Reduce greenhouse gases
Carbon dioxide is considered the major gas that causes the greenhouse effect, or global warming. The combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil and natural gas) provides energy but emits exhaust containing nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide (CO2), water vapor, sulfur dioxide (SO2), and nitrogen oxides (NOx). CO2 is generated in massive amounts, typically at 2-3 times the amount of coal burned. In terms of CO2, SO2 and NOx emissions, natural gas is the cleanest fuel, followed by oil and coal.
SO2 and NOx are acid rain precursors but their emissions are far less than CO2 emissions and can be reduced by more than 90 percent with currently applied exhaust cleanup technologies. For example, SO2 can be reacted with a lime solution to form gypsum as a byproduct; and NOx can be catalytically reduced with ammonia to form harmless nitrogen and water, with oxygen as a by-product.
In contrast, it is difficult, if not impossible, to reduce CO2 emissions by more than 90 percent unless the fossil fuel consumption can also be slashed by more than 90 percent through a combination of energy conservation, efficiency improvements and lifestyle changes. For example, energy savings can be achieved to a certain extent by preheating combustion air with flue gas waste heat, using oxygen (at an extra cost) or oxygen-enriched air instead of air for combustion, installing fuel cells for electricity generation, etc.
Alternatively, CO2 can be recovered from exhaust, compressed and injected underground or undersea. However, the environmental impacts of CO2 injection have to be assessed carefully since, in essence, CO2 is moved from air to land or water.
There has been an idea to dispose CO2 by catalytically reacting it with hydrogen to produce methane, which is the major component of natural gas. This idea sounds good but has a fallacy: the generation of hydrogen from fossil fuels also involves CO2 emissions. The so-called hydrogen economy has the same fallacy. Even if hydrogen is generated by the electrolysis of water, the generation of electricity from fossil fuels involves CO2 emissions as well. Incidentally, methane in air is another greenhouse gas more potent than CO2 per molecule.
Eventually, when fossil fuels are used up, people will have to use solar energy (including biomass and other regenerable energy) and nuclear energy. The CO2 emission problem might vanish. However, will a "global cooling" or other problems occur instead?
Charles Hong
Columbus, Ohio
Democratize China
One only has to look at the one party government of the People's Republic of China (PRC), including its legislative body, to see how absurd this "anti-secession" is ("Anti-secession bill makes no sense," Dec. 28, 2004, page 8).
Hong Kong's legislative body, however miserable it is, at least has 49 percent of its representatives directly elected by the population. While the "people's" Congress in Beijing, consists exclusively of communists, whose members number around 30 million. In other words, the 1.3 billion Chinese people have no representation -- only the obligation to pay taxes and to die in wars waged by the communists.
As an American, this "taxation without representation," looks to me like a good reason for revolution, be it against colonialists or anything else.
Communist China, from its "Constitution" on, has the same farcical authoritarian laws as previous imperial regimes. They do not recognize the concept of rule of law, or any legal standards outside of China, be it international law or UN declarations. The laws they do have are arbitrarily enforced by layers of bureaucracy, which, in practice, twists these laws to the breaking point.
The greatest thing Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) could do, would be to democratize China, return the power to the people and let the people make their own laws and decisions. China should also be governed by the consent of the people as in any other modern country. Hu's name would surely be remembered for centuries to come.
The PRC must first get to know the rules and principles of law before they enact this absurd "anti-secession" law.
Ming-Chung Chen
Chicago
Taiwan's Chinese is modern
Taiwan is indeed a better place than China to study Mandarin because it is safer and has a better educational infrastructure ("Taiwan ideal place to learn Chinese," Dec. 27, 2004, p.2).
But the most important reason is that Taiwan has preserved the essence of Chinese culture better than the communists in Beijing. Taiwan maintains the traditional (complex) system of writing characters, which is a vital link to centuries of Chinese texts and is aesthetically more beautiful than the simplified system, which the PRC promoted to indoctrinate the populace and to destroy traditional culture.
Taiwan, a society of immigrants standing at the crossroads of international commerce, has welcomed diasporas from all provinces of China and overseas (along with their cuisines and work ethics) and infused this eclectic Chinese culture with the best of the West, including democracy and capitalism. In contrast, China is ruled by a communist regime founded on Marxism and Leninism, ideas which have nothing to do with traditional Chinese culture.
Rather than discarding its roots (as some independence hardliners advocate), Taiwan should better market its comparative advantage as a Chinese yet modern nation. Foreigners studying in Taiwan can sometimes more clearly see the nation's future prospects.
Vincent Wei-cheng Wang
Richmond, Virginia
Having lived through former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s tumultuous and scandal-ridden administration, the last place I had expected to come face-to-face with “Mr Brexit” was in a hotel ballroom in Taipei. Should I have been so surprised? Over the past few years, Taiwan has unfortunately become the destination of choice for washed-up Western politicians to turn up long after their political careers have ended, making grandiose speeches in exchange for extraordinarily large paychecks far exceeding the annual salary of all but the wealthiest of Taiwan’s business tycoons. Taiwan’s pursuit of bygone politicians with little to no influence in their home
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
Despite calls to the contrary from their respective powerful neighbors, Taiwan and Somaliland continue to expand their relationship, endowing it with important new prospects. Fitting into this bigger picture is the historic Coast Guard Cooperation Agreement signed last month. The common goal is to move the already strong bilateral relationship toward operational cooperation, with significant and tangible mutual benefits to be observed. Essentially, the new agreement commits the parties to a course of conduct that is expressed in three fundamental activities: cooperation, intelligence sharing and technology transfer. This reflects the desire — shared by both nations — to achieve strategic results within
It is difficult not to agree with a few points stated by Christian Whiton in his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” and yet the main idea is flawed. I am a Polish journalist who considers Taiwan her second home. I am conservative, and I might disagree with some social changes being promoted in Taiwan right now, especially the push for progressiveness backed by leftists from the West — we need to clean up our mess before blaming the Taiwanese. However, I would never think that those issues should dominate the West’s judgement of Taiwan’s geopolitical importance. The question is not whether
RSS