 San Jose 259 44
35 Epaw 179 36
49 Sag-od 188 33
24 San Isidro 1,666 335
50 San Antonio 228 45
Total 4,576 853
- 46 -
The specific plan for expansion of distribution line is assumed as shown in Fig-5.7. As a
result of these expansion plans, the distance of expansion of distribution line and households is
assumed as shown in Table-5.11.
The electrification cost by expansion of distribution line is assumed to consist of the

items as follows.
1. Capital cost for expansion of distribution line

2. Capital cost for installation of electric transformer and incoming line
3. Capital cost for extension of transformer at Lawaan substation
4. Operation and Maintenance cost for power distribution equipment
5. Cost for distribution loss from Lawaan substation to household
6. Power cost
Where,
As for No.1, the cost for expansion of distribution line is estimated to be USD 8,000 per
km. The annual expense rate of 0.114 is estimated based on an expected lifetime of 25
years and a discount rate of 12%.
As for No.2, the unit rate for a transformer of USD 1,600 is applied based on
NORSAMELCOs standard specifications for transformers with 13.2kV, 240V and
15kVA.
As for No.3, the unit rate for a transformer of USD 12/kVA is applied. Even though no
expansion is needed at the Lawaan substation in this plan, this cost is estimated for future
expansion of electrification.
As for No.4, the O & M cost is assumed to be 1.5% of the construction cost
As for No.5, the distribution loss depends on the distance of the distribution line and the
electric power, so that it is estimated by the multiplication method using the electric unit
rate of NORSAMELCO.
As for No.6, the consumer price is applied which contains the generating and transmission costs
as well as the administration costs of NORSAMELCO.
- 47 -
Fig-5.7 Expansion Plan of Distribution Line
Las Navas
Mabini
Goyo
Taylor
Rizal Hangi San Antonio
Del Pilar
Tagab iran
Palanas
Rufino
Dapdap
Tagan-aan Epaw San Isidro
San Jose
Sag-od
Table-5.11 Number of Household and Distance of Distribution Line
Section From To Household Population Distance

(house) (people) (km)
1 Mabini Rizal 90 517 2.8

2 Rizal Taylor 140 859 2.2
3 Hangi Palanas 35 164 3.0
4 Palanas Rufino 35 200 2.4
5 Tagabiran Tagan-ayan 60 316 3.6
6 Dapdap Epaw 44 259 2.4
7 Epaw San Jose 36 179 2.4
8 San Jose Sag-od 33 188 3.6
9 Dapdap San Isidro 335 1,666 3.4
10 Dapdap San Antonio 45 228 3.6
Total 853 4,576 29.3
- 48 -
The Long-run Marginal Cost (LRMC) is estimated by the cost at block distance of
expansion of distribution line divided by the annual usage of electric power of consumer.
Table-5.12 shows the electrification cost of each area by expansion of distribution line.
As a result, the electrification cost is estimated to range from 19.8 centavos/kWh to 32.2
centavos/kWh. If the distance of the distribution line is long and the barangay is small, the
electrification cost is estimated to be more than 25centavos/kWh.
- 49 -
Table-5.12 Electrification Cost by Expansion of Distribution Line
Eenergize Plan up to each Barangay Rizal Taylor Palanas Rufino Tagan-ayan Epaw San Jose Sag-od San Isidro San Antonio All Area-A Calculation Methodology
Beneficiary Households (houses) 90 140 35 35 60 44 36 33 335 45 853 (a) Census2000data
Beneficiary Population (people) 517 859 164 200 316 259 179 188 1,666 228 4,576 (b) Census2000data
Power Demand (kW) 17.3 26.9 6.7 6.7 11.5 8.4 6.9 6.3 64.3 8.6 163.8 (c) (a)xStandard Barangay Power Demand/100
Annual Energy Demand (MWh) 73.8 114.9 28.7 28.7 49.2 36.1 29.5 27.1 274.9 36.9 699.9 (d) (a)xStandard Barangay Energy Demand/100x365
Distance of Feeder Expansion (km) 2.8 2.2 3.0 2.4 3.6 2.4 2.4 3.6 3.4 3.6 29.3 (e) From Feeder Line Allocation Tabel
Distance from Laoang S/S (km) 29.8 31.9 29.4 31.8 31.8 36.0 38.4 42.0 37.0 37.2 34.5 (f) Distance from Laoang S/S
Loss rate in Dist. Line (%) 0.13% 0.22% 0.05% 0.05% 0.09% 0.08% 0.07% 0.07% 0.61% 0.08% 0.31% (g) depend on distance & power demand
Annual Energy to be Transmitted (MWh) 73.9 115.1 28.7 28.7 49.3 36.1 29.6 27.1 276.6 37.0 702.1 (h) (d)/(1-(g))
Annual Energy Loss in Dist. Line (MWh) 0.1 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.7 0.0 2.2 (i) (h)-(d)
Cost of Dist. Trans. Extension ('000$) 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 1.0 0.1 2.5 (j) @12$/kVA
Cost of Distribution Lines Extensio('000$) 22.1 17.3 24.0 19.2 28.8 19.2 19.2 28.8 26.9 28.8 234.2 (k) @8,000$/km
Pole Transformer ('000$) 2.3 3.6 0.9 0.9 1.5 1.1 0.9 0.8 8.6 1.2 21.8 @1,600$(15kVA)
Connecting Line ('000$) 6.1 9.5 2.4 2.4 4.1 3.0 2.4 2.2 22.8 3.1 58.0 (m) @85$/Household
Total Construction Cost ('000$) 30.8 30.8 27.4 22.6 34.6 23.4 22.7 32.0 59.2 33.1 316.5 (n) (j)+(k)+(l)+(m)
Annual Cost of Construction. ('000$) 3.50 3.50 3.12 2.57 3.94 2.67 2.58 3.64 6.74 3.77 36.0 (o) (n)x annuity 0.114 (25 yrs, 12%)
O&M Cost ('000$) 0.46 0.46 0.41 0.34 0.52 0.35 0.34 0.48 0.89 0.50 4.7 (p) (n)x1.5%
Cost of Loss Energy ('000$) 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 0.00 0.3 (q) (i)x(t)
Total Cost (Annual) ('000$) 3.98 4.00 3.53 2.91 4.46 3.02 2.92 4.12 7.84 4.27 41.1 (r) (o)+(p)+(q)
Cost of Grid Expansion /kWh) 5.4 3.5 12.3 10.1 9.1 8.4 9.9 15.2 2.9 11.6 5.9 (s) (r)/((d)
Cost of Energy /kWh) 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 (t) Norsamelco Tariff (6.23P/kWh) x Tariff Increase (2.0% annu
Energy Cost by Grid Extension /kWh) 22.4 20.5 29.3 27.1 26.1 25.4 26.9 32.2 19.8 28.6 22.9 (u) (s)+(t)
- 50 -
5.4 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Renewable Energy
5.4.1 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Micro Hydro Power Plant
As mentioned in Chapter 2, the electric demand for rural electrification is estimated to

have a peak load of 10 kW and a base load of 5kW. If all electric demand is covered only by the
micro hydro power plant, an output of 10 kW is needed. If the facility is not used efficiently
during peak load, the utilized capacity is estimated to be 46.8%. A potential discharge 0.2m3/s
and a head of 7m is essential to cover the output of 10kW generation.
On the other hand, if only the base load is to be covered by the micro-hydro power plant,
the installation of a plant with an output of 5kW is needed. In this case, the utilized capacity is
estimated as 66.5%. A potential discharge 0.1m3/s and a head of 7m is essential to cover the
output of 10kW generation.
The electrification cost by micro hydro power plant is assumed to consist of the items as
follows.
1. Capital cost of installation of Turbine and Generator

