Geothermics, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 545-558, 1992. 0375~o505/92 $5.00 + 0.

00
Printed in Great Britain. Pergamon Press Ltd
CNR.

ECONOMICS OF G E O T H E R M A L D E V E L O P M E N T S IN
THE PHILIPPINES

F E L I C I T O M. G A Z O and R O G E L I O D A T U I N
National Power Corporation, Quezon Avenue, Diliman, Quezon City, P.O. Box 10183, Republic of the
Philippines

(Received October 1991; accepted for publication April 1992)

Abstract--This paper presents a short history of the development and utilization of geothermal energy in
the Philippines, its present status and future prospects, and the economic viability of its utilization in the
country. It reports financial and economic indicators relating to power generation and utilization of
primary energy sources (hydroelectric, oil, coal, and geothermal energy) in the country from 1981 to 1989.
A comparative analysis between electricity generating costs, results of operations and other operational
data from these various power sources shows that geothermal energy is very competitive, very reliable,
and a viable energy resource that can alleviate the energy problem in the Philippines. Fifteen per cent of
the electricity generated in the Philippines comes from geothermal energy.

INTRODUCTION

The Philippine Archipelago, together with the island arcs and land masses that b o r d e r the
Pacific O c e a n , comprise the Circum-Pacific "ring of fire", so called because of the active
volcanism in the area. Such volcanoes, together with the spatially and causally correlated
earthquakes, are manifestations of the c o n v e r g e n c e of huge blocks or plates of the earth's crust.
These crustal plate m o v e m e n t s incessantly shape the geologic structure of the Philippine
Archipelago, as well as those of the other islands bordering the Pacific Ocean.
Plate tectonics and attendant volcanism p r o d u c e sufficient heat and geothermal energy
resources for commercial exploitation. The geothermal resources in the Circum-Pacific Region,
if t a p p e d adequately, could provide the bulk of the energy requirements of the region and
considerably reduce d e p e n d e n c e on p e t r o l e u m and other fossil fuels. It is perceived that the
reduction in d e m a n d for fossil fuels will lead to m o r e reasonable and stable price levels that will
immensely help countries that are highly d e p e n d e n t on these i m p o r t e d fuel sources.

HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF GEOTHERMAL ENERGY IN T H E

PHILIPPINES

T h e Philippines e m b a r k e d on an accelerated p r o g r a m for the utilization of g e o t h e r m a l energy

at the onset of the energy crisis in the early 70s. The main historical events in the d e v e l o p m e n t of
geothermal energy in the country that p r e c e d e d and then followed this are as follows:
1926 - - Dr Jose Feliciano of the D e p a r t m e n t of G e o l o g y and G e o g r a p h y , University
of the Philippines, initiated the formal study of geothermal energy in the
Philippines.
1928 - - Publication of the results of D r Feliciano's survey on the t e m p e r a t u r e
m e a s u r e m e n t s and chemical characteristics of 54 hot springs.
1962 - - The geoscientific investigation of Tiwi area, Albay, was started by the
545
546 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin
Commission of Volcanology ( C O M V O L ) , a Philippine government research
agency.
1967 -- An electric bulb was lit for the first time in the country by geothermal power at
Cale, Tiwi, Albay.
1968 -- Steam was produced in Tiwi from a 641-foot well with a four-inch production
liner.
1969 -- Initial operation of a 2.5 kW non-condensing pilot plant utilizing geothermal
energy from the Tiwi well.
I I I
118° .j'~,~, 22°~L. 126~
Philippine geothermal operations ' ">~-~'~ Legend:
• Historically active volcanoes
--18° /" " • Production stage ~8°--
• Advanced expLo, stage
Cagua,Cagayan o Preliminary expLo stage
Batong - Buhay ~ Philippine fault

Meinit, Mt. Province o

Buguias, Benguet
Acupan, Benguet DekLan, Benguet
Mok - Ban, Laguna ( PGI - N P C )
Unit I and 2-110MWe - 1978
Mr. Pinatubo, Zambates Unit 3 aed 4 - IIOMWe - 1980
Mr. MariveLes, Bataan ~ • ~ ~ / Unit 5 and 6 - I10 MWe - 1982

Teal
~Mt. Labo Camarines Norte
Mabini, Batangas
_ 14° - - ~ ~ ~ Tiwi, Allx]y ( PGI - NPC } i4°-
Unit I and 2 - l l O M W e - 1979
MonteLago or Mindoro Unit 5 and 4 - tlOMWe - 1980
Philippine Fault Unit 5 and 6 - I I O M W e - 1982

