Talk:Commercial solar power in the Philippines

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Energy Low‑importance Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Tambayan Philippines Low‑importance Philippines portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Essay like

Article scope, policy relevance, and precedent

This article is intended to cover the commercial and industrial (C&I) rooftop solar segment in the Philippines, distinct from utility-scale projects. It summarizes DOE/ERC regulatory frameworks (net-metering, DER, RCOA, GEOP) and independent market assessments, including the disparity between registered and unregistered rooftop systems noted by ICSC’s SPECTRUM mapping project. Content is sourced from DOE circulars, ERC rules, and independent media (e.g. PV Tech, Manila Bulletin, BusinessMirror, GMA News). This page is not intended as a company directory but as a regulatory and market overview.

Policy relevance

The article highlights the policy frameworks that govern distributed solar in the Philippines (ERC Net-Metering, DOE DER rules, RCOA, GEOP), documenting their impact on the uptake of commercial rooftop solar. It reflects DOE/ERC documents and industry analysis of these mechanisms.

Data gaps and grid stability

A key issue is the disparity between officially registered rooftop capacity (~393 MW) and independent mapping (~1,846 MW). National media (GMA News, PV Magazine, Power Philippines) have covered this as a grid stability and planning challenge, which underlines the notability of the subject.

Precedent

This article follows the structure of similar standalone pages covering distributed and commercial rooftop solar in other jurisdictions:

• Rooftop solar power – covers rooftop PV systems including commercial rooftops globally.
• Solar power in the United States – includes a dedicated section on commercial rooftop solar capacity and policy.
• Solar power in Australia – discusses residential and commercial rooftop solar adoption in detail.
• Renewable energy in the Philippines – references rooftop solar progress including commercial installations, establishing context for this sectoral focus.

These examples indicate that a regulatory and market overview of commercial rooftop solar is a valid and notable topic on Wikipedia. Energyresearchph (talk) 12:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite parts to address Essay-like tag

The article was fully rewritten on 1 September 2025 to align with an encyclopedic style. Sections were simplified, essay-like language was removed, and company listings were tied to published sources. —Energyresearchph (talk) 04:58, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no doubt on the validity of the subject. One glaring thing though that it seems like "essay-like" is the existence of the section "scope and definition" which is research paper terminology rather than your typical Wikipedia article. And you have "notes on terminology", these could be explained already within the Policy and regulation section. Its formatted in a way like your college paper-back "definition of terms". And maybe we could use a more direct and clinical alternative to "challenges"? its okay to say obstacles or adaption issuesHariboneagle927 (talk) 05:27, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate for the review. I’ll make the following changes now to address the essay-like tone:

• Merge “Scope and definition” and “Notes on terminology” into Policy and regulation, keeping only definitions used in sources.

• Rename Challenges to Barriers to adoption and tighten the language to neutral, source-based phrasing.

• Trim subjective wording and ensure each claim has a citation.

After I publish the edits, I’ll propose removing the tag. @Hariboneagle927: @AstrooKai: could you take another look once the changes are live?

—Energyresearchph (talk) 07:51, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have revised the article to remove “Scope and definition” and “Notes on terminology,” merged definitions into Policy, and renamed “Challenges” to “Barriers to adoption” with neutral language. The essay-like tag should now be resolved. @Hariboneagle927: @AstrooKai: please review. Energyresearchph (talk) 07:56, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]