2. Capital cost of installation of distribution line (low-voltage distribution system of
240V)
3. Operation and Maintenance cost for Turbine and Generator
4. Cost of operator
Where,
As for No.1, the cost for Turbine is estimated at USD 8,000 per kW. The annual expense
rate of 0.1078 is estimated based on an expected lifetime of 45 years and a discount rate
of 12%.
As for No.2, the same unit rate is applied with the expansion of distribution line
As for No.3, the total annual O&M cost for the Turbine, Generator and distribution
facility is assumed to be 1.5% of the construction cost.
As for No.4,the remuneration of one operator is assumed to be 4,000peso/month.
The Long-run Marginal Cost (LRMC) is estimated by all construction cost of micro
hydro power plant divided by the annual usage of electric power of consumer. The
- 51 -
electrification cost of 27.7centavos/kWh is estimated if the total electric demand of 10kW is
covered by the micro hydro power plant. Meanwhile, the electrification cost of
22.1centavos/kWh is estimated if the base load of 5kW is covered by the micro hydro power
plant.
The details of the hydro power potential from the irrigation canal constructed under
HCAAP is described in chapter 6. Accordingly, a potential of 10kW can not be anticipated so
that the installation of a 5kW micro hydro power plant is assumed as suitable. Table-5.13 shows
the results of the study.
- 52 -
Table-5.13 Electrification Cost by Each Method of Power Generation
GenerationType Micro Hydro Biogas Rice Hull Combustion Micro Hydro & Biogas
<ALL> <Base> <ALL> <Peak> <ALL> <Hybrid>

(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (b)+(d)
Power Plant Output (kW) 10.0 5.0 Output (kW) 10.0 5.0 Output (kW) 10.0 10.0
Plant Factor (%) 46.8% 66.5% Plant Factor (%) 46.8% 27.2% Plant Factor (%) 46.8% 46.8%
Annual Generation (MWh) 41.0 29.1 Annual Generation (MWh) 41.0 11.9 Annual Generation (MWh) 41.0 41.0
Energy Source Current of Irrigation Channel Animal Waste Rice Hull

Discharge (m3/s) 0.2 0.1 Swine (heads) 1,800 500 Harvest Area (ha) 130
Head (m) 7 7 Daily Biogas Offtake (Nm3) 100 28 Annual Available Rice Hull (ton/y) 182
Heat Value (kcal/m3) 5,000 5,000 Heat Value (kcal/kg) 3,250
Gas Engine Efficiency (%) 20% 20% Engine Efficiency (%) 8%
Initial Construction Turbine & Generator ('000$) 80.0 40.0 CIGER ('000$) 30.0 10.0 Stirling Eng. & Gen. ('000$) 105 50.0
Cost Estimation - - - - Gas Holder ('000$) 4.0 2.0 (3.3 kW x 3units) 2.0
- - - - Gas engine & Generator ('000$) 8.0 5.0 Rice Hull Storage ('000$) 5.0 5.0
Distribution Line ('000$) 1.2 1.2 Distribution Line ('000$) 1.2 1.2 Distribution Line ('000$) 1.2 1.2
Connecting Line ('000$) 3.4 3.4 Connecting Line ('000$) 3.4 3.4 Connecting Line ('000$) 3.4 3.4
Total ('000$) 84.6 44.6 Total ('000$) 46.6 21.6 Total ('000$) 114.6 61.6
Annual Generation Capital Cost ('000$) 9.12 4.81 Capital Cost ('000$) 5.57 2.58 Capital Cost ('000$) 13.70 7.39
Cost Estimation O&M Cost ('000$) 1.27 0.67 O&M Cost ('000$) 0.93 0.43 O&M Cost ('000$) 2.29 1.10
Operator (1 person) ('000$) 0.96 0.96 Operator (2 person) ('000$) 1.92 1.92 Operator (3 person) ('000$) 2.88 1.92
Supplemental Fuel ('000$) 0.46
Total ('000$) 11.35 6.44 Total ('000$) 8.42 4.93 Total ('000$) 19.33 10.41
Generation Cost Generation Cost (/kWh) 27.7 22.1 Generation Cost (/kWh) 20.5 41.5 Generation Cost (/kWh) 47.1 25.4
Difficulty of Difficulty of As stirling engine is in the demonstration stage,

acquiring acquiring the generation cost estimation is high. However
Comments
necessary necessary if the engine cost becomes lower, the generation
discharge swine cost also becomes lower.
- 53 -
5.4.2 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Biogas Energy
The system which performs a methane fermentation process using livestock manure
from swine, cows, or poultry has been used commercially in the Philippines. These technologies
have been used as the technology for livestock manure processing from an environmental
impact point of view but marsh gas has also been used effectively from an energy usage point of
view. According to DOE officials, large and small processing system of livestock manure has
been done in more than 650 places in Philippines. An example of a large case application is at
the Maya farm, where electricity is generated by marsh gas from 60,000 hogs in a farm with an
area of 40Ha, and is used for light and refrigerator in the enclosure. The usage of simplified
digester tanks of concrete is encouraged in case of small scale farming. There have been 9
manufacturers for digester tank of livestock manure processing in the Philippines.
In recent years, cases of methane fermentation system with swine manure planned as
CDM project have been increasing in the Philippines (Table-5.14). In this case, marsh gas has
been processed by CIGAR (Covered In-ground Anaerobic Digester) which was developed by
the Bioscience Company. Thus, the system which performs a methane fermentation processing
of livestock manure has been used commercially. Swine farming has been a livelihood activity
in Catubig (Table-5.15). If the income level of the farm household is increased in association
with HCAAP, it is assumed that farm households engaged in swine farming as an auxiliary
business will also increase. Thus, biogas generation by livestock manure as renewable energy is
studied.
Table-5.14 CDM Project by Usage of Biogas in Philippines (Registered CDM Project)

Registered Title Host Parties Other Parties Methodology * Reductions ** Ref
United Kingdom of Great AMS-III.D. ver.

30-Oct-06 Gaya Lim Farm Inc. Methane Recovery Philippines
Britain and Northern Ireland
3130 611
9
Uni-Rich Agro-Industrial Corporation

28-Oct-06 Methane Recovery and Electricity Philippines
2929 609
9
Generation

23-Oct-06 Joliza Farms Inc. Methane Recovery Philippines
3656 607
9
Gold Farm Livestocks Corporation

21-Oct-06 Methane Recovery and Electricity Philippines
2929 612
9
Generation
Source: UNFCCC CDM Project activities http://cdm.unfccc.int/Projects/registered.html
- 54 -
Table-5.15 Current Situation of Firming of Livestock and Poultry in Catubig
(as of 2000)
Livestock / Number Production
Poultry (heads) (metric tons)
Livestock
Swine 5,200 6.50
Cattle 150 0.75
Goat 1,000 5.75
Carabao 3,197 15.90
Horse - -
Sheep 20 0.02
Poultry
Chicken 11,760 5.80
Duck 500 0.25
Turky 100 0.10
(Source: Materials of Catubig Municiparity)
In the case of generating by marsh gas, and similarly as with micro hydro power, biogas
generating equipment with an output of 10 kW is needed. In this case, the utilized capacity is
estimated as 46.8%. 1,800 hogs, a digester tank with a capacity of 3,600m3 and a biogas volume
of 100m3/day is needed for an electric demand of 10 kW.
On the other hand, if only the base load is to be covered by the biogas power plant, an
installation of only 5kW is needed. The utilized capacity is estimated as 11.9% but if the gas
holder uses 500 hogs only, a corresponding smaller biogas digester tank and a biogas volume of
28m3/day is need.
The electrification cost by biogas power plant is assumed to consist of the items as
follows.
1. Capital cost of biogas transaction equipment (including installation cost)

