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.

Google Calendar: A User's Introduction

For this post, I will not talk about Philippine energy. I will briefly introduce Google Calendar, with the hope that you (I hope you understand who you are) will use it to increase productivity and collaboration.

Google Calendar is (obviously) Google's take on calendar and task management. As far as I remember, Yahoo! has calendar also in their Yahoo! Mail, but it was not as integrated to their other products, and did not have a lot of collaborative functionalities (why does Google say that 'functionalities' is incorrectly spelled?) that Google Calendar introduced.

Google Calendar is a simple take and presentation on how we see dates vis-a-vis tasks, activities, sharing and communication. If you have a Gmail account, just look up, at the gray ribbon of Google services available, and you will see Calendar on the right-middle part. Click it, and that's almost it. (You will probably need to agree to the terms of services.)

There are a number of features in Google Calendar that I like, such as:

1. Sharing of Calendar - By sharing calendar, this means you share one of your calendars. As people, we have different aspects of our lives. For example, we live as an employee, a part of a circle of friends, and member of a volunteer organization. For each of these circles, we can have a calendar, which we can share. And there are many ways of sharing: Allow certain people to see your calendar, edit existing appointments, create new ones, or manage the calendar, which means they can re-share your calendar to those who need access to your schedule. Of course, there is also the option of making your calendar public. When another user adds an appointment in your shared calendar, you get notified (via email or SMS, to be discussed next).
2. Mobile Notifications - For me, I configured my Google Calendar to send me SMS to remind of in advance of my schedules  (many times for each event/schedule). This is, of course, in addition to notifications via the email. As discussed in the previous number, you also get be notified if a shared calendar is changed (someone requested an appointment or added a schedule, or edited an existing appointment, among others)
3. Integration with other Google services - If you use Google Sites, for example, for managing a project or a team dashboard, you can (and I did) integrate the Google Calendar gadget so that it displays your calendar there. If your Google Sites is login-based, it would display your own Google Calendar.

Google Calendar is a very useful productivity tool that I hope you would use to increase productivity (of course) and enhance collaboration in shared activities.

For more information on how to do the things I listed here, you can go to the Google Calendar Help site https://support.google.com/calendar/?hl=en

No, I am not a Google advertiser or stockholder. Just a Google Fan. :D

I may update this as soon as I have the time and realize its other exciting features.

Philippine Power Sector: Generation

In my previous post, I discussed in general how we get access to electricity. In this post, we will look more closely into the generation sub-sector, one of the three (now four, under Retail Competition and Open Access regime, which we will discuss in a later post) entity types in our electric power industry.

A general schematic of power generation, transmission and distribution, in the United States, which is generally similar to the Philippine system. Image source: Wikipedia

As previously stated, the generation sub-sector is mainly the group of companies and GOCCs which own electricity-generating assets. Under this sub-sector, entities can be classified by ownership as follows:

1. Government-owned and controlled corporation assets (PSALM-owned but National Power Corporation, or NPC-operated)
2. NPC-contracted Independent Power Producers (also now PSALM-owned)
3. Private generation companies

Initially, power generation was market-driven (For example, MERALCO owned power generation assets in 1905.). Private investments focused mostly on where investor's return was guaranteed, which was mostly in urban areas. Power generation sub-sector development was refocused following the State's realization of their need to lead the development and make electricity available to all. This led to the government takeover of all generation assets (through negotiation and compensation), which gave the NPC its assets prior to 2001.

With NPC as the sole generation provider in 1972 (as declared by Presidential Decree 40, which also nationalized MERALCO), the government took on the risks of the import-dependent power generation sub-sector, while trying to maintain a low price of power for the consumers.

With the power crisis under Pres. Cory Aquino, the government passed RA 6957 ("An Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector, and for Other Purposes"), giving the President the authority to enter into contracts with independent producers. In a gist, the arrangement is that investors (called independent power producers, or IPP) will build and operate power generation assets for a certain amount of time, during which they are guaranteed earnings, and then the assets will then be turned over (ownership-wise) to the government. These assets, at this time called NPC-IPP contracted facilities, (or NPC-IPPs) are still owned by the government, but may still have working contracting arrangements. Examples of this are Casecnan Multipurpose Hydro and Benguet Mini Hydro (contract for bidding as of 2012).

In this arrangement, NPC-IPPs build and operate the power plant, sell (in a way) the power to NPC, which then sell the power to consumers.

(Under EPIRA, these NPC-IPPs are also to be privatized.)

The third type is mostly private investment generation facilities which were built after the passing of the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001 (or EPIRA), which made power a market for interested investors to compete in. Unlike previous arrangement, which is that the government guarantees return of investment to the IPPs, independent investments under EPIRA treat power facility investments as usual market investment with risks, and the government provides no guarantees (although the government provides some technical assistance in terms of commerciality of energy investments, particularly in renewable energy).

The above typologies refer to major and grid-connected power generators. There are also other generation facilities (mostly hydroelectric plants) which are not connected to the main power grids (Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao), and they are called SPUG-areas (Small Power Utility Group, which refers to the wholly-owned subsidiary of the NPC).

Getting into the power generation sub-sector: Official Policy and Processes

Currently, under EPIRA, the government recognizes power generation as a business with public interest. As such, while private capital is encouraged, the government enforces public interests through regulation of the market, as well as technical requirements for incoming and existing players, among others.