,\ , oc- oc,
~/ "~\~ ~'..~'~ ? ~Irosin, Sorsegon
" ~ ~-~=~~-~'7 ~ B i l i r a n , Leyte

_•_
ic, 2 ~
MambucaL
N~rosOCC
Tongonon, Leyte
( PNOC - EDC)
Tar@anon 3 MWe - 1977
Tong~non I - 112.5 MWe 198.~

-10 ° #~/" Canlaon 10° _

Burauen
r/ ~ Palimpinon Anahaw, Leyte
,7 / Southern Negros .Mainit, Surigao
~ . / ( PNOC - EDC)
/'~ / pilot 3 M W e - 1980
/ ~ pilot 3MWe- 1982
p a l 112 5MWe- 1983
MaLindang
Misamis OCC.
LLakewood
akewood - - ~ \ =~ ,= ~
~.~.~ Zamboanga de[
de[ Sur
Sur U ~'~ " ~ ~ - ~

6o~

~'~, Manet-Amacan Davao . . . . J

118° 122° 12Co°
I

Fig. 1. Philippine geothermal Operations (1990).

 Economics of Geothermal Developments in the Philippines 547
1970 -- The Philippine government declared 17,660 hectares of land in Tiwi, Albay as
a geothermal reservation area. The government gave the National Power
Corporation (NAPOCOR), the state-owned electric utility firm, the responsi-
bility of administering the exploration and development of Tiwi.
1971 - - N A P O C O R entered into a service contract with Philippine Geothermal
Incorporated (PGI), a subsidiary of Union Oil Company--California, to
develop the Tiwi field and serve as steam supplier for N A P O C O R geothermal
power plants.
1974-76 -- Another joint venture agreement was signed between N A P O C O R and PGI
for the exploration and development of Makiling-Banahaw (Mak-Ban)
geothermal field in Laguna. The Philippine government entered into bilateral
agreements with New Zealand, Italy and Japan for technical expertise in the
utilization of geothermal energy. Two additional geothermal fields in Tongo-
nan, Leyte, and Palinpinon, Negros Oriental, were also explored for full-scale
geothermal power generation.
1977 -- Commercial operation of a 3-MWe geothermal pilot power plant started in
Tongonan, Leyte. The government created the Ministry of Energy to spear-
head a systematic and continuing geothermal energy program through the
coordination and regulation of geothermal energy development and utiliz-
ation. This led to the enactment of the Philippine Geothermal Law, which
nationalized geothermal exploration and development activities.
1979 -- Large-scale, commercial operation of two ll0-MWe geothermal power plants
started in Tiwi and Mak-Ban.
1980-89 - - Additional geothermal units in Mak-Ban, Tiwi, Leyte, and Negros boosted
the installed geothermal plant generating capacity to 888 MWe or about 15%
of the country's total installed plant capacity of 6006 MWe.

G E O T H E R M A L ENERGY UTILIZATION

Geothermal energy in the Philippines is mainly used for electricity generation. Thus,
non-electrical uses such as fish canning, salt production and various agricultural drying
applications are insignificant compared to power utilization.
Currently, the National Power Corporation (NAPOCOR) is producing bulk electricity from
four major geothermal power plants in Tiwi, Mak-Ban, Leyte (Tongonan) and Negros
(Palinpinon). The main characteristics of these operating geothermal plants/fields in the
Philippines, as of 1989, are shown in Table 1 and Fig. 1.
Table 2 shows that geothermal energy utilization in the country attained positive growth in
gross generation (10%) and installed capacity (9%) from 1981 to 1989. It also contributes a
relatively high generation mix (22%) to the country's total generation mix and displaces more
expensive fuels such as coal and oil.
Moreover, generation costs (with or without interest expenses) and fuel costs ($0.010/kWh)
during operation of geothermal power plants are cheaper than those for oil-fired ($0.030/kWh)
and coal-fired plants ($0.020 kWh). Total generating costs for geothermal are only 60% of the
total generating costs from oil and coal. Geothermal plant load factor (53%) is also better than
plant load factors for oil-fired plants (47%) and hydroelectric plants (49%), which remain
vulnerable to droughts and typhoons.
From 1981-88, the results of plant operations showed that net income for geothermal plants
averaged more than $7 million and is better than those attained for oil-fired and coal-fired
548 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin
Table 1. Geothermal fields under operation in the Philippines

Fields Tiwi Mak-Ban Tongonan Palinpinon

Location Albay Laguna Lcytc Negros ()r.