2. Capital costs of gas engine and generator (including installation cost)
240V)
4. O&M cost of biogas transaction equipment, gas engine, generator and distribution
equipment.
5. Cost of operator
Where,
As for No.1, the construction cost for CIGAR is estimated as 7.4$/m3 and an annual
expense rate of 0.1195 is estimated based on an expected lifetime of 20 years and a
- 55 -
discount rate of 12%.
As for No.2, the cost of gas engine and generator is estimated with annual expense rate
of 0.1195.
As for No.3, the same unit rate is applied with the expansion of the distribution line.
As for No.4, the total annual O&M cost of CIGAR, gas engine, generator and
distribution equipment is assumed to be 1.5% of the construction cost.
As for No.5, the remuneration of two operators is assumed to be 4,000peso per person
per month.
The Long-run Marginal Cost (LRMC) is estimated by all construction costs`of the
biogas power plant divided by the annual usage of electric power of consumers. The
electrification cost of 20.5centavos/kWh is estimated if the total electric demand of 10kW is
covered by the biogas power plant. Meanwhile, an electrification cost of 41.5centavos/kWh is
estimated if the base load of 5kW is covered by the biogas power plant (Table-5.13).
As a result of this study, the electrification cost by biogas with a capacity of 10kW is
assumed as the same cost as by expansion of distribution line. However, it might be difficult to
gather 1,800 hogs for swine farming.
5.4.3 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Rice Chaff Power Plant
It is expected that agricultural productivity will increase substantially from rice

cropping, from a daily capacity of 1ton/ha to 5ton/ha under HCAAP. As a result of this, rice
chaff might be used for generating energy. Even though rice chaff is used for household cooking
in the Philippines, there is no experience of large scale usage of rice chaff. According to the
DOE, rice chaff power plant is planned in Bulacan province with a capacity of 35MW and in
Nueva Ecija province with capacity of 25-30MW.
If the study of rice chaff power plant is conducted and existing boiler technology and
steam electric generation are used, the scale of generating equipment becomes large. In fact, the
capacity of the case example mentioned above is 25-30MW, and operating rice chaff power
plant in Thailand is 10-20MW. To install the generating equipment with large capacity, large
amounts of rice chaff is needed. However, there is no committed plan of rice chaff collecting
system under HCAAP. Thus, in the current situation, rice chaff power is not suitable for rural
electrification.
- 56 -
On the other hand, Stirling engine has been coming up with small size biomass energy
using higher efficiency technology. Stiring engine is an external-combustion engine, unlike an
internal-combustion engine, and generates power from various external fuel sources such as
rubbish timber, biomass, etc.. Even if the technology of internal-combustion engine was
invented many years ago, it has not, come into practical use, in the shadow of development of
internal combustion power. However, nowadays, the technology of external-combustion engine
has come up from the point of view of the efficient use of untouched natural resources and
environmental aspects. These days, small type systems with 5 horsepower and capacity output
of 3kW (Fig-5.8) have been tested for validation. Since a small size system is suitable for the
electrification of small barangays, the feasibility of electrification by using the Stirling engine is
studied15.
If rice chaff power is generated using a Stirling engine, it becomes advantageous to

raise economical efficiency by raising the facility utilization factor. Thus a total of 10kW output
may be generated by 3 sets of 3.3kW engines. In this case, the utilization factor is estimated as
46.8%. The specifications of the Stirling engine is shown in Table-5.16. An amount of 180 tons
per year of rice chaff is needed to generate 10kW. This amount is equivalent to the amount of
rice chaff produced from the farm with an area of 130ha and which is prepared under HCAAP
(Table-5.17).
Fig-5.8 Outline of 3kW Stirling Engine (ST-5)
Biomass Fuel Hopper

Controller
Fan
Combustion Chamber
Heater Head Compressor Generator
Source: Boucher of STIRLING ENGINE Co. Ltd.
15 Materials and information about stirling engine has been kindly provide by STIRLING ENGINE Co.
Ltd. Kanagawa Science Park East Tower 213 3-2-1 Sakado, Takatsu-ku, Kawasaki-city, Japan,
213-0012 http://www.stirlingengine.com
- 57 -
Table-5.16 Specification of Stirling Engine
Specifications of the ST-5 Stirling Engine
Engine Type External Combustion, Stirling Cycle, Crank Drive

Engine Output 5 Horse power (Shaft), at 650 rpm
Fuels Used Wood, Saw dust, Husks, Corn cods, Weeds,
Other Agro-byproducts, Natural Gas
Fuel Consumption 38 kW of Heat (approximately 10 kg/h of wood)
Lubrication Dry bearing; No oil used
Working Fluid Air
Working Pressure 5 bar, self pressurizing
Heater Head temperature 650
Dimension 49" x 16" x 16"
Weight 440 lbs (200kg)
(Source: Stirling Engine Co. Ltd)
Table-5.17 Assumed Amount of Rice Chaff for Generating

Item Estimation
Rice Productivity 5.0 t/ha
Paddy Field Area 130 ha
Rice Production 1,140 ton/year(*)
Available RiceHusk Ratio 0.8
Rice Husk Weight 0.2 kg/kg Rice
Available Rice Husk 180 ton/year
Heat Value of RiceHusk 3,250 kcal/kg
Energy Generation 41,270 kWh/year
Energy Generation 113 kWh/day
*) Rainy season 5.0 t/ha, dry season 3.75 t/ha.
- 58 -
The electrification cost by rice chaff power with Stirling engine is assumed to consist of
the items as follows.
1. Capital cost of Stirling engine and installation cost

2. Capital cost of construction of storage house for rice chaff
240V)
4. O&M cost of Stirling engine, generator and distribution equipment
5. Cost of operator
Where,
As for No.1, currently, since stirling engine is under verification test, the commercial
price has not been set. Therefore, the cost of $35,000 is used as a provisional value. An
annual expense rate of 0.1195 is estimated based on an expected lifetime of 20 years and
discount rate of 12%.
As for No.2, the cost is estimated to be $5,000 and an annual expense rate of 0.1195 is
used similarly as in No.1.
As for No.3, the same unit rate is applied with the expansion of distribution line.
As for No.4, the total annual O&M cost of Stirling engine, generator and distribution
equipment is assumed to be 2.0% of the construction cost.
As for No.5, the remuneration of three operators is assumed to be 4,000peso per person
per month.
The Long-run Marginal Cost (LRMC) is estimated by all construction costs of biogas
power plant divided by the annual usage of electric power of consumers. The electrification cost
of 47.1centavos/kWh is estimated if the total electric demand of 10kW is covered by the biogas
power plant (Table-5.13). This price is estimated to be higher than the cost of expansion of
distribution line since the capital cost of Stirling engine is provisional. Meanwhile, the
electrification cost of 20centavos/kWh is estimated if the cost of Stirling engine becomes
common and consequently attains a lower price such as $10,000. The commercial viability and
popularization of Stirling engine is expected since the cost is just the same as the expansion cost
of distribution line.
- 59 -
5.4.4 Assumption of Electrification Cost by Hybrid Generating System between Micro
Hydro Power and Biogas Power
As described in Sub clause 4.1 and 4.2, it is not expected that only micro hydro power
potential is hard to cover the number of 50 households of standard Barangay. On the other hand,
number of the firming swines are also not enough to produce the electricity by Biogas method
to cover all households. In consideration of both features, micro hydro is available to operate 24
hours and Biogas is available to stock in Gas holder, hybrid system between a micro hydro
power plant for base load and biogas power for peak load is proposed in this study.
As a result of this study total construction cost of rural electrification by hybrid

generating system between micro hydro power with 5kW and biogas power with 5 kW is
estimated to be $61,600. As the method mentioned above indicates that the annual operating
and maintenance cost is estimated to be about $10,400. The Long-run Marginal Cost (LRMC) is
estimated by all construction costs of the hybrid generating system divided by annual usage of
electric power of consumers. The electrification cost of 25.4centavos/kWh is estimated.
5.5 Selection of Candidate Barangays for Electrification by Renewable Energy
As mentioned in Chapter 3, the electrification cost for the expansion of distribution line
is estimated from 20centavos/kWh to 32centavos/kWh and there are some barangays with costs
of more than 25centavos/kWh. On the other hand, the electrification cost by hybrid generating
system between micro hydro power and biogas power is estimated as 25centavos/kWh. As a
result of this study, seven barangays in Las Navas may possibly adopt the hybrid system as
follows.
No. Barangay Population Household

