24/08/2026
๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ & ๐๐๐๐๐๐ | ๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต ๐๐ฒ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ๐, ๐๐ถ๐ด๐ต ๐ฅ๐ถ๐๐ธ๐: ๐ง๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ป๐๐ถ๐ฟ๐ผ๐ป๐บ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ฎ๐น ๐๐ผ๐๐ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฃ๐ฎ๐
๐ฆ๐ถ๐น๐ถ๐ฐ๐ฎ
As people strive for advancement and innovation, there is one aspect that is always taken advantage of, which is the environment. Ever since then, natural resources are used to supply the production of materials and for other functions but it is evident that this only benefits the consumer, not the producer. Right now, a potential problem it may face is the impact of Pax Silica, a US-led initiative and artificial intelligence and semiconductor hub which aims to secure tech supplies by sharing essential earth minerals and has a high demand for water and energy consumption. It offers economic opportunities that make the government support it. If the environment is sacrificed for the benefit of another sector, is it still development for a country despite the occurring depletion?
Pax Silica, which is designed to secure supply chains for advanced technologies like artificial intelligence (AI), computer chips, and critical minerals, grows major concerns for nature. These concerns are centered on massive water and energy consumption, and land use and community impacts. The estimated amount of water this proposed project needs to consume is between 65 million and 90 million liters per day but it can also reach up to 120 million liters as it is designed to handle that much. The purpose of using water is to keep facilities running safely for it is essential in operating cooling systems because of the intense heat generated from high-performance tech and component manufacturing. In comparison to people's daily use of water, an average person uses 150 liters a day. With that estimated quantity to consume, it can already supply the daily water needs of 400,000 to 600,000 people. Even if the Bases Conversion and Development Authority (BCDA) said that groundwater will not be tapped and rainwater harvesting will be utilized, it will not be enough to sustain especially during El Niรฑo years according to an assessment.
When it comes to energy consumption, this will require an estimated 3 to 5 gigawatts (3,000 to 5,000 megawatts) of electricity to fully operate. This is equivalent to roughly 19% to 32% of Luzon's peak grid capacity. It poses grid instability and power risks according to Energy Secretary Sharon Garin because plugging 3 gigawatts directly into the Luzon grid is too dangerous. The Makabayan bloc, which includes ACT Teachers Rep. Antonio Tinio, Gabriela Womenโs Party Rep. Sarah Jane Elago, and Kabataan Rep. Renee Louise Co, strongly opposes it. The lawmakers emphasized energy concerns. "(Pax Silica) threatens to permanently lock the Philippines into having the highest power rates not just in Southeast Asia but in all of Asia,โ they stated.
In order to have an independent electricity supply, the project will have to rely on an โembedded generation" model which means solar farms, battery storage facilities, and liquified natural gas (LNG) plants will be built inside or near the hub. Water reservoirs and recycling facilities will also need space that is estimated between 390 to 780 hectares to operate. This means that additional land area will be occupied aside from the 1,600 to 1,620-hectare (approximately 4,000-acre) economic zone located in New Clark City, Tarlac that is centered on manufacturing, artificial intelligence data centers, semiconductor assembly, and logistics. Overall, it could scale past 20,000 hectares if these infrastructures are linked. This raises concerns for the local and indigenous groups as they face displacement risks and loss to agricultural lands. It also poses food security risks because the extension of land requirements would decrease the availability of land meant for food or crop production. With the size of the affected land, if planted with rice, it could feed about 408,000 to 520,000 people a year. This land diversion shows a significant effect because it could also cause dependence on imports.
Many people, indigenous communities, farmers, advocate groups, environmental scientists, and lawmakers, criticize or oppose this initiative because of the effects or risks it poses. Before implementing, these concerns should be assessed and solved first so that there will be no problems for the next few years, considering that this is a long-term framework. Aspiring for progress is good as long as it does not come at the expense of sacrificing nature and natural resources because it has limitations and it will come to a point that it will all be used up.
| ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ฏ๐๐ฃ๐๐ง๐ ๐ฝ๐๐ฃ๐๐๐ข๐๐ฃ
| ๐๐๐ฎ๐ค๐ช๐ฉ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ง๐๐ฃ๐๐๐๐
