Energy transition is no longer an option; it is an inevitability that the Philippines will have to go through to achieve sustainable development.
The question is how to make it as just as possible, in other words, where no one is left behind.
This is one of the biggest questions to be answered as the government currently leads the formulation of the country’s Just Transition Framework (JTF). Assuming the current pace of development, it is set to be only the second of its kind in the world after South Africa, which is consistent with the Philippines’ long-running reputation of being among the global pioneers in climate and environmental policies.
But this is not about making history; it is about making a greener future truly possible.
The energy incoherence
During consultations and public hearings in recent months, it is not uncommon to hear arguments about how the country is not ready to fully leave fossil fuels behind. Groups that bring up such points, including representatives from corporations, emphasize that this process cannot occur in a short period of time.
Well, no one advocating for a nationwide just energy transition (JET) would ever assume that an overnight switch is even feasible.
After all, the country’s energy mix is still dominated by fossil fuels. More than 60% of generated power comes from coal. The current policy also favors the growth of the gas industry as a supposed “transition fuel,” which is only strengthened by the recent discovery of a new gas field near Malampaya.
Such arguments also conveniently leave out that enacting JET essentially requires a clear phase-out plan that would take years or decades to achieve, with accompanying policy, technical, and financial reforms. There remains no outlined plan with specific targets and timelines for the long-term phase-out of gas, which directly contradicts its branding by proponents as a “transition fuel.”
The current dominance of fossil fuels is what makes energy the most important sector to address under the JTF. Current discourse on just transition is mostly triggered by its emergence as an important issue within the global climate agenda. More than half of the country’s climate pollution comes from the energy sector.
When discussing this transition, another contentious issue is on viable alternatives to coal. Different sectors have their own perspectives on what counts as clean energy technologies, with some basing it simply on having lower emissions than coal and others championing stricter standards, especially for air quality and public health.
Of course, attempts to move away from coal can be discouraged when the Department of Energy loosened the 2020 coal moratorium, granting more exemptions that would allow new coal plants to be built. In addition, the negative externalities of coal, its adverse impacts on health or the environment, are still not accounted for in the market cost of coal-produced electricity in the country.
These cases show not only how complicated the JET issue is, but also the challenges in ensuring an overarching coherent energy transition strategy in the Philippines, amid different perspectives and inconsistencies among existing policies. Nonetheless, we must not lose sight of why such a transition is important.
So many questions
The cost of inaction is greater than the initial cost of action. In the case of the climate crisis, it is not just the economic costs that we should be concerned about, but also the non-economic losses and damages that are shouldered disproportionately by the most vulnerable communities. It is not just about the short-term expenses that those not in favor of JET will highlight more, but also the long-term ramifications.
A proper JET must prevent billions of losses due to stranded assets that are the inevitable fate of fossil fuel facilities. It must avoid even more expensive electricity bills for consumers, with current rates in the Philippines already among the highest in the region. It also must avoid following the same polluting development pathways of industrialized countries that have led to the climate crisis in the first place.
It is up to the government to ensure a sustainable, coherent, and inclusive energy transition strategy will be designed. This transition is still very much possible, as it would take a long time to be properly implemented, but it would need a genuine buy-in from all stakeholders involved.
From the perspective of the vulnerable communities and sectors, it is about a stable and affordable energy supply that contributes little to no pollution. It is about ensuring secure and adequate livelihoods during the transition, including on potential renewable energy sites. It is about ensuring that their rights are respected and that they can participate in decision-making involving their energy future.
To sum up, it is about ensuring that, in a country with a track record of decision-making that tends to favor the interests of the private sector and politicians over the marginalized, on just transition or any other climate or development issue moving forward, this time would be different.
To be fair, compared to other national climate policymaking processes in recent years, the formulation of the JTF has been more inclusive. Yet there is room for improvement. With the framework’s finalization in a matter of weeks and the subsequent development of its implementation plan, more sectors need to be included in consultations. These include electric cooperatives and consumer groups.
It is also important to monitor how just transition is enabled through other energy-relevant plans, from the Philippine Energy Plan to the Nationally Determined Contribution. This is not just any transition; justice must remain the heart of this process.
No more delays, no to greenwashing, no to false solutions. The JET in the Philippines must be genuinely launched as soon as possible.
John Leo Algo is the National Coordinator of Aksyon Klima Pilipinas and the Deputy Executive Director for Programs and Campaigns at Living Laudato Si’ Philippines. He has been representing Philippine civil society at UN climate and environmental conferences since 2016 and has worked as a climate and environment journalist since 2016.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial stance of LiCAS News.
