Wind farm on a sacred mountain of the Philippines

Support clean technicia’s work through subscription or strip.

The future aggressive acquisition of the Philippines of the Philippines has been hit by a deep problem of environmental justice and cultural protection, which is focused on the proposed wind power project. Giga Wind 4, Inc., a subsidiary of the Energy Group’s Energy Platform Energy Platform, is about 120 120 km from Manila, a large -scale P34.5 billion ($ 59.30 million) in Quizon Province, 247 MW (MW).

Alala -owned Essen Corporation, also owns a solar farm in Alemanus, Laga, said the project is an important offer to meet the national purpose of increasing the shares of renewable energy by 2030 by 2030, which has promised to strengthen the Lozen grid and provide important economic benefits to the host communities.

However, the selected site near Mount Banhaho has incited intense and organized opposition.

I live only 18 km away from Banhau and look at the east of the mountain, called the Lokban Overflow. It is sitting near another mountain called San Crystobel. Both can be seen from the Sampalok lake, which is one of the seven crap leaks in my hometown of San Pablo, Laguna.

Sacred mountain and a “great irony”

The heart of the conflict is as a mountain as a sacred and safe landscape. Mount is much more than an environmental resource. It is an important water shedding and a valuable cultural sign for indigenous and religious groups throughout Quizon and Lagha.

Environmental organizations, including Tanggol Kalikasan (Defend nature), the project has publicly labeled “great irony”. They argue that the construction of an industrial facility-even renewable energy generating energy. In the area that Mounts Benhao San Crystobel is clearly protected by the law under the Protective Land Skip (MBSCPL) Act (Republic Act No. 9847). For centuries, the mountain is considered a sacred land, and opponents say that industrial construction should not be allowed on such a sacred site.

Environmental and political concerns

Safe Bunduk Banhao Network (SBBN) has raised many concerns over the project’s scale and developer process.

Proximity to safe areas: According to critics, 28 of the 38 planned turbines are intended to install in a 3km circle of secure landscape. The construction of these structures, which is about 120 meters long, requires a widespread road network in 4,536 hectares. Although Essen has not publicly described the exact locations of the turbine in detail compared to the boundaries of the safe area, the opponents argue that the project’s impressions posed important risks to the integrity of the landscape.

The effects of water shedding and livelihood: SBBN has warned that construction on this scale may cause clay cuts, slites and floods, and thus endanger water shedding services that provide fresh water to local farmers and surrounding communities. The group emphasizes that mountain environmental integrity is very important for regional livelihood and food protection.

Procedure -related questions and engagement of community: An important point of the dispute is involved. MBSCPL’s Protective Area Management Board (PMB) publicly reported in September 2025 that it was not informed about the project’s initial scooping activities. The mistake that included an important legal authority for the safe area has made claims that the proper consultation protocol has not been followed.

Opposition groups have further argued that social consultation has been more technical. Clean energy supporters from groups like Reboot PH claim that local residents face obstacles to meaningful participation, and society’s concerns are sometimes focused on that critics describe “engineering solutions” and “expert assurances”. The SBBN has introduced the wind form as a “development aggression”, which has argued that the project prefers corporate interests over cultural heritage and local welfare.

Clean energy competitive views

Some opponents have also raised questions about the overall environmental credentials of the project, which they call “hidden mining impressions.” They argue that the wind turbine relies heavily on the manufacturing industries such as manufacturing steel and rare land minerals, which are manufactured through energy -related and pollution processes. Critics claim that this fact needs a more comprehensive approach to evaluate renewable energy projects.

Esen’s position

Until the time of this article, Essen confirmed that the project was a strategic move but emphasized that it was in “very early stages before development” and that “no investment has been decided till date.” The company did not provide a detailed response to specific criticisms of turbine placement, pamb consultation, or specific criticisms of the community’s engagement process. Representatives indicated that the project will undergo the diagnosis of the Environmental Impact (EIA) required by the Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).

What is the next

The upcoming stages of the diagnosis of Denr’s environmental impact, especially from public scoping sessions, are expected to act as important forums where opponents will formally enter their position against the construction. These sessions will examine whether the plan can move forward with the consent of the meaningful community or the opposition will be able to block the proposal or significantly new shape.

The dispute around the Banho Wind Power Project has determined a high penetration for the Philippines.

It forces a critical inquiry into where, how, and for whom to renewable energy should be constructed, raising basic questions about whether national climate goals can be achieved without compromising environmental justice, cultural protection, and the rights of host communities. Since the country accelerates its renewable energy construction, the made case can well explain how – or will – disputes can be resolved.