The media in Taiwan portrayed the solvent spill in southern Taiwan two weeks ago as largely the fault of Taiwan's petrochemical industry and immoral business practices. The Hsinchu Science-based Industrial Park (SIP) got away virtually scot-free in the media blame game, but the statistics paint a different story.
Taiwan's Industrial Development Bureau, a part of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, reports that 50,000 tonnes of toxic solvents are produced in Taiwan each year, of which 35,000 tonnes are produced by firms located in the Hsinchu SIP. Some 80 percent of firms in the park hold contracts with the Taipei County-based chemical waste handler Shengli to dispose of toxic solvents, including big names like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC) and United Microelectronics (UMC). Industries that manufacture silicon wafers and flat-screen monitors (LCD-TFT) produce immense amounts of waste solvents each year.
The statistics show without a shadow of a doubt that the Hsinchu SIP is the largest producer of toxic solvents that are fouling Taiwan's rivers and streams. Yet firms in the science park attempted to stand with the public after the dumping was revealed, by feigning that they had no idea what Shengli was up to.
The media and government officials played along with the script, scrambling to find a way to deal with the toxic solvents produced in the science park, since most of the companies that could legally handle the substances were shut down after they were also found to be violating standards for waste disposal. A major question remains not just unanswered but almost unasked: "What happened to the solvents that firms in the science park sent to Shengli for treatment?"
According to the Waste Disposal Act passed in January this year, firms that produce hazardous materials are liable if the companies they hire to dispose of the waste do so in a manner that creates pollution. The law was established so producers of toxic materials couldn't circumvent regulations by passing waste onto another company for treatment. Why hasn't the EPA starting going after the actual source of the toxic solvents that left 600,000 families in the south without water for days?
Beginning in the 1970s, Taiwan started to play the role of a production base for the world market, providing cheap textiles, petrochemicals, consumer electronics, and now high-tech equipment to buyers the world over. But while Taiwan's exports leave the island for all over the world, the pollution created in the production process remains here. The costs of Taiwan's massive exports, constant industrial upgrading and expansion has never really been calculated.
Taiwan remains an economy dependent on massive exports. The vast majority of production in Taiwan is not geared for domestic consumption, but for foreign markets. Components and raw materials are imported, processed by workers here in Taiwan, and then sold abroad. Taiwan earns hard currency, but has to pay in terms of the pollution that remains on the island. We may export 95 percent of products in a range of industries, as the government tells us with pride, but we retain 100 percent of the pollution resulting from production processes.
Taiwan's push into high-tech is no answer to this dilemma; rather, it is part of the problem.
In 1997, Taiwan exported 99.2 percent of the motherboards it produced, 98.2 percent of color monitors, 95.1 percent of scanners, and 60.1 percent of silicon wafers. Most of the remaining 39.9 percent of wafers consumed domestically probably ended up in other products sold abroad, however.
The latest case of solvent dumping only shows that Taiwan does not have the ability to handle the waste products it produces. The Industrial Development Bureau (IDB) and Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) plan to set up a system to track toxic and hazardous materials from their source, but it's still in the planning stage.
Not too long ago, the IDB publicly admitted that of the 1.5 million tonnes of hazardous waste produced each year in Taiwan, only around 600,000 tonnes are treated. It's not too hard to guess where the rest of the toxic waste ends up: in rivers, streams, landfills, underground water supplies and in our bodies.
Further, the IDB's statistics are based on figures voluntarily provided by the firms that produce and handle the waste. Judging by the fact that two of the seven major waste solvent handlers had to be closed down because of major infractions, the official statistics regarding solvents and other toxic waste produced in Taiwan are probably only a fraction of the real totals.
Taiwan's "miracle" of economic growth has forced society to bear a huge cost of hazardous waste and pollution, and continues to burden us.
Now there is talk of a "Green Silicon Island," but the same patter is being repeated.
Just as all of Taiwan was focused on the wastes dumped into the Chishan River, Premier Tang Fei (唐飛) said that the Meinung Dam should be built to solve the water shortage problem in the Luchu Industrial Park. The Bureau of Water Resources was also busy looking for additional water resources to quench the thirsty Tainan SIP, a second high-tech, polluting powerhouse for Taiwan.
The solvent dumping case in southern Taiwan is not a simple example of corporate greed and immoral business practices. The problem lies with Taiwan's system of production. On the outside, Taiwan appears as an export dynamo, but its guts are filled with pollution and toxins.
Environmental protection in Taiwan is an exercise in futility at present. The problems are manifold and ubiquitous.
As the media and experts have stated, the government must establish a system to monitor and track hazardous materials created in Taiwan, and find a suitable way of treating and disposing of waste. But this is only the beginning. Once we can account for all the toxins and waste produced in Taiwan, we must begin to ask how much we can handle. We must ask who benefits and who is harmed by the monstrous industrial structure erected on Taiwan.
Cool Louder Web are managers of a Web site (http://www.coolloud.org) dedicated to the discussion of social issues.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under