No. of wells t 12 87 52 56
Estimated total well capacity (MWe) 350 360 410 250
Estimated field potential available (MWe years) --- 15,000 7000-12,000 9750
Installed capacity, MWe Plant A Plant A Plant l t>ilot
(Units 1 and 2) (Units 1 and 2)
110 MWe 110 MWe 112.5 MWe 3 MWe
Year of operation 1979 1979 1983 1982
Plant B Plant B Plant 1
(Units 3 and 4) (Units 3 and 4)
110 MWe 110 MWe 112.5 MWe
Year of operation 1980 1980 1982
Plant C Plant C
(Units 5 and 6) (Units 5 and 6)
i10 MWe 110 MWe
Year of operation 1982 1984
Total plant capacity (MWe) 330 330 112.5 115.5
Total plant capacity, Philippines (MWe) = 888

Source:Datuin and Roxas, 1990.

plants. Moreover, geothermal utilization is very competitive with oil-fired and coal-fired plants
in terms of return-on-rate base and generation costs (see Table 3).
Under its loan agreements with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF),
NAPOCOR is required to register an annual return of at least 8 per cent of its rate base (this is
the average net value of its fixed assets used in generating electricity).
Provisions specifying a minimum return on investments are standard parts of loan agreements
with creditors.
The rate base is determined every four years by an independent appraiser. For the years in
between appraisals, NAPOCOR determines the value of its power-generating assets by using a
set of standard indices provided by the appraiser.
Although its own charter requires NAPOCOR at least 8 per cent return-on-rate base
(RORB), it negotiated with its creditors for a lower RORB of only 6 per cent.
By meeting this 6 per cent requirement, NAPOCOR will continue to enjoy access to foreign
funding, which it needs in order to put up more power plants.

Table 2. NAPOCOR average operational figures (1981-89)

Generation cost
Gen. Cap. Plant (S/kWh) Total
Gross growth Gen. Inst. growth load Fuel gem
Power gen. rate mix cap. rate factor w/o cost cost
source (GWh) (%) (%) (MWe) (%) (%) int. w/int. (S/kWh) (S/kWh)

Oil 9020 0.6 46 2450 0.3 47 0.030 0.030 0.025 0.055

Coal 1440 270.0 7 280 97.0 59 0.030 0.040 0.020 0.060
Geo 4300 10.0 22 800 9.0 53 0.020 0.025 0.010 0,035
Hydro 4800 9.0 25 1760 11.0 49 0.005 0.010 -- 0.010
Total 19560 6.0 100 5290 6.0 45 0.025 0.025 0,015 0:040

Source: NAPOCOR Financial Data Bank, 1972--89.

 Economics of Geothermal Developments in the Philippines 549
Table 3. Average results of operation of power plants in the Philippines
1981-88 (in million dollars at 1990 level, $1.00 = P = 28.00)

Oil-fired Coal Geothermal Hydro

Generation, GWh 8920 1300 4180 4590

Energy sales, GWh 8340 1190 3630 4290
Gross operating revenue 273 28 84 67
Net operating revenue 261 44 104 88
Operating expenses 239 42 74 32
Net operating income (loss) 22 2 30 56
Net income (loss) -3 -14 7 36
Rate base (WB-IBRD) 306 180 428 532
Return-on-rate base, % 2 6 9 12

Generation cost, S/kWh 0.0270 0.0320 0.0180 0.0070

Source: NAPOCOR Financial Data Bank, 1972-89.

By 1989, average net losses (at minus $3 million), however, were incurred due to increased
steam costs, depreciation and interest costs and other operating costs of these geothermal power
plants (see Table 4). Return-on-rate base for geothermal plants, however, remained positive at
7% and better than coal-fired plants. Moreover, generation costs for geothermal plants are still
lower than those for oil-fired and coal-fired plants.
Table 5 shows that Mak-Ban geothermal plant has the highest plant load factor (76%) among
generating plants in the Philippines. Total plant load factor for all geothermal plants (53%) is
also better than oil-fired (47%), diesel (23%) and hydro plants (49%).
These overall results showed that geothermal power utilization in the country is a more cost
effective and reliable source of energy than other fuel sources. Geothermal energy is projected
to remain as a primary component of conventional indigenous energy sources in the country and
will make a significant contribution to the future energy requirements of the country.

