- The Philippines is considering reviving the long-mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) to address rising electricity costs, leveraging its existing infrastructure for faster integration into the energy mix by 2032.
- While proponents highlight the plant’s robust safety features and cost-effectiveness compared to building new facilities, critics raise concerns about its location near a volcano and fault line, as well as historical corruption and safety fears.
- Clean energy advocates urge the government to focus on renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and geothermal, questioning the need for nuclear power given its risks and controversial history.
The Philippines is once again considering the revival of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP) as part of its effort to address soaring electricity costs and diversify its energy mix. This move comes amidst lingering public resistance rooted in historical controversies over safety, corruption, and environmental risks. In December, the Department of Energy announced that the country had met the initial requirements set by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), allowing it to explore the development of nuclear energy. According to Energy Undersecretary Sharon Garin, the Philippines may now proceed with establishing a nuclear facility, provided it complies with the necessary regulatory laws.
For many energy experts, however, the fastest path to incorporating nuclear power into the country’s energy portfolio lies in reviving the BNPP. Constructed during Ferdinand Marcos Sr.’s regime, the plant was completed in 1984 at a cost of $2.3 billion and was designed to generate 621 megawatts of electricity. Initially conceived during the 1970s Middle East oil embargo, the project aimed to shield the Philippine economy from energy shocks. However, allegations of corruption, safety concerns, and fears stoked by the 1986 Chernobyl disaster ultimately led to the plant’s closure after Marcos was ousted. Since then, the government has spent between 40 and 50 million pesos annually on maintaining the facility, even though it has never been operational.
Recent developments have rekindled interest in the BNPP’s potential. In October, the Philippines and South Korea signed an agreement to assess the rehabilitation needed to bring the plant online. Josef Yap, a former president of the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, described the mothballing of the BNPP as an ill-advised political decision by the administration of President Corazon Aquino. Experts like Carlo Arcilla, director of the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute, have sought to dispel safety concerns by emphasizing the differences between the BNPP’s design and that of the Chernobyl reactor. Unlike the Soviet reactor, which lacked a containment structure, the BNPP’s Westinghouse design includes critical safeguards to prevent radiation release in the event of an accident.
The Department of Energy envisions nuclear energy playing a pivotal role in the country’s power generation by 2032, particularly as the nation reduces its reliance on coal and faces the depletion of the Malampaya natural gas field, which currently supplies 20 percent of the Philippines’ power. While constructing a new nuclear plant remains an option, it is considered a longer-term endeavor that could take at least a decade to navigate siting, safety, and regulatory processes. In contrast, experts like Arcilla argue that reviving the BNPP could bring nuclear energy to the grid within four to five years.
Despite these prospects, significant challenges remain. Concerns about the BNPP’s safety persist due to its location on the slope of Mount Natib, a dormant stratovolcano, and its proximity to a fault line. Critics, including Kelvin Rodolfo, professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Illinois, warn that reactivating the plant poses substantial risks to public safety and the environment. On the other hand, proponents argue that engineering solutions, similar to those employed at nuclear plants like Diablo Canyon in California, could address these vulnerabilities.
Public perception remains another barrier to the BNPP’s revival. Research by Ardvin Ong, an associate professor at Mapua University, highlights enduring apprehensions about safety and the economic implications of reopening the facility, given its controversial history of corruption and cost overruns. Meanwhile, clean energy advocates, such as Gerry Arances of the Center for Energy, Ecology, and Development, question the necessity of nuclear power altogether. They urge the government to prioritize renewable energy sources like wind, solar, geothermal, and hydropower, which they argue are safer and more sustainable alternatives.
The revival of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant represents a critical crossroads for the Philippines. While it offers a potentially expedited path to addressing the country’s energy challenges, it also reignites debates over safety, environmental impact, and the role of nuclear energy in the nation’s future.
