0 Comments
Table of Contents
Opposition is mounting in a coastal town in Pangasinan over a proposal to build a ₱225-billion nuclear power plant, as residents, church leaders, and local officials raise concerns about safety, consultation, and whether promised benefits would materialize for the community.
The proposed project, backed by Pangasinan Second District Rep. Mark Cojuangco, involves constructing a 1,000-megawatt nuclear facility composed of four small modular reactors on about 120 hectares of land in Labrador, a town of roughly 30,000 people. Cojuangco, who chairs the House special committee on nuclear energy, has advocated nuclear power for nearly 18 years, arguing it is the solution to the country’s long-standing electricity problems.
He has said access to nuclear power could significantly lower electricity costs, claiming that Labrador residents could eventually pay as little as ₱5 per kilowatt-hour, or even receive electricity for free. According to Cojuangco, cheaper and more reliable power would reduce household expenses, lower costs for farms and businesses, and attract investors discouraged by high energy prices.
Broken Promises
Residents opposing the plan point to Sual, Pangasinan, where a 1,218-megawatt coal-fired power plant has operated since 1999, as evidence that host communities do not necessarily benefit from large power projects.
“They promised cheap or free electricity,” said Joel Ferrer of the Save Sual Movement. “That never happened.”
Sual residents say they continue to pay standard electricity rates under Pangasinan Electric Cooperative I, despite hosting the country’s largest coal plant. They have also yet to experience discounted power, contrary to earlier assurances made when the plant was built.
For Labrador residents, the Sual experience has fueled skepticism over similar promises now being made for the nuclear project.
Safety Concerns
Proponents have also cited job creation as a benefit, but critics argue that employment opportunities for locals would be limited. Farmer-leader Hipolito Mislang, 93, said most jobs would be available only during construction and would later require specialized expertise not readily available in the area.
“But once it’s built, who will work there?” Mislang said. “Only specialists can work there.”
Opponents have also raised concerns about nuclear radiation and emergency preparedness. Ferrer said while radiation is present in daily life through common devices, a nuclear power plant poses risks on a different scale, particularly in the event of an accident.
Site Selection
Cojuangco has defended Labrador as a suitable site, citing its geography. In a previous interview, he said the town’s mountains allow the plant to be elevated above sea level to reduce tsunami risk, while access to seawater would make cooling more cost-effective than using freshwater.
However, critics counter that Labrador’s location along the Lingayen Gulf and near the East Zambales fault line exposes it to earthquakes, typhoons, and other natural hazards. Younger residents have also questioned the impact of safety measures, such as a potential exclusion zone.
“From Lingayen to Sual is only about 18 to 20 km. If a 16-km danger zone is enforced, Labrador disappears,” said Jericho Lontoc, a schoolteacher.
Church Opposition
In December 2025, Catholic leaders led by Lingayen-Dagupan Archbishop Socrates Villegas formally opposed the project through a pastoral letter citing seismic risks, unresolved radioactive waste disposal issues, and lessons from the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Within days, 33 bishops had signed the letter.
Following a Mass led by Alaminos Bishop Napoleon Sipalay, about 500 residents signed a manifesto opposing the nuclear plant. Church leaders denied claims by pronuclear groups that parishioners were misled into signing, saying participants were fully informed that the Mass was explicitly held to oppose the project.
Pronuclear groups, meanwhile, have claimed that 66 percent of Labrador residents support the proposal, a figure questioned by church leaders and opposition groups who have raised concerns about how signatures in favor of the project were obtained.
Regulatory Process
Despite the local debate, the decision to build a nuclear power plant does not rest solely with Labrador. The project would require approval from the Philippine Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (PhilATOM), as well as an environmental compliance certificate (ECC) from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.
During a Senate hearing on the proposed Philippine Nuclear Liability Act, officials from the DENR’s Environmental Management Bureau said an ECC requires a lengthy review process with mandatory public participation and oversight.
Some national officials have suggested alternative approaches. According to the Department of Science and Technology–Philippine Nuclear Research Institute, reviving the long-mothballed Bataan Nuclear Power Plant could be the fastest way for the Philippines to adopt nuclear energy.
For critics in Labrador, however, the issue remains unresolved. “The risks are greater than the benefits,” church leaders said in their pastoral letter, warning that the province must consider long-term safety and responsibility to future generations.
Source:
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2179305/pangasinan-town-nuke-plan-faces-backlash
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2179080/quiet-pangasinan-town-weighs-cost-of-power
https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/2179815/how-national-agencies-will-decide-pangasinans-nuke-fate