Wind Farm on a Sacred Philippine Mountain Sparks Controversy

Assist CleanTechnica’s work by means of a Substack subscription or on Stripe.

The Philippines’ aggressive pursuit of a clear power future has collided with a profound difficulty of environmental justice and cultural preservation centered on the proposed Banahaw Wind Energy Venture. GIGAWIND4, INC., a subsidiary of the Ayala Group’s listed power platform ACEN Corp., is advancing plans for the huge P34.5 billion ($59.303 million) 247-megawatt (MW) facility in Quezon Province, some 120 kilometers from Manila.

The Ayala-owned ACEN Corp., which additionally owns a photo voltaic farm in Alaminos, Laguna, mentioned the challenge is a important stride towards assembly the nationwide objective of accelerating the renewable power share to 35% by 2030, promising to stabilize the Luzon grid and ship vital financial advantages to host communities.

Nevertheless, the chosen website close to Mount Banahaw has ignited intense and well-organized opposition.

I stay simply 18 kilometers from Banahaw and might see the east facet of the mountain, known as the Lucban Overflow. It sits beside one other mountain known as San Cristobal. Each may be considered from the Sampalok Lake, one in every of seven crater lakes in my hometown of San Pablo, Laguna.

The sacred mountain and a “nice irony”

The center of the controversy lies within the mountain’s standing as a sacred and guarded panorama. Mount Banahaw is excess of an ecological useful resource; it’s a important watershed and a revered cultural landmark for indigenous and spiritual teams throughout Quezon and Laguna.

Environmental organizations, together with Tanggol Kalikasan (Defend Nature), have publicly labeled the challenge a “nice irony.” They argue that constructing an industrial facility—even one producing renewable power—on an space explicitly protected by legislation beneath the Mounts Banahaw-San Cristobal Protected Panorama (MBSCPL) Act (Republic Act No. 9847) mustn’t even be thought-about. For hundreds of years, the mountain has been thought-about sacred floor, and opponents contend that industrial building shouldn’t be permitted on such a hallowed website.

Ecological and political considerations

The opposition, mobilized by means of the Save Bundok Banahaw Community (SBBN), has raised a number of considerations over the challenge’s scale and the developer’s course of:

Proximity to protected areas: In keeping with critics, 28 of the 38 deliberate generators are meant to be put in inside a 3-kilometer radius adjoining to the protected panorama boundary. The development of those constructions, which stand roughly 120 meters tall, requires intensive street networks throughout 4,536 hectares. Whereas ACEN has not publicly detailed the precise turbine areas relative to the protected space boundaries, opponents argue that the challenge’s footprint poses vital dangers to the panorama’s integrity.

Watershed and livelihood impacts: The SBBN warns that building at this scale might result in extreme soil erosion, siltation, and flooding, thereby threatening the watershed providers that provide freshwater to native farmers and surrounding communities. The group emphasizes that the mountain’s ecological integrity is essential for regional livelihood and meals safety.

Procedural questions and neighborhood engagement: A big level of competition entails the allowing course of. The Protected Space Administration Board (PAMB) of the MBSCPL publicly acknowledged in September 2025 that it was not knowledgeable concerning the challenge’s preliminary scoping actions. This omission, involving a key authorized authority for the protected space, has fueled claims that correct session protocols weren’t adopted.

Opposition teams additional argue that neighborhood consultations have been overly technical. Clear power advocates from teams like Reboot PH assert that native residents face obstacles to significant participation, with neighborhood considerations generally addressed by means of what critics describe as generic “engineering options” and “knowledgeable assurances.” The SBBN has characterised the wind farm as “growth aggression,” arguing that the challenge prioritizes company pursuits over cultural heritage and native welfare.

Competing visions of unpolluted power

Some opponents have additionally raised questions concerning the challenge’s general environmental credentials, invoking what they name the “hidden mining footprint.” They argue that wind turbine manufacturing relies upon closely on extractive industries for supplies like metal and uncommon earth minerals, that are produced by means of energy-intensive and polluting processes. Critics contend this actuality necessitates a extra holistic method to evaluating renewable power initiatives.

ACEN’s Place

As of the time of this text, ACEN confirmed that the challenge is a strategic initiative however emphasised that it stays within the “very early phases of pre-development” and that “no funding resolution has been made up to now.” The corporate didn’t present detailed responses to particular criticisms concerning turbine placement, PAMB session, or neighborhood engagement processes. Representatives indicated that the challenge would bear the total Environmental Influence Evaluation (EIA) course of required by the Philippines’ Division of Surroundings and Pure Assets (DENR).

What’s subsequent

The approaching phases of the DENR’s Environmental Influence Evaluation, significantly the Public Scoping periods, are anticipated to function important boards the place opponents will formally register their place in opposition to the development. These periods will take a look at whether or not the challenge can proceed with significant neighborhood consent or whether or not the opposition will reach blocking or considerably reshaping the proposal.

The controversy surrounding the Banahaw Wind Energy Venture units a high-stakes precedent for the Philippines.

It forces a important examination of the place, how, and for whom renewable power ought to be constructed, elevating elementary questions on whether or not nationwide local weather objectives may be achieved with out compromising environmental justice, cultural preservation, and the rights of host communities. Because the nation accelerates its renewable power buildout, the Banahaw case might effectively outline the template for a way—or whether or not—such conflicts may be resolved.