THE LONG-standing imbroglio between PECO and MORE Power seems to be drawing to a close. The aspect that has always troubled me is the legitimacy or otherwise the expropriation of PECO’s assets by MORE Power.
This issue should have been treated by the Supreme Court (SC) early in the day, because it is only the SC that can give an authoritative answer. Not to have grasped the nettle has caused SC to sideline itself. It needs to be more proactive if it wishes to cause the Judicial Branch to be recognized alongside the Executive and Legislative as a co-equal branch of government.
***
The good news is that MORE Power is providing much data about its activities. I hope this continues and that transparency is a hallmark of MORE Power’s corporate culture. The “accomplishment report” which appeared in last Thursday’s (March 19) PN is particularly informative.
PECO was accused by many as having a superciliously disdainful attitude towards its customers. MORE Power, by providing statistics of its performance is allowing consumers to know how things stand.
One aspect claimed by MORE Power is that the cost-effectiveness of its activity would be superior than that shown in the past by PECO. This could mean that the price we pay per kilowatt hour (KWH) may be reduced.
MORE Power has provided information about the sources of the electricity supply. The data is, for Feb 28 – Mar. 17, Panay Energy Development Corp. (PEDC), 66.5 percent, Wholesale Electricity Spot Market (WESM), 24.4. percent, Panay Power Corp. (PPC), 3.7 percent, and Kepco-Salcon Power Corporation, 5.5 percent.
It would be helpful if MORE Power provided the average cost per KWH from each of the sources of supply.
In recent years, WESM has often supplied electricity at lower prices than the supply obtained from electricity resulting from bilateral contracts.
WESM in the Visayas region was opened by then Energy Secretary Jose Rene Almendras on 26 December 2010. At the time, he said that WESM would be a buoyant market with active buyers and sellers coming together to reach a fair price for electricity. This has proved to be substantially true.
Can MORE Power tell us how the WESM price currently compares with that provided by PEDC?
In 2013, I wrote an article suggesting that PECO agreed to pay a price to PEDC which was significantly higher than the WESM price.
Is this still the case?
If so, can MORE Power renegotiate the terms of the bilateral contract signed by PECO?
Bilateral contracts, sometimes with onerous conditions, have been a chronic problem. Consumers would welcome more assertive negotiations which should drive prices down somewhat.
Around a decade ago, I compared the price paid by CENECO (Central Negros Electric Cooperative) consumers with that paid by PECO consumers. At the time, we were paying under P10 per KWH. But the hapless PECO consumers found their per KWH price rising significantly each month. Presumably there was a clause in the contract allowing PECO’s supplier to do this. Anyhow PECO’s price went sailing past the P10 per KWH ‘barrier’ well before CENECO.
In fact, because the population density of the area covered now by MORE Power is higher than CENECO, we would expect the local distribution charge for MORE Power to be less than that for CENECO.
It is a sad fact that Filipinos, in receipt of low incomes associated with developing countries, pay first world prices for electricity. Agnes VST Devanadera, ERC Chairman has said she would examine bilateral contracts arrived at with, incidentally, the concurrency of ERC.
Perhaps she can facilitate the renegotiation of disadvantageous bilateral contracts./PN