1 Palanas 164 35
2 Rufino 200 35
3 Tangan-ayan 316 60
4 Epaw 259 44
5 San Jose 179 36
6 San-od 188 33
7 San Antonio 228 45
- 60 -
Chapter 6 Rural Electrification Plan by Renewable Energy
6.1 Potential of Micro Hydro Power Plant
The HCAAP plan consists of constructing three irrigation facilities which include the
Catubig service area (3,565.5ha), the Bulao service area (742.2ha) and the Hagbay service area
(665.3ha), respectively. The data discharge and head of the water channel, and of the irrigation
channel at the Catubig service area were subsequently obtained in this study. Table-6.1 show
the potentials for micro hydro power generation at the Catubig service area.
As a result of this study, the possibility of micro hydro power generation was found in
four barangays, namely, Palanas, Tagan-ayam, Epaw and San Jose.
Table-6.1 Potential of Micro Hydro Power at Catubig Service Area
Site No. Discharge Head Output Nearest

(m3/s) (m) (kW) Barangay
1 0.11 2.6 1.7 San Isidro
2 0.19 2.8 3.2 Epaw
3 0.19 1.5 1.8 San Jose
4 0.17 4.5 4.3 Tagan-Ayan
5 0.24 4.2 6.0 Tagan-Ayan
6 0.22 2.0 2.6 Tagan-Ayan
7 0.10 3.0 1.8 Palanas
8 0.14 3.4 2.8 Rizal
6.2 Hybrid Power Generation Plan at Barangays
The respective electric power demand in each of the four barangays, namely, Palanas,
Tagan-ayan, Epaw and San Jose is shown under the Demand side column of Table-6.2. The
possible supply sources, on the other hand, and in case that power is provided for by Micro
hydro power and Biogas power, is shown under the Supply side column of Table-6.2.
In Palanas, a barangay peak demand of 6.7kW and an electric energy demand of

78.7kWh per day are anticipated. These requirements can be met by hybrid power generation,
which consists of constructing a 1.8kW micro hydro power facility along the No.7 water
channel for base load, and a supplemental 4.9kW biogas power facility, for covering the
shortfall. In this instance, a total of about 540 farmed swine (about 15 swine per stand alone)
and the installation of a CIGER digester chamber with a volume of 1,100m3 shall be needed.
- 61 -
In barangay Tagan-ayan, the expected peak demand of 11.5kW and an electric energy
demand of 134.9kWh per day are anticipated. The expected demand can likewise be met
through hybrid power generation, which consists of constructing a 6.0kW micro hydro power
plant along the No.5 water channel for base load, and an additional biogas power facility with a
capacity of 5.5kW, to cover for the shortfall. About 600 farmed swine (about 10 swine per stand
alone) and the installation of a CIGER digester chamber of 1,200m3 shall be needed.
In barangay Epaw, the daily peak demand is expected to reach 8.4kW with a
corresponding electric energy demand of 98.9kWh. Hybrid power generation, consisting of a
3.2kW micro hydro power facility along the No.2 water channel for base load, and a 5.2kW
biogas power structure for covering the shortfall, are necessary. These will require getting
manure from about 440 farmed swine (about 10 swine per stand alone) and installing a CIGER
digester chamber with a volume of 900m3.
In barangay San Jose, a peak demand of 6.9kW and electric energy demand of 80.9kWh
per day is anticipated. Once again, a hybrid power generation consisting of a 1.8kW micro
hydro power facility along the No.3 water channel for base load, and a biogas power structure
with a capacity of 5.1kW for covering the shortfall, are needed. Considering the requirements,
manure from about 580 farmed swine (about 16 swine per stand alone) and the installation of a
CIGER digester chamber with a volume of 1,200m3 are needed.
6.3 Micro Hydro Power Plant

6.3.1 Turbine for micro hydro power
With the micro hydro power turbine, which is applied to micro hydro power stations of
less than 100kW, more emphasis is placed on low cost and ease of inspection and maintenance
rather than on turbine efficiency.
The Pelton turbine, Francis turbine and S-type tubular turbine, which are also widely
used for small and micro hydro power, and only the types particular to micro hydro power are
described below.
The cross-flow turbine is used for relatively small flow with a head of 5 to 100m. The
runner is a cylindrical cage type with 20 to 30 arc shaped blades. One guide vane is divided into
two parts which are arranged axially. It maintains high efficiency in a wide load range as the
guide vanes are switched according to the load.
- 62 -
The rim-generator unit has the generator rotor installed on the circumference of the
runner blade and the generator and turbine are integrated into one piece.
The turgo impulse turbine is applied to the intermediate specific speed between the
Pelton turbine and Francis turbine. This is an old model dating from 1920s but is now being
reconsidered for small hydro power applications. Fig-6.1 shows various types of micro hydro
power turbine.
Fig-6.1 Micro Hydro Power Turbine Types
- 63 -
6.3.2 Selection of type of turbine
The turbine type is selected on the basis of the effective head and turbine discharge,
while considering such factors as river flow, operation of the reservoir and regulating pondage.
When two or more turbine types are possible, they are determined by comprehensively studying
their cost efficiency, maintainability, etc.
Various turbines have limitation on their respective head and applicable specific speed.
The application range is determined by their adaptability to the head variation, characteristic,
strength against cavitation, etc. Turbine Selection Diagram is shown in Fig-6.2.
Effective Head

1000 1000
Pelton Turbine
Turgo Impulse Turbine Horizontal Francis Turbine Vertical Francis Turbine
100 100
Kaplan Turbine
10 10
Reversible pump Turbine

Cross-Flow Turbine
S-type Tubular Turbine
Submerged pump Turbine

Propeller Turbine
Propeller Turbine(Siphon)
1 1
0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Maximum Discharge 3 /s
Fig-6.2 Turbine Selection Diagram
For the type of turbine, Propeller turbine was found to be appropriate in view of the
flow (0.1-0.24m3/s) and effective head (1.5-4.5m) relationship based on the turbine selection
diagram given in Fig-6.2. Thus Propeller turbine was selected for its high efficiency and proven
performance.
- 64 -
Table-6.2 Basic Specification of Hybrid Power Generating at Each Barangay
Demand Side Supply Side

Daily Daily Base Hydro Energy Energy
Household Peak Base Micro Hydro Biogas Necessary Capacity of
Barangay Energy Energy Site production by Production
s Demand Demand Potential Generation No. of Swine Digester
Demand Demand No. Micro Hydro by Biogas
(house) (kW) (kW) (kWh) (kWh) (kW) (kWh) (kW) (kWh) (Head) (m3)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)=(b)-(f) (i)=(d)-(g) (j) (k)
Palanas 35 6.7 3.5 78.7 55.9 1.8 7 43.2 4.9 35.5 540 1,100
Tagan-ayan 60 11.5 6.0 134.9 95.8 6.0 5 95.8 5.5 39.1 600 1,200
Epaw 44 8.4 4.4 98.9 70.2 3.2 2 70.2 5.2 28.7 440 900
San Jose 36 6.9 3.6 80.9 57.5 1.8 3 43.2 5.1 37.7 580 1,200
Note 1. Peak demand (b) is calculated by 9.6kW x (Households No./ 50)

