I’ve looked at clouds and the climate for over two decades and I must say the claims of our weather, energy, and science officials are a bit befuddling.
In the early 1990’s I was investigating the remote and immediate causes of the crippling power shortages, and observed that unseasonably bad weather inflicted a double whammy on power consumers in the Philippines. The less rain there was, the less hydroelectric power availability and thus the higher were electricity production costs. At the same time, less rain entailed higher ambient temperatures and thus greater demand for airconditioning. This is true for the whole country, and to all countries similarly situated. It is a double whammy indeed, for both supply and demand factors result in lower satisfaction at a much higher price.
From Nick Nichols I learned that Cyril del Callar of NPC had been quoted as saying that the current cloud-seeding operations were meant more to lower ambient temperatures, and thus lower airconditioning demand, rather than to increase the water levels in the dams of the hydropower facilities. Yet, the pronouncements of spokespeople of the departments of agriculture and of science of technology belie this. And so does the an article in the weekly newsletter of NPC, which clearly associates the cloud-seeding with attempts to elevate dam water levels.
I had a brief exchange with Cyril first to ask him whether there was any ‘optimal’ cloud-seeding effort level. Perhaps he did not appreciate the import of my question and said no. He said that in terms of NPC cash operations, the expenses were justified.
Now, if you follow me, why don’t we spend billions instead of a few million to induce rain? I am an advocate of science and economics and would thus suggest that government spend on cloud-seeding as much as and until the incremental costs exceed the marginal benefits. And, to my knowledge, we are far from there, although I need to study both the science and economics more thoroughly.
Incidentally, government spokesmen recently admitted that cloud-seeding operations could be concentrated on specific areas when clouds were favorable. That might buttress suspicions that government can exercise weather control to lessen attendance in poitical opposition rallies. Triple whammy!
Saturday, August 04, 2007
Clouds, now, from both sides
by viking at 1:59 AM
Labels: energy, environmental economics, philippine politics, philippines
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
If cloud seeding is truly an effective means of peak demand management, wouldn't the private sector distribution utilities - namely, Meralco - be spending tons of money on it? Are they asleep at the wheel, or is it simply not worth it, or is it that they benefit from not managing peak demand so they can justify more assets?
So this all leads me back to another issue. The Philippine distribution utilities have successfully been able to wash their hands of responsibility for 80% of the costs associated with peak demand - that of generation. So that part indeed reverts back to government consideration if only by default - no one else has an economic stake (except the customer).
Post a Comment