Located in the mountains of Kabugao, Apayao, is the 196-kilometer Apayao-Abulug River. Along its banks, the Isnag people have made their homes, enriched their culture, and sustained their livelihood. The river plays a vital role throughout their lives—they fish in the river and use the water to irrigate their farms. When they die, their families setup a lapat near the river, a burial spot that no one can disturb for a year.

But since 2016, two construction projects have threatened to destroy the river where their livelihood and culture revolve. The proposed hydropower plants Gened 1 and 2 are feared to submerge the villages and ancestral lands near the river.

“Ang problema sa mga energy projects ay tinatayo ito sa loob ng ancestral lands. We are not debunking the need to shift to renewable energy sources. Pero bakit laging indigenous people ang nagsasakripisyo for the sake of sustainability?” said Jillie Karl Basan, one of the conveners of the Kabugao Youth, a group that aims to bring awareness to the plights of the Isnag people. The group has also been organizing the Isnag in opposing the mega dam projects.

President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s State of the Nation Address emphasized the adoption of renewable energy sources, such as hydropower, geothermal, and solar and wind. But oftentimes, energy exploration projects come at the expense of the indigenous peoples (IPs)—the exact situation in Kabugao.

Sham FPIC Process

For six years now, Kabugao Youth, along with the Isnag, has been opposing the plan to build two hydropower plants in Apayao—the 150-megawatt Gened 1 and the 335-megawatt Gened 2, which will be constructed by the Pan Pacific Renewable Power Philippines Corporation (PPRPPC) along the Apayao-Abulug River.

“There were anomalies and flaws in securing clearance from the affected Isnag, thus violating their right to free, prior, and informed consent,” said Basan. The free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) is a legal requirement under the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 before any project could affect IP lands.

Elders and members of the community initially filed their first resolution of nonconsent on February 4, 2019. In September 2019, the community passed their second resolution of nonconsent. During the consensus-building in December 2021, where they were supposed to cast their votes for the construction of the dams, as part of the FPIC process, members of the community were reportedly barred from entering.

The 2012 FPIC guidelines state that sacred areas, such as burial grounds, in the ancestral lands must be excluded in any development project. The lack of FPIC is the first of five main issues surrounding construction of dams, according to the Philippine Taskforce for Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in their statement on dams. Other issues include the privatization of dam projects, the displacement of IPs from their ancestral domains, the destruction of IP culture and livelihood, and the destruction of biodiversity.

And finally, in August 2021, handpicked members of the community passed a resolution which overturned the previous resolutions of nonconsent, paving the way for the dams’ construction. Signatures on the so-called endorsement of the construction projects were falsified and forged, said Basan.

If constructed, Gened 1 and 2 could submerge villages along the river, as well as the burial grounds of the Isnag people. Worse, the PPRPPC’s proposed memorandum of agreement does not propose a relocation site for the Isnag.

PPRPPC is controlled by the San Miguel Corporation (SMC), which is notorious for its mega-dam projects. In 2009, SMC tried to construct the Kaliwa Dam which threatened to submerge more than 28,000 hectares of forestland in the Dumagat-Remontado indigenous group’s ancestral domains.

The 2019 revised plans of the Kaliwa Dam called for the construction of nine smaller dams, which will transport 600 million liters of water to Metro Manila and nearby areas. Groups fear that the dam project could affect 93 hectares of forestland, including 12 sacred sites.

“Matagal itong proseso,” said Basan, referring to the fight against the dams’ construction. “Pero, kahit gaano katagal, we are looking at this positively. It’s a win for us, dahil hindi nila ineexpect yung ganitong klase ng resistance. They underestimated the Isnag of Apayao.”

Search for Local Energy Sources

The country’s aggressive search for domestic energy sources is rooted in the government’s attempts to increase energy supply across the archipelago. Marcos said that the Philippines must build new power plants and take advantage of all the best technology that is now available—including renewable energy sources such as hydropower, geothermal power, solar, and wind.