2. Base demand (c) is calculated by 5.0kW x (Households No./ 50)
3. Daily energy demand (d) is calculated by 112.4 kWh x (Households No./ 50)
4. Daily base energy demand (e) is calculated by 79.8 kWh x (Households No./ 50)
5. Energy production by Micro hydro (g) is smaller number of either micro hydro potential (f) x 24h or daily base energy demand (e).
6. Biogas generation (h) is the balance of peak demand (b) and Micro hydro potential (f).
7. Energy production by biogas (i) is the balance of daily energy demand (d) and energy production by micro hydro (g).
8. Necessary No. of swine (j) is calculated by energy production by biogas (i) divided by 6.54 kWh/day/100 swine head.
9. Capacity of digester (k) is calculated by energy production by biogas (i) multipled by 31.0 m3/kWh/day.
- 65 -
6.4 Biogas Power Plant
As already mentioned, the CIGER (Covered In-ground Anaerobic Digester) method,

which is more common in the Philippines and which was developed by the Philippine
Bioscience Company, is considered for the biogas power plant plan. In order to protect the
penetration of digestive juice to the ground and the emission of produced gas to the air, the
chamber is covered with a 1mm-thick, high density polyethylene (HDPE) liner. The waste
material of the farm animal is stocked in the digester chamber for at least 30 days. Then, the
organic matter is broken down by bacteria, so that biogas, including methane, is produced. This
gives a BOD of more than 90% and a COD of more than 80% which account for the density of
methane becoming more than 65%. On the other hand, bacillus withers away in a temperature
condition of more than 35 degrees.
Source: UNFCCC CDM Project Activity, Gaya Lim Farm Inc. Methane Recovery project
PDD p.5
The biogas generating system with a CIGER chamber is being constructed by the
Sorosoro Ibaba Development Cooperative (SIDC) in Batangas province. The SIDC was
established in 1969 as a cooperative and as of the end of 2005, the cooperative had full category
members totaling 3,834 and supporting members numbering 4,976. The activities of SIDC
include stock growing, distribution, rice milling and sales of goods. SIDC also
consistently maintains a swine population of approximately 30,000 throughout the year.
Two years ago, SIDC started the study of fermentative treatment with swines manure, from an
environmental perspective and considering digestive gas and usage of organic manure. At
present, a big gas power generation system is being constructed with funding support from the
British government. This system covers the following processes: manure is produced from
8,000 swine; the manure is digested in the CIGER chamber (30m x 90m x depth of 6m), where
- 66 -
biogas with an average daily volume of 400-500m3 is produced; the gas is collected in the tank
to generate 75kw of electricity; and the electricity is distributed to the office building of SIDC
and some households in the vicinity. The generating system will be completed by 2007. The
swine manure is gathered automatically using a drain system.
The total construction cost of 6 million pesos is broken down as: 4 million pesos for the
digester chamber, and 2 million pesos for construction. The generator is procured from the
United States of America with a price of 1.3 million per set. The generated electricity is
distributed to some households (50-100 households, 200-300 residents) in the barangay. At the
moment, electricity is being distributed by MERALCO. However, a reduction in electricity
tariff is expected with the potential use of biogas power.
Aside from swine, manure from poultry and cows may additionally be considered. For
instance, chicken manure produces biogas more efficiently than manure from swine. However,
due to the local dry conditions, manure from poultry has been utilized better as fertilizer on
commercial basis, than for energy use. Therefore, manure of swine is still the most efficient fuel
source for biogas energy in the Philippines.
Considering the specifications of SIDCs system, manure from 500 swine and a biogas
digester chamber with a volume of 1,010m3 shall be needed to generate an output of 5kW.
These are expected to result in the production of 28m3 of biogas per day and the generation of
about 32.7kWh of electric energy. Table-6.4 shows that comparison of biogas generation in
Philippines and Japan.
Table-6.3 Basic Specification of Biogas Power Generation
Item Estimation
Swine number 500 head
Biogas Production 28 m3/day
Heat Value of Biogas 5,000 kcal/m3
Daily Energy of Biogas 32.7 kWh/day
Output Power 5 kW
Generation Hour per day 6.5 hours
Energy Prod. by Swine No. 6.5 kWh/day/100head
Capacity of Digester 1,010 m3
Digester cap. by Energy prod 31.0 m3/kWh/day
- 67 -
Table-6.4 Comparison of Biogas Generating in Philippines and Japan
SIDC Cooperative Yagi Bio-Ecology Center
Item
(Philippines) (Japan)
Bio Materials
Animal Waste Swine Cow, Swine etc.
8,000 (heads) 86 (t/day)
Digester
Type CIGER
Capacity 16,200 m3 2,100 m3
30m90m6m(D) 14m17.7m(H)
Daily Biogas Offtake 450 m3 2,120 m3
Heat value around 5,000 kcal/m3 4,780 kcal/m3
(Methane content 65%)
Gas Holder
Capacity unknown 500 m3 350 m3
Engine
Capacity 75 kW 220 kW
75kW2 80kW1
Heat Efficiency unknown 28.1%
Daily Electricity Generation 3,500 kWh
Project Cost
Digester 6.0 million Peso
Gas Engine 1.3 million Peso
Total 7.3 million Peso 1,048 million Yen
Source Hearing at SIDC Broacher of the Center

(Note: CIGER;Covered in ground anaerobic reactor
Fig-6.3 Biogas Generating System
Pigpen
Gas Holder
CIGER
Electricity
Gas Engine & Generator
- 68 -
Chapter 7 Profile of the Project
Profile for Rural Electrification Program by Renewable Energy in
The Mountainous Region of Northern Samar
1. Sector 2. Project site

Energy Catubig and Las Navas Province, Mountainous
Region in Northern Samar, Philippines,
3. Agency in charge of implementation
Philippine National Oil Corporation ;PNOC
4. Background and Purpose
The Northern Samar province in the Eastern Visayas region, which is the study area for this
feasibility study on rural electrification, is one of the underdeveloped areas in the Philippines. Its per
capita income level is less than 50% of the average per capita income level in the Philippines. Since
the electrification rate of households in the northern mountainous area is only less than 20%, it has
targeted to increase the electrification rate in order to boost the growth of agricultural activity and
the development of the tourism industry.
This study covers the feasibility of rural electrification by renewable energy, such as micro hydro
power supplied from the potential of the Catubig River and irrigation facilities and biomass power
energy supplied from agricultural products. The increase in agricultural products is an expected
outcome of the Exclusive Agricultural Development Project in the Catubig watershed area.
5. Outline of Project
(1) Name ; Rural Electrification Program by Renewable Energy
(2) Maximum Output Generated by Hybrid Power System
Palanas barangay: P=6.7kW (Micro Hydro: 1.8kW, Biogas: 4.9kW)
Tagan-ayan barangay: P=11.5kW (Micro Hydro: 6.0kW, Biogas: 5.5kW)
Epaw barangay: P=8.4kW (Micro Hydro: 3.2kW, Biogas: 5.2kW)
San Jose barangay: P=6.9kW (Micro Hydro: 1.8kW, Biogas: 5.1kW)
6. Project implementation term
F/S to completion of construction ; approx two yearsConstruction period : a half year
7. Expected benefit and beneficiary
Beneficiary ; Local residents
Benefits ; Efficient use of Livestock Manure, Employment effect brought by construction,
Development of local industry after electrification,
Reduce poverty by productivity improvement
8. Expected influence to environment 9. Expected cost
Almost no influence About 0.5million dollars
- 69 -
- 70 -
Appendix 1
Schedule for Field Investigation
- 71 -
- 72 -
(1st Field Investigation)
From
Days Night Date Week By To Activities
(Via)
Departure
1 1 2006.10.10 Tue Fukuoka Air Manila
Meeting with West Jec Resident Coordinator
Meeting with DOE Energy Utilization Management

Bereau Director
2 2 2006.10.11 Wed Manila
Meeting with PNOC-EDC Engineering Design and
Construction Department
Meeting with NIA Design and Specfications

Department Office-in-Charge
3 3 2006.10.12 Thu Manila
Data collection at Bureau of Agricultural Statistics
Data collection at National Statistic Office

Bureau (JICA Experts)
4 4 2006.10.13 Fri Manila Meeting with PNOC-EDC Assistant to the President
Meeting with PNOC-EDC Engineering Design and
5 5 2006.10.14 Sat Manila Air Fukuoka Arrival
- 73 -
(2nd Field Investigation)
From
Days Night Date Week By To Activities
(Via)
Departure
1 1 2006.12.03 Sun Fukuoka Air Manila
Meeting with West Jec Resident Coordinator