STATUS OF GEOTHERMAL ENERGY IN THE PHILIPPINES

At present, the Philippine geothermal energy reserves are estimated to exceed 8000 MWe but
so far only 888 MWe or 11% have been harnessed commercially (see Table 6). Some 3000 MWe
of these reserves are in Luzon, where only 660 MWe (or 22%) are now being utilized. Leyte
accounts for 2000 MWe potential steam reserve, with Tongonan field providing 400 MWe. Full

Table 4. Average results of operation of power plants in the Philippines

1981-89 (in million dollars at 1990 level, $1.00 = P = 28.00)

Oil-fired Coal Geothermal Hydro

Generation, GWh 9020 1440 4180 4800
Energy sales, GWh 8440 1310 3630 4480
Gross operating revenue 296 29 87 73
Net operating revenue 284 43 104 91
Operating expenses 238 47 84 36
Net operating income (loss) 46 -4 20 55
Net income (loss) 22 -22 -3 32
Rate base (WB-IBRD) 322 199 454 580
Return-on-rate base, % 8 2 7 11

Generation cost, S/kWh 0.0260 0.0330 0.0200 0.0080

Source: NAPOCOR Financial Data Bank, 1972-89.

550 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin
Table 5. Operational and financial data of power plants (1981-89) (average values at
1990 level, $1.00 = P = 28.00)

Generation cost
Plant load
Without interest With interest factor Fuel cost
Plant type (S/kWh) (S/kWh) (% ) (S/kWh)

Oil-fired
Malaya I 0.027 0.031 47 0,025
Diesel
Cebu I -- -- 23
Geothermal 0.018 0.024 53 0.009
Tiwi 0.018 0.028 67 0.009
Mak-Ban 0.016 0.025 76 0.007
Negros Pilot 0.028 0.046 47 0.015
Negros I -- -- 24 0.009
Leyte Pilot 0.017 0.025 38 0.007
Leyte I 0.03l 0.040 39 0.019
Coal
Batangas I 0.029 0.040 59 0.015
Hydro
Ambuklao 0.004 0.007 49
Total 0.019 0.024 45

Note: Typical plant load factor (%)

Hydro = 30-50
Oil-fired = 75
Geothermal = 75
Coal = 70
Diesel = 70

Source: NAPOCOR Financial Data B a n k 1972-89.

utilization, however, of steam from Leyte can only be realized if this power is connected to the
main Luzon grid via a submarine cable from Samar to the Bicol peninsula.
In 1989, geothermal energy supplied 15% of the country's power demand, saving the country
about $100.0 million or P = 2.8 billion in avoided oil imports. In addition, geothermal energy
developments result in minimal disturbance to the environment. There have been no problems
at Leyte and Negros, where geothermal power plants have now been operating for more than
seven years. In Tiwi and Mak-Ban, communities also continue to live in the vicinity of the
geothermal field and no untoward environmental hazards have been experienced.

World Bank study on Philippine geothermal energy

In 1987, the World Bank Energy Sector assessed the viability of geothermal utilization in the
country and concluded that geothermal steam is the most viable local energy source for
displacing imported coal. The important findings of the study are as follows"
(a) Incremental~avoided cost of geothermal steam, tn Luzon, the avoided cost of geothermal
steam is the break-even price of electricity generated from imported coal to enable
NAPOCOR to produce electricity at the same cost as a coal-fired plant (the next best
alternative). It is estimated that the avoided economic cost is $0.024/kWh and the avoided
financial cost is $0.0275/kWh for a steam price of $0.027/kWh if PNOC absorbs
exploration and development risks. A separate pricing scheme is advised for private
sector participation to ensure that the Philippine government garners rental on geo-
thermal territories. As shown in Table 7 the average incremental costs for energy
 Economics of Geothermal Developments in the Philippines 551
T a b l e 6. P h i l i p p i n e g e o t h e r m a l e n e r g y r e s e r v e s

Installed rroven Probable Potential

Field name (MWe) (MWe) (MWe) (MWe)

