Blogging on Technology for Teaching

Back in 2008, I started an idea of blogging about technology for teaching, which includes technology not just for learning but also for the teaching profession. Unfortunately, I was not able to go beyond a few chapters, which mostly were introductory concepts, like hardware, software, and peopleware. That was in 2008, when I was still working at UP. Now, I work at a busier agency.

Still, I wanted to pursue that book, but I feel that I want to start with blogging the chapters instead, so that I can also get feedback about each item or topic that I want to talk about.

I would probably start with re-posting old posts about factors to consider when making decisions related to technology for teaching. (I recognize that a lot of things have happened since 2008, like the Google Docs becoming a mature system to Google Drive now. I hope to update these articles soon.)

I have a few ideas I hope to pursue, and I will post it there. For my first post, I will post my preliminary outline, which may change over time, of course.

So, I hope that new blog will help those who want to learn more how to leverage technology (particularly free and open source ones) to maximize learning opportunities.

See the first post in the next few weeks at http://trainingtechnologies.blogspot.com/.

Determining Price of Electricity in WESM

First and foremost, the price of electricity as paid by the customers is regulated by the Energy Regulatory Commission, as mandated by Republic Act 9136, or the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001. Part of the amount customers pay is the generation charge, which itself has to be approved by the ERC. Usually, the ERC approves a formula so that distribution utilities don't need to get ERC approval every billing month.

How does the generation charge come about? A distribution utility (whether a private distribution utility like Meralco or an electric cooperative) may source its power from two main sources: its own contracted power supply (through power supply agreements with independent power producers, or IPPs) and from the Wholesale Electricity Spot Market, or WESM. While the price of the electricity a distribution utility gets from its contracted power supply is fixed (e.g., P9/kilowatt-hour for 10 years), the price of electricity the distribution utility sources from WESM fluctuates as the WESM is, well, a "spot market." Among other things, this means that its price is determined every interval of time (in the Philippine situation, every hour).

As a market, this means there are many consumers and many suppliers. Due to the technical limitation of electricity (i.e., electricity goes where the circuit leads to, not necessarily to who ordered the electricity), determination of price of electricity in WESM is based on "least-cost solution meeting demand." Here is how it works:

1. NGCP forecasts demand level (including reserve requirement and customer submitted demand in WESM) for each hour. 
2. IPPs submit their bids, including capacity and price offer (baseload and peak).
3. The bids are arranged from lowest-priced to highest-priced to determine which generator will be dispatched first.
4. The market price of electricity is determined by the price of the bid at the level of capacity (based on price bid) that addresses the demand, and all bidders (including lower price bids) will be paid that price. Those generators which priced their bid too high would not be dispatched, hence, not paid.
5. Reserve capacities dispatched will be priced based on the highest priced. 

To illustrate the determination of price and how demand level and supply interact to determine price of electricity in the spot market, you may see this online simulation. (You can play with the elements.)

In this simulation, you can see that the price of electricity in the spot market will be the price of the bid that meets the demand level. If the demand for electricity lowers, it is possible to have the price of electricity go down, because the next higher bid price will be dispatched. 

This says two things, among others:

1. For the IPPs, there is an incentive to increase operational (i.e., production) efficiency (i.e., lower the price). If you are an IPP and you bid at a lower price (presumably, because you have the operational efficiency to do so), when someone else with a higher price gets approved, the price of that higher offering IPP will be the price that will be paid to you.
2. For the consumers, there is an incentive to increase energy efficiency. The lower the demand, the lower the price of electricity that will be cleared (i.e., selected as that which meets demand).

However, as a free market, the determination of price is limited on the assumption of rational decision making to pursue the most cost-efficient level. This means that the WESM methodology of price determination is not exempt from outlier behavior of an IPP pursuing individual higher revenue by creating an artificial shortage of supply in one power plant and bidding a very high price on another, knowing that the artificial shortage will ensure dispatch of the highest price bid.

Reminder: Most distribution utilities source their power from power supply agreements, or contracts with IPPs. Usually, they get only 10% or unexpected demand from WESM, unless 1) their power supplier goes down or 2) there is an unexpected higher demand that their power supplier cannot provide.

Disclaimer: The above is an unofficial and non-technical interpretation of how the WESM works. WESM operation is a very complicated integrated process of economics and engineering. There are other rules and limitations in WESM that have not been included here. The above is just an attempt to  focus on the economic side of determining price of electricity. Corrections and comments will be appreciated.

Installing Microsoft-based TrueType Fonts in Ubuntu 14.04

So I installed Ubuntu 14.04, or Trusty Tahr. Like previous Ubuntu versions I have installed (started with 9.04), the Linux-based operating system works just out of the box.

I particularly like the Ubuntu font, which I don't remember having in Ubuntu 12.04 (Precise Pangolin)

However, for me, as I have to use MS Office-based TrueType fonts, like Times New Roman and Arial, I have to add these fonts as an additional step. Unfortunately, while the application ttf-mscorefonts-installer can be installed from the Ubuntu Software Center, it won't really work.

To enable the MS fonts, you have to do it from the Terminal so that you can accept the End-User License Agreement (EULA). To do this, just open your Terminal, and type this:

sudo apt-get install --reinstall ttf-mscorefonts-installer

You will, of course, have to enter your system password.

After that, you should be able to read and accept the EULA, and the fonts will be downloaded and unpacked in your Ubuntu computer. After finishing the installation, you can go to your office application (e.g., LibreOffice), and find the new fonts useable there.

What is ILP?

The  DOE published on its website the announcement that the Interruptible Load Program, or ILP, will be rolled out in Luzon to address the apparent power generation capacity shortfall in light of the projected increase of demand during the summer months.