Bureau Director
2 2 2006.12.04 Mon Manila Meeting with NIA Design and Specfications
Department Office-in-Charge
Meeting with NPC-SPUG Vice President
Meeting with NIA Catubig Agricultural Project Office

Meeting with Las Navas LGU Office
Survey for Catubig irrigation dam site
3 3 2006.12.05 Tue Manila Air Catarman
Survey for Pinipisakan Fall
Survey for Energized Barangay (Dapdap)
Survey for Unenergized Barangay (Epaw)
Meeting with NIA Catubig Field Office
Meeting with Catubig LGU Office
Survey for Lawaan Substation (NORSAMELCO)
4 4 2006.12.06 Wed Catarman
Meeting with NIA Catubig Consultant Office
Meeting with NORSAMELCO
Meeting with Eastern Philippines University
Meeting with DOE Electric Power Industry
Management Bureau Director
Catarman Air Manila Meeting with DOE Rural Electrification Adm. & Mgt.
5 5 2006.12.07 Thu Division
Manila Car Batangas Meeting with PNOC-EDCEngineering Design,
Procurement & Construction Department
Meeting with NIA Administrator
Meeting with Sorosoro Ibaba Development
Cooperative
6 6 2006.12.08 Fri Batangas Car Manila Survey for Biomass Powerstation site (Under
construction)
Data collection at National Statistic Office
Survey for Balugbog Hydropower Plant
Manila Car Laguna
Meeting with Philippine Power and Development
7 7 2006.12.09 Sat
Corporation
Laguna Car Manila Survey for Villa Escudero Hydropower Plant
Making for field investigation report

8 8 2006.12.10 Sun Manila
Collection data arrangement
Meeting with EDCOP (Philippine consultant)

Meeting with JBIC Manila
9 9 2006.12.11 Mon Manila
Bureau (JICA Experts)
10 2006.12.12 Tue Manila Air Fukuoka Arrival
- 74 -
- 75 -
Appendix 2
Interviewed Persons List
- 76 -
Interviewed Persons List (No.1)
Name Post Position
Dr.Guillermo R. Balce Department of Energy Undersecretary

Energy Utilization Management Bureau
Mr. Mario C. Marasigan Ditto
Director, Officer-in-Charge
Renewable Energy Management Division
Mr. Ronnie N. Sargento Ditto
Officer in charge
Electric Power Industry Management Bureau
Ms.Mylene Capongcol Ditto
Director
Ms.Marissa Mariano Ditto
Senior Science Research Specialist
Mr.Sherwin Adeva Ditto
Senior Science Research Specialist
Mr.Elmer Casao Ditto
Science Research Specialist
Mr.Rodel Padrique Ditto
World bank consaultant on rural power project
Mr. Lorenzo S. Marcelo National Power Corporation Vice President(Small Power Utilities Group)
PNOC Energy Development
Mr. Noel D. Salonga Assistant to the President
Corporation
Engineering Design Procurement and Construction
Mr. Martin Jude Lacambra Ditto
Department Manager
Mr. Ronnie Andador Ditto
Superintendent
Corporate Plannung
Mr. Erudito S. Recio Ditto
Manager
Mr.Danilo H. Cruz Ditto Process Design Supervisor
National Irrigation
Mr.Arturo C. Lomibao Administrator
Administration
Design and Specifications Department
Mr. Rodolfo D. Gales Ditto
Office-in-Charge
Design and Specifications Department
Ms. Proserpina Mariano Ditto
Senior Engineer
Mr.Reinerio E. Irinco Ditto Project Manager(HCAAP-IDC)
Mr.Prisco Buco Ditto Project Engineer(HCAAP-IDC)
Mr.Abner Morales Ditto Project Engineer(HCAAP-IDC, Catubig)
Mr.Romualdo Saises Las Navas LGU Municipal Engineer
Dr.Felipe Gavino Las Navas LGU Municipal Engineer
Mr.Antonio Adella Catubig LGU Planning Officer

University of Eastern
Mr.Lidany Cornillez Engineer
Philippines
- 77 -
Interviewed Persons List (No.2)
Name Post Position

Northern Samar Electric
Mr.Henry Banjawan Engineer
Cooperative, Inc.
Mr.Roy Sosa Ditto Engineer
Sorosoro Ibaba Development
Mr.Rico B. Geron General Manager
Cooperative
Ms.Marife Dimaano Ditto Executive Assistant
Philippine Power and
Mr.Ramon Achacoso General Manager
Development Corporation
Villa Escudero Hydro Power
Mr.jaime Iporac Engineer
Station
Japan Bank for International
Mr.Hiroshi Togo Chief Representative in Manila
Cooperation
Energy Utilization Management Bureau
Mr. Jun Tamakawa Department of Energy
JICA expert (Tokyo Electric Power Company)
Engineering and Development
Mr.Jose U. Jovellanos Chairman
Corporation of the Philippines
Mr.Restituto A. Arbolente Ditto Vice President(Power & Industrial)
Mr.Wilfredo A. Osabel Ditto Vice President(Agri-Infrastructure)
Mr.Teofilo Malicse Ditto NIA HCAAP Engineer
Mr.Ben Ibuna, Jr Ditto NIA HCAAP Engineer
- 78 -
- 79 -
Appendix 3
Photos
- 80 -
Boatslip of Catubig Boatslip of Catubig
River Condition of Catubig River River Condition of Catubig River

(Downstream) (Downstream)
River Condition of Catubig River River Condition of Catubig River

(Upstream) (Upstream)
- 81 -
Intake Dam Site
(JBIC Catubig Agricultural Advancement Project)
Upstream of Intake Dam Intake Site
Unenergized Barangay Unenergized Barangay

(Right side of Intake Dam) (Right side of Intake Dam)
- 82 -
Pinipisakan Falls Pinipisakan Falls
(Downstream of Intake Dam site) (Downstream of Intake Dam site)
Downstream of Pinipisakan Falls Boatslip of Pinipisakan falls
Rest Area of Pinipisakan Falls
- 83 -
Las Navas LGU Office Las Navas Town
Energized Barangay (Dapdap) Energized Barangay (Dapdap)
Energized Barangay (Dapdap) Rice mill (Dapdap)
- 84 -
Unenergized Barangay (Epaw) Unenergized Barangay (Epaw)
Diesel generator 3kW (Epaw) Diesel generator 3kW (Epaw)
University of Eastern Philippines (Catubig) Old Church (Catubig)
- 85 -
NORSAMELCO Substation (Catubig) NORSAMELCO Substation (Catubig)
Biogas Powerstation of Under construction Pig Farm (SIDC)

(SIDC)
Covered In-ground Anaerobic Digeter of

Under construction (SIDC)
- 86 -

- 87 -
- 88 -
.

2008 100
20%
2008
Catubig River
- 89 -
.
2.1
3 5.5
2006
2010 60

2013 2

2.2

(1)
3,219MW
2014 780MW
3,991MW
1
2005 2006 2010 2014
(MW ) 3,219.1 3,219.1 3,219.1 3,991.1
Luzon 2,209.8 2,209.8 2,209.8 2,509.8
Visayas 11.61 11.61 11.61 61.61
Mindanao 997.65 997.65 997.65 1,427.65
(GWh) 8,374 8,563 12,996 14,741
Luzon 4,422 4,611 8,896 8,819
Visayas 35 35 35 188
Mindanao 3,917 3,917 4,065 5,734
14.44 14.76 22.41 25.42
(in MMBFOE)
- 90 -
(2)

250
235.7MW 127.8MW
2 30MW 50MW
4
(3)

80
154 5,600
PNOC
(4)

25MW
2004 16 345MW
19 3,270MW
2.3

No9337
- 91 -
2.4
1990
1991
40%
2
80%
20
1992 2004
1,019,715,354.53
ER 1-94
2 Energy Regulation(ER)1-94
1kWh
0.01Peso
(Electrification Fund)<50%>

BarangyMunicipality or CityProvince
Region
(Development and Livelihood Fund)<25%>

5%20%
35%30% 10%
(Reforestation, Watershed management,

Health and Environment Enhancement Fund)<25%>

ER 1-94 2005 3 3,360,000,000

1,500,000,000 1,800,000,000
1,877 ER 1-94
- 92 -
.
3.1

1960
1969 NEA
NEA
1970 1980
119
1997 Municipality
Barangay 72%
2000 O-ILAW
2003 4 ERExpanded Rural Electrification
2008
( 2004 2006 2008
)2017 90%
41,995 2000
19.8% 8,300
1,500
10
3040
100%
3040
2006 10 41,945 39,590
- 93 -
94.4
97.1% 96.0% 87.0%
(ECs) 93.8%
MERALCO 98.5%// 97.7%
3.2
O-ILAW ER DOE
DOE
DOE (PT)
O-ILAW ER
ER1-94 NGO
IPP
ER1-94 2000 PNOC-EDC
Ormoc 10 Southern Energy
East Asia
Franchise Distribution Unit

EC
Missionary
Missionary EC
QTPQualified
Third Party
KEPCO QTP QTP
NPC-SPUG Missionary
ERC
3.3
119 16 3
138
100% 15 12.6%75 63.0%
90% 100%
2000
8,300 45% 4,000
- 94 -

SHSSolar Home System

1999 2002
5,082 81.8% 4,159
18.2%923
3.4
NEA
2004
a)

b)

1613
4

c)

- 95 -
d)

60W
7701
2191

4.1

14
4
3,498km225 Municipalitiy569 Barangay
500,639 2.11 94,410 2000
20%
- 96 -

1970
4.2
No1,2,3
700MW
NORSAMELCO
2005 569 Barangay 73 415 Barangay
50%
5.1
5.1.1
Catubig
Catubig Las Navas
Region VIII 2006 7 Region

VIII 90.8%
100%
NORSAMELCO 73.1%Region VIII
2
- 97 -
2004 Catubig
60.9%Las Navas
11.3% 3
2 Region Barangay
Electric Number of Barangays

Cooperatives Covered Energized %
Region VIII 4390 3984 90.8
DORELCO 499 494 99.0
LEYECO II 196 196 100.0
LEYECO III 285 285 100.0
LEYECO IV 245 242 98.8
LEYECO V 416 416 100.0
SOLECO 500 483 96.6
BILECO 132 132 100.0
SAMELCO I 427 366 85.7
SAMELCO II 524 482 92.0
ESAMELCO 597 472 79.1
NORSAMELC 569 416 73.1
(as of 2006,July,31)
(Source: NEA)
3 Brangay
(as of 2004.12.31)
Municipality Cooperative
Number of Barangays Potential Members House Connections
Energized Covered Energized % Households Total % Total %
Allen 20 19 95.0 3,217 2,140 66.52 2,529 78.6
Biri 8 2 25.0 1,317 376 28.55 397 30.1
Bobon 18 13 72.2 2,613 1,710 65.44 1,598 61.2
Capul 12 5 41.7 1,780 504 28.31 446 25.1
Catarman 55 37 67.3 9,228 7,465 80.90 8,145 88.3
Catubig 46 28 60.9 4,050 1538 37.98 1596 39.4
Gamay 26 12 46.2 3,119 992 31.81 1104 35.4
Laoang 56 33 58.9 7,968 3,707 46.52 3,905 49.0
Lapinig 15 5 33.3 1,396 441 31.59 476 34.1
Las Navas 53 6 11.3 4,286 451 10.52 479 11.2
Lavezares 26 20 76.9 3,635 1,565 43.05 1,624 44.7
Lope de Vega 22 5 22.7 1,621 309 19.06 374 23.1
Mapanas 13 7 53.8 1,326 472 35.60 471 35.5
Mondragon 25 14 56.0 3,987 1,985 49.79 1,927 48.3
Palapag 32 23 71.9 4,019 2,181 54.27 2,259 56.2
Pambujan 26 12 46.2 3,349 1,396 41.68 1,470 43.9
Rosario 11 7 63.6 1,196 596 49.83 629 52.6
San Antonio 10 10 100.0 1,423 723 50.81 665 46.7
San Isidro 14 13 92.9 3,591 2,155 60.01 2,291 63.8
San Jose 16 16 100.0 2,099 1,356 64.60 1,385 66.0
San Roque 16 10 62.5 2,493 1257 50.42 1288 51.7
San Vicente 7 3 42.9 1,178 195 16.55 196 16.6
Silvino Lobos 26 3 11.5 1,601 12 0.75 12 0.7
Victoria 16 13 81.3 1,873 956 51.04 945 50.5
Total 569 316 55.5 72,365 34,482 47.65 36,211 50.0
Source : Northern Samar Electric Cooperative (NORSAMELCO), Inc., Bobon, Northern Samar
- 98 -
5.1.2
NORSAMELCO Tongonan PNOC-EDC, NPC
112.5MW Wright 138kV 69kV 69kV
DalakitLawaanAllen
NORSAMELCO Catubig Las Navas
Lawaan 69kV/13.2kV 3.75MW) 30km
Las Navas
Catubig Las Navas
12vBCS
BCS PNOC-EDC NPC
BCS 50-70
20
10W 100
18:00-21:005:00-6:00 4,000-6,000
75Wp1.21.7m 150Wp
5.1.3 NORSAMELCO
NORSAMELCO 1977
3,498km Municipality 24Barangay
569 23 Municiparity316 Barangay 1
Municiparity 2007 72,000
2004 36,211 67
18% 9% 1% 4%
NORSAMELCO 2004 31,249MWh 72.4%

3,717,900kW 2006 10
44,615MWh 2006 8,133W
NORSAMELCO 21
NORSAMELCO 2004 6.13 /kWh

5.41 /kWh 5.60 /kWh 2006
10 6.23 /kWh NORSAMELCO NPC
4.66 /kWh
- 99 -
NORSAMELCO 1,550,085Peso 2004
13% 72008
5.1.4
Catubig 47 Barangay 28 Barangay
La Navas 53 Barangay 26 Barangay
Barangay QTP
QTP
5.2
Catubing Las Navas Catubig Help for Catubig
Agricultural Advancement Project;HCAAP
4,500Ha 65km
1 /ha
5 /ha
Barangay
Barangay 3
TV
50 Barangay
TVBarangay
4 9.6kW
2 48.8%
- 100 -
4
(kWh/
Energy Denmand in Barangay <Demand> coverage (kW) (hour) Remarks
day)
Number of Households 50 Households
Household Light(40Wx4) 160 W 0.8 6.4 4 25.6 Peak
HouseholdTV 70 W 0.5 1.75 4 7.0 Peak
HouseholdsRefrigerator(50L 100 W 0.3 0.45 24 10.8 Peak & Base
(Refrigerator Availability) ( 0.3 )
Street Light (40WX25) 40 W 25 1 12 12.0 Peak & Base
Pump for Water Well 250 W 1unit 0.25 20 5.0 Non-Peak
Ice Manufacturer 1,250 W 1unit 1.25 20 25.0 Non-Peak
Rice Miller 3,000 W 1unit 3 9 27.0 Non-Peak
Total 112.4
Peak Demand 9.6 kW 44.6
Base Demand 5.0 kW 67.8
Daily Power Demand in Barangay (50 Households)
12
10
8
Demand (kW)
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
hour
HH Ref St Light HH Light HH TV Pump Ice Rice
5.3

19.8/kWh 32.2/kWh
25/kWh
Barangay
- 101 -
5.4
5.4.1
5.2 10kW 5kW
10kW
46.8%10W
0.2 m3/s 7
5kW
66.5%5W
0.1 m3/s 7

240V
O&M

8,000/kW 45 12%
0.1078

1.5%

4,000

LRMC10W
27.7/kWh 5kW
22.1/kWh
HCAAP 5kW
10W
5.4.2

DOE
650
40Ha 6
Maya
- 102 -
CDM
Catubig HCAAP

10kW
46.8%10W 1,800
3,600m 100 m3/
3

5kW 11.9%
500 1,000 m3
28 m3/

240V
O&M

CIGER 7.4/m3 20
12% 0.1195
0.1195

CIGER
2.0%
2 4,000

LRMC10W
20.5/kWh
5kW 41.5/kWh
10kW
1,800
- 103 -
5.4.3
HCAAP 1 /ha 5 /ha
DOE Bulacan 35MW

