It is difficult to know whether the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) announcement last week that Taiwan plans to present a "green" initiative during next month's APEC forum was some kind of joke.
After all, Taiwan has doubled its carbon dioxide emissions since 1990, the baseline year of the Kyoto Protocol, while the government -- if we are to believe environmental groups -- recently reshuffled its environmental review commission in order to rid it of anyone opposed to development on environmental grounds. This came soon after the president told an association of industrialists that "the government should not make environmental protection policy so stringent as to force out enterprises."
If the nation were really serious about reducing carbon dioxide emissions, tackling climate change and reducing its dependence on energy imports, then it would have already begun to make better use of emission-free power sources, including the vast amounts of untapped potential it possesses in solar, hydroelectric and geothermal power generation.
It would also be trying to reduce the amount of power it generates using fossil fuels, which the Bureau of Energy (BOE) puts at 68 percent.
Taiwan has more than 100 geothermal sites but so far only small-scale experimental geothermal power generation. In contrast, Iceland uses its geothermal resources to great effect, heating around 90 percent of all homes and also generating electricity.
Taiwan receives a lot of sunlight and is a big producer of solar panels, but we do not have any large-scale solar power plants.
We could also better utilize hydroelectric power; currently just 15 percent of national power is generated in this way. In contrast, Norway, a country with similar terrain, generates 99 percent of its needs through hydroelectricity.
Wind-generated energy, although on the increase, does not yet make up a single percentage point.
Another emission-free option is nuclear power, which despite its controversial nature, should not be ruled out as it may be the best choice if Taiwan is really serious about reducing emission levels quickly.
But instead of concentrating on domestic issues and tackling the causes of climate change, officials like EPA Minister Winston Dang (
While this is undoubtedly true, whining about it will not solve anything.
If Taiwan were to forge ahead with its own investment in renewables and become a world leader in certain fields, then other countries would come knocking at our door, regardless of what China says.
Not being a member of international bodies means there are no restrictions on what we can do. Taiwan should put its engineers to work and use their skills in innovation in the renewable energy sector, while setting itself ambitious targets for renewable energy.
Instead, the BOE has set itself a target to double the percentage of electricity generated by renewable energy sources to a measly 10 percent by 2010.
While it is okay to promote green initiatives at APEC if you are serious about environmental issues, it is not okay if back home you are on the verge of allowing Formosa Plastics and CPC Corp, Taiwan to open new plants that environmentalists claim will raise Taiwan's emissions by a further 40 percent.
If the government wants to preach to other nations, then it should stop bowing to the demands of industrialists and curtail its Jekyll and Hyde attitude toward the environment, otherwise no one will ever be able to take it seriously.
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
When it became clear that the world was entering a new era with a radical change in the US’ global stance in US President Donald Trump’s second term, many in Taiwan were concerned about what this meant for the nation’s defense against China. Instability and disruption are dangerous. Chaos introduces unknowns. There was a sense that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) might have a point with its tendency not to trust the US. The world order is certainly changing, but concerns about the implications for Taiwan of this disruption left many blind to how the same forces might also weaken
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS