A nuclear Philippines in six years? OECD’s nuclear chief isn’t convinced.

The head of the OECD's Nuclear Energy Agency casts doubt on the Philippines' 2032 nuclear target, saying that getting its first reactor operating will likely take longer than six years The OECD-NEA director-general stated that the Philippines is unlikely to have its first nuclear reactor operational by 2032, citing the lengthy development process and the nascent regulatory environment. The Department of Energy's draft guidelines suggest initial electricity deliveries from nuclear projects may start in 2038, six years later than the government's original target. Public support for nuclear energy in the Philippines is relatively high, but concerns about nuclear waste management and community acceptance remain significant challenges. This is AI-generated. Read the article for full context. Report any errors. MANILA, Philippines – The Philippines is unlikely to have its first nuclear reactor operating by 2032, according to the head of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD-NEA), who warned that developing a nuclear power plant would take longer than six years. “I don’t think you’re going to have the first reactor operating in six years. It simply takes longer than that. You might have a decision in six years,” OECD-NEA director-general William Magwood told reporters on Wednesday, November 4. “There’s a lot of discussions that have to be had between governments, between the utility and vendors. These take years to go through,” he added. “And the regulator is still very nascent. It’s just getting started. So no, it won’t happen in five or six years. But it will certainly happen within the foreseeable future if things stay on track.” The international nuclear expert’s assessment comes less than a month after President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. confirmed that the government’s target of introducing 1,200 megawatts (MW) of nuclear capacity by 2032 was achievable. That timeline is already being reconsidered by Energy Secretary Sharon Garin. In addition, the Department of Energy’s (DOE) draft nuclear power capacity tender guidelines is already framed more conservatively, with initial electricity deliveries in 2038, six years later than Marcos’ endorsed target. This timetable applies to projects under the proposed tender though, meaning earlier projects through other arrangements may also be possible. TIMELINE. DOE’s timeline in its draft nuclear capacity tender as of September 2026 shows a first target delivery date of 2038. “The draft nuclear energy tender does indicate already that delivery starts in 2038. And we’ve also gone on record in statements that we will stick to what’s in the plan,” DOE Director IV Patrick Aquino told reporters. “As you know, nuclear power projects takes a long time, takes a lot of push, so we are still not officially changing. We’re still hopeful on getting it done.” With the ambitious goal, the DOE has been busy hosting forums and courting nuclear experts, suppliers, and developers. However, some early roadblocks have already appeared, with the Philippine Atomic Energy Regulatory Authority (PhilATOM) still awaiting the appointment of its leadership and its unfinished implementing rules and regulation. Beyond setting up the regulator, Aquino said the DOE was pursuing capacity-building initiatives, including human resource development and technical cooperation with countries that already operate nuclear facilities. Magwood, however, warned that recruiting qualified personnel remains a “very big struggle” even in OECD countries, with nuclear regulators requiring specialists in engineering, science, geology, and other fields. Public acceptance, nuclear waste Then there is the issue of getting the public to accept nuclear energy, with its risks and long-lasting waste. So far, DOE surveys have shown relatively strong nationwide support for nuclear energy, with approval rising from 79% in 2019 to 82% in 2024. Aquino said acceptance in communities being considered for nuclear development has also been relatively high, ranging from 60% to 90% depending on the location. Potential sites assessed include Bataan, Palawan, Masbate, Pangasinan, and Camarines Norte, while another nationwide survey is being prepared. Still, Magwood cautioned that support could vary between communities. “People in Philippines seem to be ready to have this conversation and to see where it takes them,” he said. “There’s a lot of support in some parts of the country and in other parts, maybe not as much. That’s pretty typical.” Among the concerns is nuclear waste, which can remain dangerously radioactive long after it is removed from a reactor. Magwood said there already exists technology to safely store spent nuclear fuel in specialized containers for decades before eventual disposal in geological repositories. However, he acknowledged that despite the technological advances made, nuclear waste is still “a very emotional topic,” especially for host communities. While expressing confidence that the Philippines could manage nuclear waste, Magwood acknowledged that the country has yet to determine its approach to final disposal. “The cost comes at the final disposal. But the Philippines hasn’t decided on that yet so it’s hard to put a cost estimate to it,” he said. – Rappler.com How does this make you feel? Loading