ELECTRICITY rarely calls attention to itself, yet nearly every part of daily life depends on a reliable supply of it. As the Philippines faces growing electricity demand, the government is once again looking to nuclear power as a possible part of the country’s energy future.

In his fifth State of the Nation Address on July 27, 2026, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said it may be time to “revisit nuclear energy production,” bringing the issue back into national conversation nearly four decades after the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant was shut down. With nuclear power back on the table, the question is whether the Philippines is ready to make it part of its energy future.

A plant that never switched on

On the Bataan Peninsula stands the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP), the country’s first and only nuclear power plant. Built in the 1970s under the administration of Ferdinand Marcos Sr., the facility was envisioned as a response to rising electricity demand and the Philippines’ dependence on imported oil.

The 1973 oil crisis, which sent global oil prices sharply upward, heightened concerns over the country’s energy security and pushed the government to seek alternative sources of power. Although the BNPP was completed, it was never fueled or placed into commercial operation. In 1986, the plant was mothballed amid safety concerns, with the Chernobyl disaster later that year reinforcing public fears about nuclear power. 

The project was also clouded by corruption allegations involving businessman Herminio Disini, a close associate of Marcos Sr. In its 2021 decision in Disini v. Republic of the Philippines, the Supreme Court ruled that Disini had acquired ill-gotten wealth through substantial commissions connected to the BNPP project.

The promise and the price of nuclear power

Reliability is one of nuclear energy’s biggest advantages. Unlike solar and wind power, whose output can vary with weather conditions, nuclear plants can generate electricity around the clock. The International Energy Agency (IEA) considers nuclear power a reliable source of low-carbon electricity that can help reduce dependence on fossil fuels. But that reliability comes at a cost.

The IEA notes that nuclear projects are highly capital-intensive, with financing costs playing a major role in their overall cost. Building a nuclear plant requires billions of dollars in investment, long-term financing, highly trained workers, strict regulation, and infrastructure capable of operating safely and reliably for decades. 

For the Philippines, the question is whether the electricity generated would justify those long-term costs. Policymakers would have to weigh nuclear power against alternatives such as solar, wind, and natural gas while accounting for construction, operation, maintenance, safety, and waste management.

Safety cannot come later

Then there is safety, perhaps the most consequential concern surrounding nuclear energy. The Philippines is exposed to earthquakes, typhoons, volcanic activity, and other natural hazards, making careful site selection, plant design, emergency preparedness, and regulation essential to any nuclear program.

The Philippines has already begun laying the regulatory groundwork for possible nuclear development. Republic Act No. 12305, or the Philippine National Nuclear Energy Safety Act, established the Philippine Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (PhilATOM) to oversee the safe and secure use of nuclear energy and radiation. The Department of Energy has also been assessing potential sites for future nuclear power facilities.

While safety needs to be considered from the moment a site is chosen, regulations and suitable sites are only part of the challenge, as other vital factors outside of the site itself must also be addressed.

Clean, but not without consequences

Environmental concerns surrounding nuclear power include radioactive waste management and the potential for thermal pollution from seawater cooling. Radioactive waste must be safely managed, yet the Philippines does not currently have a dedicated permanent repository for such waste. Nuclear facilities can also contribute to thermal pollution when seawater is used for cooling, potentially affecting nearby marine ecosystems.

Nuclear power, however, is not the Philippines’ only path toward energy security. Under Republic Act No. 9513, or the Renewable Energy Act of 2008, the country supports the development of renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydropower, geothermal, ocean, and biomass.

The greater challenge, then, may not be choosing one energy source over another, but determining how they can work together to meet growing demand without compromising affordability, safety, or sustainability.

More than just a power plant

According to the Department of Energy’s Philippine Energy Plan 2023–2050, the Philippines is targeting the entry of nuclear power generation into the country’s energy mix by 2032.  Until then, the country has time to determine whether it can turn renewed interest into a responsible nuclear program.

For Filipinos, however, the debate should go beyond the promise of more electricity. The country must ask whether it can afford the technology, build the necessary infrastructure, train the people who will operate it, and protect communities and ecosystems for decades to come.

Above all, can the government earn the public’s trust?

Nuclear energy may offer the Philippines a way to produce reliable, low-carbon electricity as demand continues to rise. But the power it promises comes with responsibilities just as significant. The goal should not simply be to generate more electricity. It should be to ensure that when the lights come on, Filipinos can trust the price they pay, the systems that power their lives, and the future they are helping build.