The first National Conference on an Environmental Action Plan Toward Sustainability was held last Friday and Saturday. As expected, no binding conclusions were reached, nor was the event considered important by the media or the public. Academia Sinica President Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲) even said in his opening speech that he supported the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant and keeping the first three plants open.
Given that Lee's views were contrary to those of most of the attendees, it was clear the conference would fail to reach a consensus on how to achieve sustainable development.
The key question is whether the government has set goals for the reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and clearly set restrictions on energy-intensive industries. Given that Taiwan is not a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, there is no pressure from the international community to abide by it. Why, then, should Taiwan actively display its commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
Since CO2 does not cause air pollution and the Cabinet is emphasizing "voluntary" rather than "regulated" reductions in its discussions on greenhouse gases, people may wonder why regulations are necessary.
If the government plans to regulate CO2 emissions and if renewable resources are not able to provide enough energy to meet the demands of economic development, then why not opt for nuclear power?
If Taiwan is to be built as a "nuclear-free homeland," then in the current situation with high gasoline prices, would building thermal power plants be the only solution? And if so, wouldn't that in fact emit more air pollutants?
From the point of view of sustainable development, the hope of future generations lies in creating a balance between economic development, environmental protection and social justice. Is the reduction of CO2 emissions really key to fulfilling this hope? A less controversial option than nuclear power would be gasified coal, increasing the energy efficiency of coal and capturing CO2 and injecting it into the earth crust, as currently promoted by the US.
The key problem, however, is energy consumption, and whichever method is used will not be able to curb its growth.
In recent years, Taiwan's economic transformation has slowed, and as a result, energy consumption is growing faster than the economy. If energy-intensive industries continue to expand, soaring energy prices mean that regardless of whether we turn to nuclear power or gasified coal, we still cannot expect satisfactory economic growth. The main result will be the emergence of more social alienation, deteriorating social order and growing number of suicidal people.
Obviously, in order to reach the goal of sustainable development for Taiwan, we should make it our priority to slow energy consumption to avert the current energy crisis and resolve the problem with increasing CO2 emissions. Only in this way can we control energy consumption and promote development.
When discussing sustainable development at a conference, a consensus should be built on the limits of Taiwan's capacity, rather than nit-picking specific cases. It is a pity that the conference did not meet the expectations of environmental activists or promote the idea that environmental protection can help the economy.
An "economic sustainability conference" is scheduled for June, and it will likely be driven by political rather than sustainable development concerns. Given the fact that priority is given to economic development over environmental protection, the development of high energy-consuming industries is an inescapable reality.
Liu Chung-ming is director of the Global Change Research Center at National Taiwan University.
Translated by Lin Ya-ti
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US