Philippines

Critically Insufficient4°C+ World

NDCs with this rating fall well outside of a country’s “fair share” range and are not at all consistent with holding warming to below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would exceed 4°C. For sectors, the rating indicates that the target is consistent with warming of greater than 4°C if all other sectors were to follow the same approach.

Highly insufficient< 4°C World

NDCs with this rating fall outside of a country’s “fair share” range and are not at all consistent with holding warming to below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would reach between 3°C and 4°C. For sectors, the rating indicates that the target is consistent with warming between 3°C and 4°C if all other sectors were to follow the same approach.

Insufficient< 3°C World

NDCs with this rating are in the least stringent part of a country’s “fair share” range and not consistent with holding warming below 2°C let alone with the Paris Agreement’s stronger 1.5°C limit. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming would reach over 2°C and up to 3°C. For sectors, the rating indicates that the target is consistent with warming over 2°C and up to 3°C if all other sectors were to follow the same approach.

2°C Compatible< 2°C World

NDCs with this rating are consistent with the 2009 Copenhagen 2°C goal and therefore fall within a country’s “fair share” range, but are not fully consistent with the Paris Agreement long term temperature goal. If all government NDCs were in this range, warming could be held below, but not well below, 2°C and still be too high to be consistent with the Paris Agreement 1.5°C limit. For sectors, the rating indicates that the target is consistent with holding warming below, but not well below, 2°C if all other sectors were to follow the same approach.

1.5°C Paris Agreement Compatible< 1.5°C World

This rating indicates that a government’s NDCs in the most stringent part of its “fair share” range: it is consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit. For sectors, the rating indicates that the target is consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit.

Role model<< 1.5°C World

This rating indicates that a government’s NDC is more ambitious than what is considered a “fair” contribution: it is more than consistent with the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit. No “role model” rating has been developed for the sectors.

1.5°C Compatible< 1.5°C World

Economy-wide

Neither implemented nor planned policies are sufficient to achieve the Philippines’ NDC target. Emissions growth will be predominantly driven by increased emissions from transport and coal-fired electricity generation. Current policy projections indicate a rapid and ongoing increase in greenhouse gas emissions, which is inconsistent with meeting the country’s NDC.

Emissions under current policies (excluding LULUCF) are expected to increase to about 209 MtCO2e/yr in 2020 and 296 MtCO2e/yr in 2030 (see “Current policy projections” in the graph). If the Philippines fully implements its renewable energy and energy efficient targets (see Energy section for details) total GHG emissions in 2030 could decrease to approximately 260 MtCO2e/yr (see “Planned policy projections” in the graph). In other words, implementation of planned policies yields an additional reduction of 11% in 2030 compared to our current policy projections.

The 2011 National Climate Change Action Plan (NCCAP) outlined a number of mitigation options; however, as the implementation of these measures is not mandatory, the CAT has not included them in our current policy projections.

Energy

The Philippines’ electricity mix relies heavily on coal, which accounted for 48% of total electricity generation in 2016 (Department of Energy, 2017a). This reliance on coal, coupled with GDP growth, has caused the emissions intensity of the electricity sector to increase (see graph below).

In 2015, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced that more than 10 GW of coal-fired power plant capacity would be constructed by 2025, and released a Coal Roadmap 2017–2040 (Department of Energy, 2017b). At the time the Philippines joined the Paris Agreement in 2017 and the Secretary of Energy, Alfonso Cusi, stated that ratification would have no effect on these plans (Flores, 2017).

Yet if all these power plants were built, it would be difficult for the government to achieve its NDC target (excluding LULUCF). The situation is compounded by the fact that this upswing of development has also increased interest in domestic coal exploration (Department of Energy, 2016a). As the Philippines is preparing to update its NDC, it remains to be seen whether the Secretary’s comments regarding an unaltered coal-focused development pathway remain valid. Recent developments do not appear to be positive.

Since 2015, the Philippines has installed about 2.9 GW of coal-fired power capacity. As of May 2019, another 2.9 GW of new coal plants were under construction, with 9.7 GW in the pipeline (CoalSwarm, 2019). If all the power plants in the pipeline were to be constructed, the Philippines coal capacity would increase by about 60% from 2016 levels. A 2017 report states that the coal expansion plans, worth USD 20.8 billion, run the risk of becoming stranded assets due to building up overcapacities of coal, increased coal regulations and taxes, and increased competitiveness of other alternatives, e.g. renewables and natural gas (IEEFA & ICSC, 2017).

