by ISA LORENZO

IT USED to be that the only reasons LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) gas tanks would be on the streets were because they were either being delivered to homes or were attached to stoves on the carts of vendors of banana cue and kwek-kwek (deep-fried batter-coated quail eggs). Now, however, LPG is powering thousands of taxis plying Metro Manila streets — and no one is the wiser, save for pleased taxi drivers and operators who say their fuel expenses have gone down by at least half.

	Taxis line up for LPG. [photo by Isa Lorenzo]

With gasoline, “going up and down the road from Muñoz, when I get to Edsa, the fuel gauge starts flickering,” says one taxi driver. But since he switched to LPG, he says, the gauge has been less prone to spasms.

There’s another plus to the increased use of LPG by taxis, though: it’s supposed to be a more environmentally friendly fuel than gasoline. The Department of Energy (DOE) says that compared to regular gasoline, auto-LPG has around 20 percent less ozone forming potential, at least 15 percent lower greenhouse gas emissions, and up to 80 percent less toxic emissions.

That’s partly why the government included auto-LPG in its alternative-fuels program, which it says it is undertaking not only to address environmental concerns, but also to attain energy self-sufficiency and security and contribute to the urbanization of rural areas. “Energy security means we have to enhance our uses of indigenous and other non-conventional or alternative uses of fuels,” says Mario Marasigan, director of DOE’s energy utilization and management bureau.

The primary aim, of course, is to reduce the country’s dependence on imported oil. And because the transport sector has guzzled in increasing amounts of oil for the last decade — even as total local consumption has gone down by two percent from 2000 to 2006 — it is supposed to be the initial beneficiary of the government program.

Admittedly, rising oil prices rather than environmental worries are the main driving force in the mad dash for alternative fuels worldwide. The Philippine government’s motivation is no different, but green campaigners nevertheless see its effort as a step forward. Vehicle emissions, after all, account for up to 80 percent of air pollution in the Philippines. Around 2,000 people die each year in the country’s major cities, such as Metro Manila, Davao, and Cebu, due to the effects of air pollution, says a 2002 World Bank study. More than 9,000 Filipinos suffer from chronic bronchitis annually because of pollution.

The transport sector is also one of the main sources of greenhouse gases, which contribute to global warming. A recent United Nations (UN) report says that transportation, including emissions from the production of transport fuels, is responsible for about one-fourth of global energy-related greenhouse gas emissions, and that this share is only getting bigger and bigger as time passes.

Yet some environmental groups such as Greenpeace cannot help but point out that biofuels used in transport represent a less direct solution to help reduce emission of greenhouse gases. “Biomass needs to be transformed to a liquid or gas form, which requires additional energy,” notes Greenpeace. The UN report in fact says that using biomass for combined heat and power rather than for transport fuel is the best option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the next decade.

THE ENERGY department doesn’t deny this, but it’s obvious that its more pressing concern at the moment is saving pesos for the government rather than saving the planet. Indeed, the government hasn’t given up on its oil and gas explorations just yet, even as it tests the viability of auto-LPG for taxis and biofuels like bioethanol and biodiesel for other vehicles. Natural gas is also being tapped for public buses. Still, according to Marasigan, the government is also looking into solar, hydropower, wind, and geothermal resources.

Which is just as well, since the alternative-fuels program is not exactly going at race-car speed (although it is still progressing at a pace faster than a Senate hearing). One major challenge in developing biofuels has been enlisting the support of private investors, says Marasigan. He says that while the new biofuels law offers investors incentives such as zero specific tax, exemption from the value-added tax, and assistance from government financial institutions, “it doesn’t mean that this will be enough for them to invest in the country.”

	The converted LPG engine can be found in the trunk of a taxi. [photo by Isa Lorenzo]

Developing feedstock for the biofuels is another nagging worry, with questions about land use only complicating matters. Ironically, the one potential feedstock that seems to be attracting interest from investors also has some experts hollering caution.

Jatropha, a wild fruit bush, has been around for centuries but is not native to the Philippines. Its seeds are poisonous, but these also yield oil that can be used in diesel engines. The government is still trying to determine which variety would work best on local soil, but that has not stopped one of its corporations from entering into multibillion-peso agreements involving jatropha.

This early, Philippine National Oil Company Alternative Fuels Corporation (PNOC-AFC) has already signed a memorandum of agreement with a Korean firm for a $210-million jatropha plantation and biorefinery. It has also inked a deal with the Land Bank of the Philippines to allocate P10 billion for the cultivation and propagation of the supposed wonder plant. The PNOC-AFC has even given P20 million in financial assistance to Bukidnon to propagate jatropha.

But a recent study by agriculture professors from the University of the Philippines in Los Baños advises those who have become giddy over jatropha to study the facts first. According to the academics, jatropha becomes a viable source of biodiesel only if diesel is retailed at P40 per liter; if the crop has a high fruit yield of 36,000 kg per hectare; if the variety has a high rate of oil extraction (at least 34 percent); and if byproducts are included and provide 50-percent additional income from the oil revenue.

They say, though, that no jatropha variety grown in the Philippines yields 34-percent oil; current laboratory oil extraction rates range from 28 to 32 percent. At a low-yield level of 12,000 kg per hectare, jatropha becomes profitable for farmers growing it if the diesel price increases to about P140 per liter at a 30-percent rate of oil extraction (revenue from oil alone). This estimate excludes processing and marketing costs. Current estimates put the processing cost at P12 per liter, which means biodiesel from jatropha could actually cost P152 per liter.

The academics also say that there is also a five-year wait for the jatropha crop to reach optimum fruiting. The professors wonder whether the processing plants and the technological know-how to process raw oil into biodiesel and develop byproducts would be ready by this time.