Concerns are growing that the government -- worried the scrapping of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant (核四) might worsen the industrial exodus and trigger a domino effect on investment in Taiwan -- might let the controversial Pinnan Industrial Complex (濱南開發案) project be approved by the Executive Yuan. These concerns have been raised because it appears that politicians may to trying to manipulate the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process for the project, which threatens Taiwan's only remaining unpolluted wetland and habitat for the black-faced spoonbill.
The Environmental Protection Administration (EPA,
The Pinnan project's EIA has been Taiwan's most controversial EIA report ever. Pinnan's environmental impact include the threat to the ecology of the Chiku wetlands
Because of chronic water shortages in southern Taiwan, no initial water supply plan was included in the Pinnan complex project, whose daily water demand would be 194,000 tonnes. The Water Resources Bureau (
The black-faced spoonbill is already listed as an endangered species in the Ramsar list of Wetlands of International Importance. In May 1999, more than 100 representatives from around the world appealed for the protection of the spoonbills during the Conference of the Parties to the Ramsar Convention held in Costa Rica. The years of effort Taiwan has put into preservation will go down the drain if the development of the Pinnan project destroys the birds' habitat, and its international image will suffer.
Since the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, cutting CO2 emissions has become a primary task in controlling the greenhouse effect. Pinnan will emit an estimated 20.55 million tonnes of CO2 per year. If we add emissions from the Sixth (六輕) and Eighth (八輕) Naphtha Crackers, the project will account for 35 percent of Taiwan's overall CO2 emissions, and more than 60 percent of emissions by all industrial sectors. This will crowd out the CO2 emission quotas of other sectors in the future, triggering vicious competition for quotas.
The EPA and related agencies should carefully evaluate the after effects of the project. Even though the Sixth Conference of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, held in the Hague in last November, ended without reaching any consensus, participating countries still called for attention to global warming and cooperation to reduce CO2 emissions. Can't we make a timely and appropriate response to this international trend?
In addition, three of the 10 major topics initially listed for review -- site alternatives, industrial harbor alternatives and the preservation of black-faced spoonbills -- have been ignored in the review meetings. The developers did not provide adequate information on project site and harbor alternatives. They also left out the possibility of using offshore islands as project sites, saying that the islands are not economically viable and could not be completed on schedule.
Is saving development costs and enriching a few conglomerates more important than protecting Taiwan's only unpolluted wetland and habitat for the black-faced spoonbill? Should we ignore the rich fisheries and tourism resources of southern Taiwan? Where is social justice to be found if the fisheries industry developed over many generations is terminated for the sake of an industrial project?
This country's political and economic activities have always favored northern Taiwan at the expense of the south. Is this to be the case with environmental protection too? If we sacrifice the environment for the short-term profits of a few companies, how can we even talk about social justice -- let alone balanced, sustainable development?
According to the 1998 National Energy Conference, energy-intensive industries should primarily be aimed at fulfilling domestic demand and not at export. Future industrial structure will have to stress balanced overall development and give priority to industries that offer high added value, consume less energy and have strong economic linkage effects.
In 1998, Taiwan's industrial sectors accounted for 58 percent of the country's total energy consumption, and 57 percent of its CO2 emissions. The petrochemical and steel industries took up 30 percent of the total energy consumption but only made up around 5 percent of GDP. At a time when Taiwan is working to adhere to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and to move toward sustainable development, we should not continue to rely on energy-intensive and highly polluting industries such as the petrochemical and steel industries. Such reliance will delay the upgrading of industry as well as the establishment of a knowledge-based economy.
I hope the policy-making bodies will conduct a careful and all-round evaluation of this development project that will cause a massive impact. I call on the EPA and the EIA review committee to do the following:
1. Ask the developers to provide more information on and detailed evaluations of alternative sites, port alternatives and conservation of the spoonbills.
2. Consider, as an alternative plan, expanding the sixth cracker's harbor and moving the seventh cracker and steel plants to the Mailiao
3. The project should undergo a "policy" EIA to demonstrate the legitimacy of EIA laws and the credibility of the EIA system.
4. The industrial harbor plan should also be put into the EIA process as soon as possible. It would be irresponsible for the government to approve the project and leave the industrial harbor hanging in the air.
5. The members of the EIA review committee should strictly scrutinize the project. Otherwise, it may have an irreversible impact on the the Chiku wetlands' ecology and the fisheries industry.
6. The EPA should require developers to submit a written commitment to take full responsibility for the project's ecological risks as well as the lives and properties of area residents. Land for the project should only be leased, not sold outright, so that developers cannot play fast and loose on land speculation in the name of industrial development.
I hope that the government, despite the pressure created by political changes over the past eight months, will demonstrate determination and conscience in facing up to the serious problems of the Pinnan project. I hope that the environmental issues surrounding the project will not be sacrificed to the political row that has broken out over the power plant. Policies on the Pinnan project will be a touchstone for the government's determination and drive in leading Taiwan toward sustainable development.
Sue Lin is a professor in the department of environmental engineering at National Cheng Kung University.
Translated by Francis Huang
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with