In June, the Department of Energy revealed that renewable energy makes up for 29.4 percent of the country’s energy production. From that share, 7.2 percent is from geothermal energy sources, 14 percent from hydropower energy sources, 1.8 percent from biomass energy sources, 4.9 percent from solar energy sources, and 1.6 percent from wind energy sources.

The exploration of renewable energy sources could solve the energy insecurity in the country and stabilize the inflation of the country’s energy rate. The ownership of these energy sources, however, still falls on the private sector due to the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001.

EPIRA allows private corporations to operate power facilities and to recover their capital while enjoying high profits by charging their consumers.

AGHAM, a group of science and technology advocates, said the country’s privatized and liberalized energy policy allowed the privatization of the country’s energy resources and has led to the increase of electricity costs while reducing reliability.

“Dahil privatized na ang power resources natin, supposedly magta-translate siya sa mas mababang singgil sa kuryente. Pero base sa research ng AGHAM in 2016, ang rate ng kuryente natin ay mas mataas pa ng isa’t kalahating beses,” said Jona Yang, AGHAM secretary-general.

Amid an unreliable and costly power supply, one of the country’s top energy sources, the Malampaya gas fields, is also expected to be depleted by 2024. Malampaya currently supplies around a third of the energy demand in Luzon.

As a stopgap measure, the country currently imports around half of its energy needs, according to the World Bank. This, however, has adversely affected the country’s energy independence.

By solely relying on energy imports, the country is easily affected by global affairs. One prominent example is the effect of the Ukraine war which caused oil prices in the Philippines to soar. In January 2022, the price of gasoline was pegged at around P60 per liter, while now, it is around P85 per liter.

“Ang pwedeng alternative sa current problem natin sa energy, ay i-rehabilitate natin yung mga current power plants na meron tayo, lalo na yung mga naka-focus sa renewable energy,” Yang said. “Yung energy service natin ay dapat people-oriented at hindi sa para sa benepisyo ng mga private corporation.”

Alternative Energy Sources

While there is a need to boost local energy production, alternatives that do not cost communities and towns their livelihood and culture, however, are possible.

Sibol ng Agham at Teknolohiya (SIBAT), an organization focused on community based renewable energy projects, has established micro-hydro projects in Kalinga, Abra, and Apayao provinces. Using the abundant water resources in the area, the group has helped setup 24 micro-hydro projects in 34 communities in various parts of Cordillera and are eyeing to set up 19 more. 

“These projects are providing household lighting, and at the same time they are also providing energization to barangays, schools, and other facilities in off-grid areas,” said Estrella Catarata, executive director of SIBAT. “The beauty of community based renewable energy projects is that they are autonomous, sustainable, small-scale, and dependent on resources available in the community.”

During construction, SIBAT trains community members on how to repair and maintain these projects. After the turnover, community members then have the responsibility to maintain and sustain these projects. Costs for constructing these projects are shouldered by both SIBAT and the community’s local government units.

“Communities where there are community-based renewable energy projects are very appreciative to have a source of energy that is cheap and resilient. Even in the recent strong earthquake that struck Abra, these projects were not affected, and even so, it is easier and faster for the community to repair them,” said Catarata.

Grassroots and community-based initiatives like in Cordillera prove that it is possible for communities to develop sustainable energy projects and make the transition to renewable energy. 

“Moving forward, we are planning to put up a windmill, but of course we still have to study this,” said Catarata. “We are also planning to put up a solar renewable energy plant in Bohol to provide power for potable water systems in pilot communities.”

Such initiatives in the north are alongside Kabugao Youth’s campaign for energy democracy. Energy democracy focuses on transitioning away from large-scale power plants to more distributed, locally based energy systems, without compromising local communities.

But besides their larger calls for a more sustainable and equitable energy resource development, the Isnag and Kabugao remain steadfast in opposing Gened 1 and 2. They are also encouraging the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples to force the PPRPPC to undergo a genuine FPIC process to get the real position of the entire community on the dams’ construction. 

“We are just claiming what is rightfully ours,” Basan said. “Sustainability should be a holistic approach. Energy projects must not be destructive and must put the people and the environment first. If gusto [ng gobyerno] i-address ang climate crisis, work with the Earth’s defenders—the indigenous peoples.” ●