A. Luzon
1. M a k - B a n 330 387 440 800
2. Tiwi 330 330 250 250
3. B a c - M a n -- 140 80 220
4. B a t o n g - B u h a y -- 150 350 350
5. M t . P i n a t u b o -- -- 200 300
6. I r o s i n - B u l u s a n -- -- -- 30
7. Mt. L a b o -- -- 400 1000
8. D a k l a n -- -- -- 50
9. B u h i - I s a r o g -- -- 160 --
10. A c u p a n - l s a r o g -- -- -- 34
11. M t . N a t i b -- -- 160 160
Sub-total 660 1007 2040 3194

B. V i s a y a s
1. T o n g o n a n 112.5 400 800 1200
2. P a l i n p i n o n 115.5 224 283 372
3. B i l i r a n I s l a n d -- 7 283 372
4. M a m b u c a l -- 1 1 --
5. B a s l a y - D a u i n -- 1 20 30
6. A n a h a w a n -- -- 160 160
7. B u r a u e n -- -- 330 330
8. B a t o - L u n a s -- -- 160 160
Sub-total 228 633 2037 2624

C. M i n d a n a o
1. M t . A p o -- -- 160 160
2. M a l i n d o g -- -- 160 160
3. A m a c a n -- -- 916 30
Sub-total -- -- 1236 350

Total 888 1641 5313 6168

Undiscovered reserves 1000 to 2 0 0 0 M W e

Approximate total potential 8000 MWe

S o u r c e : 1988 W o r l d B a n k E n e r g y S e c t o r R e p o r t .

T a b l e 7. A v e r a g e i n c r e m e n t a l c o s t s o f e n e r g y g e n e r a t e d f r o m
different energy sources

Average incremental
Energy source c o s t ($)

Luzon geothermal 2.90

Tongonan geothermal with HVDC* 2.72
Tongonan geothermal with HVAC** 3.08
Imported coal 3.46
Domestic coal 4.50
H e a v y f u e l oil 5.32

Note: *HVDC--High Voltage Direct Current.

**HVAC--HighV o l t a g e Alternating Current.
S o u r c e : 1988 W o r l d B a n k E n e r g y S e c t o r R e p o r t .
552 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin
Table 8. Comparative economics of geothermal steam versus other
alternative sources of energy

Investment Fuel Electricity

Energy level cost cost
source (U.S. $/kW) (Mils/kWh) (Mils/kWh)

Geothermal 600--8(XI 25-2g 38-45

Coal 1200 20--22 47--49
Nuclear* 3000 8 72
Hydro 2500 ..... 45
Oil
$27/bbl 1000 45 67
$15/bbl 1000 27 49
$10/bbl 1000 19 41

Note: *Bataan Nuclear Plant, projected at 1987 prices.

Source: 1988 World Bank Energy Sector Report.

generated from geothermal sources (in Luzon or Tongonan at different voltage intercon-
nection levels) will still be lower than those utilizing other energy sources such as
imported/domestic coal or fuel oil.
(b) Costs of geothermal steam and other alternative fuels. Power generation using geothermal
steam is economically competitive with other alternative sources of energy, if the
Philippine National Oil Company-Energy Development Corporation (PNOC-EDC)
(field operator) and N A P O C O R (plant operator) maintain their costs within the level of
the existing and planned installations. The electricity cost using steam compares favora-
bly with coal, although the equivalent fuel cost using coal is lower than that of geothermal
steam. This will be negated, however, by the higher investment costs entailed in the
construction of a coal-fired plant. Moreover, geothermal energy will remain attractive
even if the price of crude oil costs $10 per barrel. An additional advantage is that no
foreign exchange is involved during its utilization since this fuel is an indigenous resource
in the country. The cost comparisons between geothermal steam and the other alternative
fuels are given in Table 8.

