Competition is Not the Cure for Bicol’s Power Problem

It is not yet a done deal. But another electricity company is challenging the consumer cooperative that has long served Rinconada. Soon, this competitor may enter the territory of CASURECO III, then CASURECO II—as if competition alone could solve Bicol’s power problem.

I have written repeatedly about high electricity rates and the burden they put on families, businesses and institutions, especially in Camarines Sur. The solution may still be far away.

Competition should never be a substitute for reform.

CASURECO III has served the six Rinconada municipalities and Iriga City for years. As a cooperative, it is owned by its member-consumer-owners. But cooperative ownership does not automatically mean affordable electricity, efficient management or reliable service. Consumers still complain about brownouts and undervoltage.

Now comes Bicol Light and Power Corporation, a private company proposing to enter the same territory. Should we welcome competition? Perhaps. But competition is not necessarily the solution. If another company simply brings another version of the same system, what really changes for consumers?

Electricity is not like choosing between restaurants or mobile phones. We cannot simply put up two sets of poles, substations and wires and let consumers choose. Electricity depends on generation, transmission, distribution, infrastructure and regulation.

So the question should not simply be: CASURECO III or Bicol Light?

The bigger question is: Why, after decades of reforms and private-sector participation, are Bicolanos still struggling with expensive, unreliable electricity?

This brings us to EPIRA, the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001. The law was meant to reform the entire power industry and promote competition, efficiency, reliability and affordability.

Twenty-five years later, we should ask: Did we get what EPIRA promised? If competition were enough, why are consumers still complaining about high electricity prices, brownouts and unreliable service? This brings us to the Electric Power Industry Reform Act, or Republic Act No. 9136, was enacted in 2001 to restructure and reform the entire Philippine electric power industry. Twenty-five years after EPIRA, we should have the courage to ask: Have we achieved what the law promised consumers?

We cannot solve this simply by changing the utility company and owners. If generation remains expensive, the grid is congested, transmission is inadequate and regulation is weak, consumers will continue to pay—regardless of who owns the poles.

This is particularly important as Bicol prepares for more investments in offshore wind, solar, geothermal and other renewable energy. Grid planning should come first, rather than allowing projects to develop independently and discovering later that the grid cannot accommodate them.

I propose a Bicol Grid. Instead of asking who should control the lines, perhaps we should ask: Why don’t we have a Bicol-wide power strategy?

A Bicol Grid would look at generation, transmission and distribution as one regional system—not as separate franchise territories. It should plan where power is needed, strengthen the grid, prepare for renewable energy and make sure new investments benefit consumers. And consumers must have a voice. Decisions about Bicol’s power future should not be left only to utilities, investors, politicians or vested interests.

A Bicol Grid should not mean creating another bureaucracy or another monopoly. It should mean better coordination, transparent planning and accountability among the Department of Energy, National Grid Corporation of the Philippines, Energy Regulatory Commission, electric cooperatives, private utilities, local governments and investors

Bicol needs power planning that puts people first. Because ultimately, Bicolanos don’t care who owns the poles. We care whether the lights stay on—and whether we can afford to keep them on.