Nueva Ecija 25-30MW

25-35MW
10MW20MW
HCAAP
5 3kW
Barangay

3.3W 3 10kW
46.8%
10W 180
HCAAP 130ha

240V
O&M

35,000 20
12% 0.1195
5,000 0.1195

- 104 -
2.0%
3 4,000

LRMC 10W
47.1/kWh
10,000
20/kWh
5.4.4
5.4.1 5.4.2 50 Barangay
24
5kW 5kW
61,600
10,400 41.0
25.4/kWh
5.4.5 Barangay
5.3 20/kWh32/kWh
25/kWh Barangay
25/kWh 7 Barangay
5 Barangay
Barangay
Palanas 164 35
Rufino 200 35
Tangan-ayan 316 60
Epaw 259 44
San Jose 179 36
San-od 188 33
San Antonio 228 45
- 105 -
.
6.1
HCAAP Catubig Sercvice Area(3,565.5ha)Bulao Service Area (742.2ha)
Hagbay Service Area(665.3ha)
Catubig Sercvice Area
6
Barangay
PalanasTagan-ayanEpawSan Jose Barangay
6
Site No. Discharge Head Output Nearest
(m3/s) (m) (kW) Barangay
1 0.11 2.6 1.7 San Isidro
2 0.19 2.8 3.2 Epaw
3 0.19 1.5 1.8 San Jose
4 0.17 4.5 4.3 Tagan-Ayan
5 0.24 4.2 6.0 Tagan-Ayan
6 0.22 2.0 2.6 Tagan-Ayan
7 0.10 3.0 1.8 Palanas
8 0.14 3.4 2.8 Rizal
6.2 Barangay
PalanasTagan-ayanEpawSan Jose Barangay 50
Barangay -2
Demand Side
Suply Side
Palanas Barangay 6.7W78.7kWh

1.8W
4.9W
540 15
1,1003 CIGER
Tagan-ayan Barangay 11.5W134.9kWh

6.0W
5.5W
600 10
1,2003 CIGER
Epaw Barangay 8.4W98.9kWh

3.2W
- 106 -
5.2W
440 10
9003 CIGER
San Jose Barangay 6.9W80.9kWh

1.8W
5.1W
580 16
1,2003 CIGER 7
Barangay
- 107 -
Demand Side Supply Side
Daily Daily Base Hydro Energy Energy
Household Peak Base Micro Hydro Biogas Necessary Capacity of
Barangay Energy Energy Site production by Production
s Demand Demand Potential Generation No. of Swine Digester
Demand Demand No. Micro Hydro by Biogas
(house) (kW) (kW) (kWh) (kWh) (kW) (kWh) (kW) (kWh) (Head) (m3)
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h)=(b)-(f) (i)=(d)-(g) (j) (k)
Palanas 35 6.7 3.5 78.7 55.9 1.8 7 43.2 4.9 35.5 540 1,100
Tagan-ayan 60 11.5 6.0 134.9 95.8 6.0 5 95.8 5.5 39.1 600 1,200
Epaw 44 8.4 4.4 98.9 70.2 3.2 2 70.2 5.2 28.7 440 900
San Jose 36 6.9 3.6 80.9 57.5 1.8 3 43.2 5.1 37.7 580 1,200
Note 1. Peak demand (b) is calculated by 9.6kW x (Households No./ 50)

2. Base demand (c) is calculated by 5.0kW x (Households No./ 50)
3. Daily energy demand (d) is calculated by 112.4 kWh x (Households No./ 50)
4. Daily base energy demand (e) is calculated by 79.8 kWh x (Households No./ 50)
5. Energy production by Micro hydro (g) is smaller number of either micro hydro potential (f) x 24h or daily base energy demand (e).
6. Biogas generation (h) is the balance of peak demand (b) and Micro hydro potential (f).
7. Energy production by biogas (i) is the balance of daily energy demand (d) and energy production by micro hydro (g).
8. Necessary No. of swine (j) is calculated by energy production by biogas (i) divided by 6.54 kWh/day/100 swine head.
9. Capacity of digester (k) is calculated by energy production by biogas (i) multipled by 31.0 m3/kWh/day.
- 108 -

1. 2.

3.
PNOC
4.

50 20
ECDP
5.
(1)
(2)
: P=6.7kW : 1.8kW : 4.9kW
: P=11.5kW : 6.0kW : 5.5kW
: P=8.4kW : 3.2kW : 5.2kW
: P=6.9kW: 1.8kW : 5.1kW
6.
2 0.5
7.

8. 9.
0.5
- 109 -

Wjec Philippines PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Wjec Philippines PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Pre-Feasibility Study for

Rural Electrification Program by Renewable Energy

In The Mountainous Region of Northern Samar

Engineering and Consulting Firms Association, Japan

This work was subsidized by Japan Keirin

Executive Summary S-1

Chapter 2 Socio-Economic Development in Communities Hosting Renewable energy 4

Chapter 3 Rural Electrification 19

Chapter 4 Outline of the Surveyed Area 29

Chapter 5 Pre-Feasibility Study of Rural Electrification by Renewable Energy 34

Chapter 6 Rural Electrification Plan by Renewable Energy 61

Chapter 7 Profile of the Project 69

Appendix 1 Schedule for Field Investigation

Fig-5.1 Status of Barangay Electrification in Region VIII 35

Table-1.1 Study Team Members 3

1.1 Background and Objectives

1.2 Scope of Work

z Site Survey at Power Plant site

1.3 Study Area

1.4 Study Schedule

1.5 Study Team Member

Members of this study are listed below.

Table-1.1 Study Team Member

1 Takatoshi Nagao Project Manager, Project Implementation Plan

4 Kei Katayama Rural Electrification Plan

5 Hiroki Aso Regional Development Plan

2.1 Economic Development and Energy in the Philippines

a) Be the number one geothermal producer in the world

2.2 Renewable Energy Development in the Philippines

1) CAMP JOHN HAY MHP

By 2014, the hydropower sector targets a cumulative installed capacity of 3,991 MW

Table-2.1 Hydropower Measurable Targets

2005 2006 2010 2014

1. Batanes and Babuyan Island

The Environmental Improvement for Economic Sustainability (EIES) Project also

Shift in type of development

Commercialization of hydropower technology

There is a need to develop and commercialize suitable micro-hydro technology in the

2.4 Government Policies and Programs

a) Special privilege tax rates Tax payable by developers/grantees to develop

f) VAT exemption Exemption from payment of 10 percent VAT on gross receipts

a) Information, Education and Communication to enhance public acceptability

b) Promotion of alternative hydro development

The run-of-river schemes of construction will allow for a balance of river

With additional incentives as stipulated in the proposed RE Bill, the

1) Establishment of a Market Service Center

2) Pursuit of technical cooperation with other countries

For small-scale hydropower development, the basic strategy for

The grant of financial benefits was subsequently strengthened in Section 66 of the

3.1 Current Condition of Rural Electrification

1 REC changed its name to Electric Cooperative (EC) in 1993.

In the Philippines, a subject barangay is deemed electrified either (1) electricity is

Electrified Unelectrified Ratio

Table-3.3 Barangay Electrification Level by Franchise Holder (As of October 2006)

(1) Regular electrification program of government agencies

3.3 Issues of Rural Electrification

Whether electrified by grid extension or by mini grid, the barangays to be electrified in

10 The Philippine Department of Energy Website http://www.doe.gov.ph/Rep/O-ilaw/oilaw.htm

Table-3.4 Rural Electrification by Method (1999 2002)

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 Total

3.4 Effects of Rural Electrification

(1) Place visited: Residence of Mr. Constantio Rosito