The program is a demand-side management system* that allows large power consumers (e.g., industrial plants, malls) which have their own generators to get compensation if they use them. Through ILP, the participating end-users (or the participants) agree with their distribution utility (DU) or electric cooperative (EC) to disconnect from the distribution network (i.e., not get their electricity needs from their DU or EC) and use their generators at agreed times. During such period, the freed up power capacity can then be made available to non-participants, who will pay an additional cost as compensation for the participants. The additional cost is approved by the ERC, based on the formula set in ERC's Resolution No. 8, series of 2010.

The ILP is a manifestation of the economic truism: as demand of goods exceeds its supply, its price will increase. In ILP, this is manifested by the situation that non-participants will have to pay for the electricity consumption of the participants just to enjoy availability of electricity.

You may ask: How come the non-participants have to pay for the fuel used by the participants, considering that the non-participants were not present in the arrangement (i.e., during the participants' application with their distribution utility or electric cooperative.)? Where is the justice in making the smaller users pay for the use of generator of the larger consumers. Is this like against the idea of inclusive growth?

The rationale is that the participants may incur higher costs in the use of their generator sets, and the non-participants get the benefit of avoiding brownouts.

While I cannot argue with the point of "avoiding brownouts," the rationale of compensation for the costs of using the generator sets is questionable for me. Don't businesses consider generator sets as assets, which have to be used to generate revenue? Which means their consumers actually pay for them for every object they buy from that establishment as part of their good's price. I am sure they do. Also, as assets, they have insurance, which the consumers also pay for (again, included in the price of goods).

Just my thoughts.


*Demand-sidemanagement refers to strategies done to reduce demand or affect pattern of demand for electricity. My own rendition only.

S2: My Brief Experience in Cloud-Based Database Design and Google Fusion Tables

My last post was about Google Calendar, and the ones before that were about the Philippine power sector. I will not talk about either of those, but instead talk about my brief stint in designing a database (and user interface) for our staff performance evaluation and tracking system.

After our last performance evaluation exercise, I saw the need to create an information system that supports a real, learning-oriented, knowledge management (KM)-oriented staff performance evaluation system. After reading a few literature about the concept (notably, the Strategic Performance Management System and the RA 6713, or the "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees"), I designed the entity relationship diagram. You can read my concept proposal here.

Obviously, it was a self-imposed proposal that I was excited about so I went ahead and spent time and money (for staying at Starbucks... oops!) to contemplate, design, correct, recreate and re-do the database backend and the individually oriented user interaces. As a learning exercise, I tried to document as much as possible, which led to the user manual here.

But that is a big jump from the proposal to the system I was able to finish (well, almost. It still lacks the policy decision on how much is the weight of each evaluator's grade, and what are the criteria of evaluation). Obviously, before that, there were a lot of choices.

I have heard of Google Fusion Tables when I was still working at UP Manila, but it seemed too technical to me. I didn't have training on database then, too, so I did not even have the conceptual appreciation then. However, when I went to PMS, I already had the appreciation of database design and management, so I was able to appreciate Google Fusion Tables.

I needed a system that would do these things:

1. Allow the staff to enter records about their outputs.
2. Allow supervisors to evaluate their staff's outputs, but only access outputs of their own staff (direct reports) and not edit details about the output. Also, supervisors cannot change the grade other supervisors give to that output of that staff.
3. Automatically calculate overall rating for each output (because each output is rated by many evaluators, and each evaluator makes an evaluation on many criteria).
4. Allow supervisors to quickly know the current standing of that staff based on given evaluations.
5. Allow staff to see evaluation (and constructive feedback) on their outputs, as well as summary calculation of their standing.
6. Download the data.
7. Make special reports, based on what the the data the system gathers. 

At first, I wanted to use Google Forms, which would then feed the data into a Google Sheet. Google Forms can be easily created, and it also allows conditional data-inputs and required fields. Google Sheets allows range-based access, meaning I can designate which areas in a spreadsheet a person can edit. For example, I can give one Supervisor A permit to change (input and edit) data in Column I only, while Supervisor B will enter the grade in Column AA, and Supervisor A cannot change any part of the sheet other than those columns. Google Sheets allows strong data crunching functions, due to its Pivot Table function. The two are almost perfect. Well, I said almost.

The problem is that the Sheet is a very big online document, which any manager, unless I were that manager, would not want to go to. It is just a perfect example of information overload. Working for an organization that attempts at every moment to lessen the load to the bosses with the belief that they have more important things to do than read your complete and comprehensive input, Google Sheets was simply not an adorable, manager-level type of information system that they would adopt.

Remembering Google Fusion Tables when I was still studying an online system for program monitoring database, I re-read the system and what it can do, and implemented the Staff Performance Information and Evaluation System with that as the technology base. 

With Google Fusion Tables, I was able to create input forms (well, actually, input tables) for each staff, some data of which will enter in the unique user interface of supervisors so that they can grade them. The supervisors only see records of outputs which they have not evaluated yet. Once they evaluate a record and close the window, and open it again, those record will no longer appear. 

On another view, the staff can see the evaluation of the supervisors (if they have already done that), but they cannot edit it. They can only see their own records, not those of other staff. And unit heads can only see records under their individual unit, not those of others. 

As it is a database, one can easily manipulate the presentation to suit the needs of managers. 

Unfortunately, it was not utilized, so I was not able to test its full operational capability - that is, simultaneous multiple users using the database. I did the "alpha" testing alone, if that would be considered as alpha testing. 

I sure hope that I would get the opportunity to implement a system like this. I had hoped to integrate this with our dashboard, but even that would probably just go to my charge-to-experience list.