Regulation

The government exercises regulation in the whole electricity industry (generation, transmission, distribution, and the new entity, supply) through the Energy Regulatory Commmission, or the ERC.

The ERC is an independent commission where various interests are considered in coming up with decisions pertaining to the energy and power sector. Its main functions are to promote competition, encourage market development, ensure customer choice and penalize abuse of markt power in the restructured electricity industry.

Technical Requirements for Incoming and Existing Players

As a business with public interest, the government requires from generation companies many technical specifications and proofs of their capability to generate electricity continuously. As such, the government requires proof of generally two things: 1) technical expertise in operating a power plant; and 2) the capability to manage risks as they are independent entities which the government assumes no risks in case of financial failure (in business or risk management lingo, "default").

The first part of entering into the power generation business is getting a certificate of endorsement from DOE (if the power plant will utilize a traditional fuel, such as oil and coal). If the power plant is renewable energy-driven, they must also get certificate of commerciality, another certificate which, in a gist, says that based on technical specifications of the plant and the renewable energy available in the area, the company can earn.

(Availability here refers not only if there is available renewable energy, but on the frequency of its availability. For example, there can be strong winds in Metro Manila during storms, but those would not be available year-round, so building wind mills there would not be economically viable.)

DOE requires many documents, as listed in their "Investor's Guidebook" (link below), but for our discussion, the requirements for it being a power generation facility are:

1. DENR's Environmental Clearance Certificate
2. SEC Registration
3. LGU Clearance

The DOE also endorses the power plant (at this stage, called a power project) to the National Grid Commission of the Philippines (NGCP), the National Transmission Corporation's (TRANSCO) contracted operator, for a Grid Impact Studies (GIS) certification. This process ensures that the power capacity produced by the power plant can and will be accommodated by the system.

While a power plant can be constructed easily, the final authority for it to operate (whether for selling of its power to the public, or the grid, or for internal use) is the certificate of compliance (COC) issued by the ERC. The link on the list of requirements is identified in the "Sources" section below.

Benefits to Host Communities

Power generation (and the energy industry, in general) is an environment-impacting business, and when we say it impacts the environment, it impacts the physical environment and the community which lives there. As such, the government requires that the power generation companies return a certain amount of their earnings to the community, through the "Benefits to Host Communities," or Energy Regulation (ER) 1-94.

The aggregated fund can be utilized for electrification, environmental, and livelihood projects. More information is available in the DOE website, link also available in the "Sources" section.

Business

Power generation, like any business, requires inputs in the form of fuel. For renewable energy plants, which do not require traditional fuel, initial capital is generally more costly compared to fossil-based (oil, coal, natural gas) power plants. As we see, right from the start, investors spend a lot of money to make a power plant, and they have in mind right from the start that they will make money out of it.

The NPC-monopoly era of the government subsidizing the cost of power generation (among others) resulted in NPC's debts. This, among others, led to the government's reviewing the power industry, which led to the EPIRA. Mindanao, which mostly sources from hydro-power plants, sought to exempt themselves from the industry-based power market, and as such, there were not a lot of investors which wanted to compete in a grid which has a very low cost of power being made to consumers by the hydropower sources.

While we do not want to pay for external sources, renewable energy is not as reliable (as in year-round) as baseload (fossil-fuel based) power plants. As such, in power generation, we balance cost of power (lower in renewable energy) with year-long readily-available power (present in baseload plants).

Review

To review, we see that generation was initially a market-driven sub-sector. This was changed into a public utility, and with EPIRA, it was defined as a business with public interest - I guess we can say it was returned to its previous setup but with government roadmap inserted there. The changing nature of electricity (business or public utility) affects its availability as investors or players consider how they are able to earn money from it.

The various generation plants transmit through high-voltage transmission lines, another sub-sector which we will discuss later.

DISCLAIMER:

The above, and all posts in this blog, is the author's best-effort attempt to understand and communicate the power industry, and is not to be used as an official source of opinion or interpretation. The below sources are provided for that purpose.

Sources:

1. COA, Sectoral Performance Audit Report on Government Contracts with Independent Power Producers (CY 2005), http://www.coa.gov.ph/GWSPA/2005/IPP2005-09.htm accessed 21 August 2013.
2. DOE, 21st EPIRA Implementation Report http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/01_Energy_Situationer/21st%20EPIRA%20Status%20Report_FINAL.pdf accessed 21 August 2013.
3. DOE, "Financial Benefits to Host Communities under ER 1-94, as Amended" http://www.doe.gov.ph/power-and-electrification/benefits-to-host-communities/388-financial-benefits-er-1-94
4. DOE, "Energy Investor's Guidebook," http://www.doe.gov.ph/doe_files/pdf/Researchers_Downloable_Files/EnergyPresentation/Energy_Investor's_Guidebook.pdf accessed 21 August 2013.
5. ERC, "Documentary Requirements for the Issuance of COC"  http://www.erc.gov.ph/Pages/documentary-requirements-for-the-issuance-of-coc accessed 21 August 2013.
6. Fabella, R.V. (2002). The Regulatory Environment of the Energy Industry in the Philippines (Working Paper Series of Centre on Regulation and Competition).
7. NEA, "Origin of Philippine Electrification," http://www.nea.gov.ph/about-us, accessed 21 August 2013.
8. Republic Act 9136.