THE F U T U R E OF G E O T H E R M A L E N E R G Y IN THE PHILIPPINES

Projected geothermal utilization
The prospect of increased geothermal utilization in the 1990s is very bright. As shown in Table
9, it is foreseen that geothermal capacity will increase in 1990-95 from 888 MWe to 2158 MWe
(145%) while corresponding geothermal utilization will increase from 6730 GWh/yr to 16290
GWh/yr (140%). Increases in capacity and utilization of geothermal energy will be almost equal
to coal but higher than the projected values for oil-fired and hydro plants.
Based on the 1991 N A P O C O R Power Expansion Program, the total installed geothermal
plant capacity in the country will increase from 888 MWe in 1990 to 2683 MWe by 2005 through
the commissioning of additional geothermal plants in Luzon (355 MWe), Visayas (1200 MWe)
and Mindanao (240 MWe ). Moreover, geothermal mix will be about 16%, hydroelectric (21%),
coal (40%), and oil (23%) of the total installed plant capacity of the country by 2005 (see Table
10 and Fig. 2). This means that geothermal energy, which has a resource potential of about 2
billion barrels of oil equivalent per year when harnessed, can more than adequately cover the
263 million barrels oil equivalent energy requirement of the Philippines by the year 2000.
The 40 MWe Bacon-Manito geothermal plant is scheduled to be on stream by May 1993 and
 Table 9. Present and planned production of electricity in the Philippines

Geothermal Coal Hydroelectric Oil

Capacity Utilization Capacity Utilization Capacity Utilization Capacity Utilization

Status (MW) (GWh/yr) (MW) (GWh/yr) (MW) (GWh/yr) (MW) (GWb.lyr)

In operation 888 6730 405 2840 2132 7580 2582 11,250

January 1990
Under construction ll0 830 -- -- 45 190 533 700
January 1990
Fund committed but not 400 3010 300 2100 22 70 30 40
yet under construction
January 1990
Additional without financing 760 5720 300 2100
January 1990

Total 2158 16,290 1005 7040 2199 7840 3145 11,990

% Increase 145 140 150 150 3 4 22 7

Annual growth rate (%) 29 28 30 30 .6 .7 4.4 1.3 t.~"
%

Source: Datuin and Roxas, 1990.

t~
r~
 4~

Table 10. Philippine power development program (1991-2005) .~

Luzon Visayas Mindanao

Year plant additions MWe plant additions MWe plant additions MWe C)

1991 PBGT (J Brown) 120 Janopol MH 5 PBGT (Mitsui) 60 I~

Hopewell GT 140 ABB-LBGT 56 PBGT (J Brown) 30
Bohol Diesel 5 6
PBGT (Mitsui) 30
1992 Sucat GT 30 Cebu Diesel II 19 Agus I 80 ~
Small PBDsI-12 36 ~
1993 Bac-Man Geo. I 110 Cebu-Negros Davao CC Stage 210
Bac-Man Geo. II 40 interconnection 1 and 2
Bataan CC 1 and 2 310 Palinpinon Geo. 60
Mak-Ban Geo. 12 (1, 2 and 3)
Binary
Maibarara Geo. 13
Binary
1994 Calaca II 300 Palinpinon Geo. 20
11-4
Bohol Diesel 6
1995 Del Gallego Geo. 120 Mt. Apo Geoth. A 60
Masinloc I 300
Hopewell I-BOT 350
1996 Masinloc II 300 Mambucal Geo. A 40 Mt. Apo Geo, B 60
Bulusan Geo. 60
1997 Luzon-Leyte Leyte-Cebu Leyte-Mindanao
interconnection interconnection interconnection
Hopewetl II-BOT 350 Leyte Geo. A 441)
1998 Leyte Geo. B1 220 Mt. Apo Gco. C 120
Bohol Dicsel 6
1999 Coal 300 Leyte Geo. B2 220
2000 Coal 600
Casecnan 268
2001 Luzon-Mindoro Cebu-Bohol
interconnection interconnection
Coal 600 Mambucal Geo. BI 20
Kalayaan 150 5
2002 Coal 600 Mambucal Geo. B2 20 Agus III 223
Leyte Geo. C1 20
2003 Coal 600 Leyte Geo. C2 20 Small hydro 105
Kalayaan 150 stage 1
2004 Coal 900 Leyte Geo. C3-C5 6O Small hydro 174
stage 2 and 3
2005 Coal 900 Leyte Geo. C6-C8 60 Bulanog-Batang 150

Total 7623 1328 1308

Geothermal 355 1200 240
Total geothermal = 1795 MWe + 888 MWe (installed before 1991) = 2683

Legend: PBGT--Power Barge Gas Turbine PBDsl--Power Barge Diesel

MH --Mini-Hydro CC ~ o m b i n e - C y c l e
GT - - G a s Turbine BOT --Build-Operate-Transfer
LBGT--Land-Based Gas Turbine Geo. --Geothermal ~z
556 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin

BoLog BoLogH.E. Coguo Geo BGc- Man I and 2

I X 2 2 MW - 1994 2 X 2 0 M W - 1995 ,2 x 50 MW- 1992
/ 2X 20 MW- 1992
Cosecnon - H E .
Son Roque H E . 3 x 52 MW- 1998 BuLuson Geo
3 X 130 M W - 2001 2X 5 0 M W - 1998 3 x 20 MW- 1993
I X 12 M W - 1998
Ponoy - PBGT
PBGT - Mitsui , I x 3 0 MW- ~990
3 X 30 MW - 1990
Pinat.ubo Geo
Luzon PBGT - J. Brown
/ CoaL ~V
2 X 20 M W - 1994 / IXSOMW-2003
Suol Coal E / 2 x 30 MW-1990
HopeweLl. - GT CEBU - Diesel
2 X 300 MW- 2003 i x 19 MW- 1991
3 X 70 MW - 1990
80Unoo Coot. I_eyte - Geo
2 x 300 MW- 2004 Koloyoon - H. E 8 X 88 MW-19ee
2 X 150 MW- 1999 4X 55 MW-1996
MosJnt.oc CooL F / 4 x s5 Mw-1997
2 X300 MW- 1994 Cool Bond D 6X 20 MW- 200i
2 x 300 M W - 2000
CooL C 2 X 300 MW- 2002 ~.Cebu - SMPBDSL
~X 300 MW- 2001 4 x 3 MW - 1991
13el~tl~o Geo
GOs Turbine 3 X 20 MW- 1995 / C e b u - PBGT
I x 200 MW- 1991 I x 3 M W - 1990
IX I 0 0 MW- 1992
/ donopoL - Hydro
Moibarara -2x2 5MW-1990
IX I0 MW - 1993
/ B o ~ o L - Diesel
CaLaco CooL IX 3 0 MW- 1990
I X 500 M W - 1993 ,SrnoLL - PBDSL
e 4 X I 5 MW- 1995
Bot. C o a l A and G
4 X ~ MW-1993
2 X 300 M W - 2 0 0 0 Visay
4 X 300 M W - 2005

Timbobon Hydro
2 X I 4 . 5 M W - 1995
IX 6 I MW- 1995
ViLLosigo Hydro
2 X I 2 . 4 MW- 2002
I X 4 . 2 M W - 2002
>~P ~toua Hydro / ~
2 X I0 MW - 1999 ~
Fugu - Hydro
3 X 3.90MW. 199(5
~X~MW - 19~4 4X6 40MW ~ 1995
I X 20 MW - 1998 5 X 1.50MW- 1995
2X 20 MW - 1997 5X 4.40MW:- 1995
Cool T n J <3 %
I XSO MW - 2003 ~ 5 X 9 . 7 0 M W - 1995
• PBGT
ABB GT I X 50 M W - 1990
I X 5 5 M W - 1990
• CoLeel- Hydro
PoLimt~no Geo 5 X 9 . 1 0 M W - 1995
zx2o M W - ~ /- 5 X 5 6 0 M W - 1995
Mindanao
Coat .~ 5XL62 MW - 199~
l X I00 M W - 2004
I X I00 MW - 2005
S¢~LL PBDSL ~ ~ ~ / / 2 X 2 0 MW - 1993
4 X 2 0 MW - ]994
6X 20 MW - 1999
Agus II1" - Hydro
3 x','5 MW 199e
- 27" - Hydro
2 X 5 80 MW - 1995
Agus I - Hydro / ~
2X 40 MW- 1990 Cogoyon IN / •PBGT
BuLorw)g Bot.(x~ / / ' ~ 2X80MW-2003 2 x 3 0 M W - t990
Tron Hydro /
2X I I I MW- 2002 6C~ 3X9.20 MW - 1995 3 X 9 2 0 M W - 1995

Fig. 2. Geographiclocationof proposedgenerationprojectsin the Philippines.