Notwithstanding the significant coal pipeline, there has been some regulation of coal-fired electricity as part of the wider Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN) Act, implemented in 2018. The Act raises taxes on coal from 0.19 US cents in 2017 to 2.85 USD cents per metric tonne in 2020 (Department of Finance, 2017). Even though this measure taxes fossil fuels, and boosts renewable energy cost competitiveness, it is unlikely to incentivise a shift away from coal-fired power generation as major distributors can still pass the higher generation costs on to end consumers (Department of Energy, 2018).

Security of supply is a key issue for the Philippines, with the country experiencing a number of power outages earlier this year. The coal-fired installed capacity, that supplies around 48% of the country’s electricity, has not been able to cope with peak demand (Rivera, 2019). The system has been under stress due to the effects of El Niño, which causes warmer weather, and thus increased electricity demand for air conditioning, and a longer dry season, which in turn lowers hydropower supply (Rivas, 2019b, 2019a). Two earthquakes that hit Luzon and Visayas in April 2019 also caused power outages (Rivas, 2019a). In addition to the climate imperative to decarbonise, the vulnerability of the system to environmental hazards highlights the need to think of restructuring the current system (Vemuri, Bohn, & Schrade, 2018).

Long-term planning aiming to increase renewable and peaking generation can help addressing these challenges by decentralising and diversifying the Philippines’ power mix (Ahmed & Logarta, 2017; Ronnel W. Domingo, 2019; Vemuri & Bohn, 2018). These measures can enhance the system reliability, and reduce emissions, while supporting the achievement of the country’s 100% electrification by 2022 target (Filane Mikee Cervantes, 2019; Vemuri et al., 2018). If the Philippines couples low carbon development with its energy efficiency goals, it can ensure a more robust power supply for its population.

The Renewable Energy Act of 2008 aimed to accelerate the exploration, development and utilisation of renewable energy in the Philippines (Department of Energy, 2009). The National Renewable Energy Program (NREP), established in 2011, is the blueprint for the implementation of the Act and seeks to triple the renewable energy capacity level from 4.8 GW in 2010 to 15.3 GW by 2030 (IRENA, 2017). A feed-in tariff applicable to solar, wind, biomass and small hydropower has been in effect since 2012; however other policies mandated under the Act have not been implemented. As a result, by the end of 2018, only 1.7 GW has been installed since 2010 (IRENA, 2019). Given this slow progress, it remains unclear whether the planned capacity expansion set out in the NREP for 2030 will be met (IRENA, 2017).

The Philippines is starting to take action on energy efficiency. The Department of Energy approved the Energy Efficiency Roadmap in December 2014 (covering the period 2014–2030) and its corresponding short-term Energy Efficiency Action Plan in December 2015 (for the planning period 2016-2020), both of which have been prepared with the support of the European Union (Department of Energy, 2016b).

Overall, the Energy Efficiency Roadmap mandates energy savings equivalent to 10% across energy demand sectors in 2030, compared to the reference energy demand outlook. Both policy documents list various measures to enhance energy efficiency in the buildings, industry, energy supply, and transport sectors. The Energy Efficiency Action Plan is being implemented by the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Division of the Energy Utilization Management Bureau of the Department of Energy, but the extent and coverage of implementation is unclear.

In April 2019, the president Rodrigo Duterte signed into law the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act which creates an Inter-Agency Energy Efficiency and Conservation Committee (IAEECC). This agency will develop projects aiming to reduce energy costs in state-owned and leased buildings and facilities (Azer Parrocha, 2019).

Forestry

The actual emissions and/or removal levels for the Philippine forestry sector (LULUCF) is highly uncertain. National inventory data shows nearly zero emissions from the sector in 1994, but a net sink (removal of CO2 from the atmosphere) of 105 MtCO2/yr in 2000 (UNFCCC, n.d.-a). This difference is partly attributed to changes in the definition of forests and correction of methodological errors. The 1994 inventory did not account for millions of hectares of upland farms and presented very low biomass density for grassland (Government of The Philippines, 2014); a logging ban on old-growth forests in the 1990s may also have contributed to the net removal of GHG emissions during this period (Asia-Pacific Forestry Commission, 2001). In contrast to this inventory data, the FAO estimates the forestry sector was a small net sink of 2.6 MtCO2/yr in years 1994 and 2000, but had increased to 60.4 MtCO2/yr by 2014 (FAOSTAT, 2017).

With the goal of reducing greenhouse emissions from deforestation and forest degradation and conserve biodiversity, the Philippines has implemented the national REDD+ strategy (DENR, 2010). This strategy supported the creation of an institutional framework to monitor and avoid deforestation and development of forestry protection incentive mechanisms. In addition, a ban on cutting and harvesting in natural and residual forests throughout the country has been introduced by executive order in 2011 (President of the Philippines, 2011).