資料６

Case Study for Improving Disaster

Resiliency of
Electric Power Distribution Network
In
Philippines
2017

1
 Hokkaido

Osaka Tokyo

Kyushu Shikoku

Shikoku Electric Power Co., Inc.

2
The study on the incentive mechanism for improving disaster resiliency of electric
power distribution network
 The Philippines is the 2nd most disaster-prone country per World Risk Report
 An average for 20 tropical storms or typhoons impact the Philippines each year
 Typhoon Yolanda left the devastating damage to the Visayas region
 Total damage to the electricity sector was estimated at PhP 6,830 million , of which,
the distribution section accounts for PhP 5,200 million

 Improvement of resiliency of the distribution sector is critical in disaster reduction

while it requires substantial investment

出典： フィリピン国電力化庁 （NEA）

Establishing of Business Continuity Standard for power distribution system shall mitigate
disaster damage and lead to a faster recovery. 3
Disaster Resiliency Program for DRRM
DRRM: Disaster Risk Reduction Mgt.

1. Identify Threats and Risk

2. Upgrade Structure Design of Infrastructure
3. Funding Build Back Better
4. Other Measurements
(Warning, community awareness, capacity training, restoring manual)

“Investment for resiliency & risk

reduction will save 5-7 times in
reconstruction and rehabilitation”

Source: Department Public Works and Highways(DPWH) 4

 A Rating System for
Business Continuity Management

An assessment tool on “Preparedness for Natural

Hazards” for Electric Distribution System that provides
an overall view on the preparedness along with Strong
points and areas needing improvement.

Rating should be designed to allow financial institutes

to decide if the facility is entitled to preferred financial
scheme.

5
 Key Elements in Business Continuity Management
for Electric Distribution Service
Electric Supplying

Disaster
100%
Prompt
Recovery Work

Time

Damage Management Faster

Reduction Control Restoration
in BCM

6
Key Elements in Business Continuity Management
for Electric Distribution Service
1) Well Designed Facility for Natural hazard
Damage
2) Protection against Secondary Damage
Reduction 3) Power Distribution Loop and Isolation
4) Additional Protection for Important
Facility
1) Forecast Power Outage Area
Faster 2) Restoration Capability
Restoration
3) Conditions to Restoration Work
4) Mutual Aid System

Management 1) System Hardening Plan

Control
in BCM 2) Emergency Response Plan

Note: Rating indicators are further breakdown into around 50 items in total
 Wind Date for Designing the Electric Pole
PEC2
Recommended
Basic Wind Speed of
Various Wind Zones

Zone1 = 193 ---270 km/h

(Heavy)

Zone2 = 145 ---240 km/h

(Medium)

Zone3 = 96 ---160 km/h

(Light)

8
NEA recommendation of the Distribution Improvement

From To
Class of Poles 5, 6 3 or 4
Span 80 , 90 m 50, 60 m
Conductor 1/0, 2/0 3/0 or 4/0
Conductor Insulation Bare Insulated
Substation Feeder 30 to 100 km Less than 20
Storm Guy 2/ km 3 / km

9
 Case study : Prevention Investment
1. Shortening Span 80m---- 50m
2. Class 5 to Class 2

Demonstration site in Bicol area in CASURECO_2

10
 Root of Typhoon Durian and Probability of Hit

Yolanda Class
Every 40 years

Durian Class
Every 3 years

11
Result of the simulation of MAX Wind Speed in Durian Class

Reflect the geographical Terrain on the map

12
 Simulation of Fragility Rate( Class 5 to 2 / Span 80 to 50m)

Class 5
95% 80m
90% 50m

Class 2
Fragility Rate

70% 80m

MAX Wind Speed [m/s]

75m/s Fragility Rate
=270km/h
25% 50m
Class 2
Loading Zones (kph) *PEC2 Previous Rural
Line Design
Zone1 – Heavy 270 193
Zone2 – Medium 240 145 75m/s
MAX Wind Speed [m/s] =270km/h
Zone3 – Light 160 96
*Philippine Electrical Code Part 2
13
 Preventive Investment (Existing 80m to 50m)

Pole Span: 80m, Number of poles: 10 pcs

System Hardening
Pole Span: 80m to 50m (1/1.6)
Pole Span: 50m, Number of Number of Poles: 10 to 16 (160%)
poles: 16 pcs

14
 Result of the estimated damaged poles by Fragility Rate
Pole
Span （m） (1) Total pole s (2) Damaged poles (3) rate = (2) / (1)
Class
Existing 5 80 2,673 282 10.5%

5 60 3,564 166 4.7%

Countermea
sure 5 50 4,277 115 2.7%
（Span）
5 40 5,346 75 1.4%

Countermea 2 80 2,673 30 1.1%

sure
（Span 2 60 3,564 21 0.6%
& 2 50 4,277 18 0.4%
Pole
reinforce） 2 40 5,346 15 0.3%

15
Economic Comparison of Preparedness
(Span short / Pole strengthen)

Almost 2 times

Life time of Pole

=40 years

16
Source: Calculated by Study Team
Results of the Seminar Questionnaire

17
 Next Step to Introduce Financial Incentive Scheme
on Disaster Resiliency
 We believe improving disaster resilience of ECs will lead to stronger stability of
electric supply, better financial soundness of ECs in the long-term, and more solid
operation base for local companies, which will reduce credit risks of ECs and local
companies in the long run.

 Next step to realize this financial incentive mechanism for disaster resilience will be:
• To consider possible financing to NEA for its preferential lending to ECs
• To consider possible funding to LGUGC for its preferential guarantee program
• To consider possible two-step loan program for commercial banks’ loans to ECs
• To continue discussion on collaboration and bundling of each effort in disaster
risk financing

 Disaster risk financing will be important for not only ECs but also other infrastructure
sectors and industries.
Discussion platform among commercial banks may be required for the financial
industry to move forward with its efforts in this field.

18