an additional 110 MWe unit from this resource is also planned for operation in June 1993. Two
(2) binary geothermal power plants in Maibarara and Mak-Ban will be introduced by 1993 and
contribute another 25 MWe to the grid. The reserves of Bulusan and Del Gallego will also
contribute another 180 MWe between 1995 and 1996.
In the Visayas grid, 120 MWe from Palinpinon and Mambucal resourees will provide the
additional power source for the planned interconnection of the Cebu-Negros grid by 1996. The
projected interconnection of the Tongonan resource to the Luzon grid via submarine cables will
 Economics of Geothermal Developments in the Philippines 557
Table 11. Allocationof professionalpersonnelto geothermalactivities
(restricted to personnel with a universitydegree)
(Professional man-yearsof effort)
Year (1) (2)* (3) (4) (5)' (6) Total
1985 460 6 335 801
1986 461 6 321 784
1987 450 2 356 808
1988 452 2 396 850
1989 449 4 593 1,046
Note: *Includesplant operatingpersonnel.
(1) Government. (2) Public utilities. (3) Universities. (4) Paid
foreignconsultants.(5) Contributedthroughforeignaid programs. (6)
Private industry.
Source: Datuin and Roxas, 1990.

provide about 880 MWe of geothermal capacity by 1999. By 2005, Leyte resource will provide
additional 160 MWe, while Mambucal will account for the additional 40 MWe requirement of
the Visayan grid.
After the settlement of land and environmental issues in Mindanao grid, the Mt. Apo
geothermal resources could be tapped and contribute as much as 240 MWe by 1998. It is
envisioned that the increased geothermal base load in the region will also increase the reliability
of the grid's high hydropower capacity, especially during long periods of droughts.
The Philippine government is now accelerating full-scale development of domestic geo-
thermal resources to meet the rapid rise in electricity demand, to minimize or prevent power
interruptions, and to reduce the imports of expensive fuel oils. In 1991, the national government
listed nine geothermal projects of N A P O C O R for implementation under R. A. No. 6957
otherwise known as "Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Mainten-
ance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector and For Other Purposes". To achieve the
above goals, the government specifically sought appropriate Congressional action on the
following geothermal power plant projects through the Build, Operate and Transfer (BOT)
scheme or through the Build-Transfer (BT) scheme:
1. Bac-Man 2, Bacon-Manito, Albay.
2. Bulusan, Sorsogon.
3. Maibarara, Batangas.
4. Tongonan A, Leyte.
5. Cagua, Cagayan.
6. Del Gallego, Camarines Sur.
7. Palinpinon, Negros Oriental.
8. Tongonan B, Leyte.
9. Mambucal, Negros Oriental.

Establishment of a geothermal research~training center in the Philippines

Although the Philippines is currently the second largest producer of geothermal energy in the
world, the country is hampered by the lack of geothermal specialists to fully explore, develop
and utilize even a moderate amount of its vast geothermal resources (see Table 11).
To overcome this problem, several government agencies engaged in geothermal develop-
ment, production and utilization in the country are considering the establishment of a foreign-
funded geothermal training center for geothermal practitioners that are not yet available in
sufficient numbers in the Philippines and other ASEAN-Pacific countries. This is also in
558 F. M. Gazo and R. Datuin
consonance with the plan of the ASEAN Geothermal Cooperation Project Committee of the
Association of ASEAN Power Utilities/Companies for the establishment of the above training
center.
It is envisioned that, with the establishment of a geothermal training center, the research and
technical sector, currently hampered by the lack of trained technicians, professionals and
researchers, and of state-of-the-art instruments, equipment and materials, would be able to
cope with the multi-faceted research, studies and monitoring needs of geothermal activities in
the Philippines.

CONCLUSIONS
Based on the comparative studies of financial and operational data of various power sources
(oil, coal, hydro, and geothermal) in the Philippines, geothermal utilization is economical, very
competitive, reliable, and a viable energy resource compared to other fuel sources.
With the above findings, a shift towards increased geothermal development and utilization in
the Philippines should be implemented by the government in order to provide the growing
electric power requirements of the country. The Philippines' geothermal energy potential
should be fully tapped and developed to promote energy self-sufficiency and reduce consider-
ably overdependence on expensive petroleum and fossil fuels.
Geothermal energy is projected to remain as a primary component of conventional indigen-
ous energy sources in the country. Its development and utilization is envisioned to meet the
country's energy requirements for industrial development and dispersal, the total electrification
program, and upliftment of economically depressed areas.

REFERENCES
Gazo, F. M. and Datuin, R. (1990) Economic and financial aspects of geothermal energy utilization: a Philippine
experience. Geothermal Resources Council Trans. 14, 499-502.
Datuin, R. and Roxas, F. Y. (I990) Geothermal development and policy in the Philippines. Geothermal Resources
Council Trans. 14, 217-226
National Power Corporation Annual Report (1990).
National Power Corporation Power Development Program (1990).