Print

Mail

wiki links

Everyone can choose nuclear-free

On Feb. 18, Academia Sinica's research group for environment and energy resources took aim at global warming by issuing a statement addressing the government's energy policy, but the different players seem to focus only on the position of former Academia Sinica president and Nobel laureate Lee Yuan-tseh (李遠哲), who is in favor of the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, and use this as evidence that the Democratic Progressive Party's (DPP) anti-nuclear energy policy is inappropriate and bad for Taiwan's economy.

DPP presidential candidate Frank Hsieh (謝長廷) has made a vague statement, saying the DPP is against building new nuclear reactors, but since the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant is not new, it can be discussed, regardless of the DPP's position against nuclear energy. Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) says he not only wants to continue construction of the power plant, but that he wants to speed up construction.

Forces in civil society have built a consensus for a "nuclear-free homeland," but political players appear to be ignoring this consensus, leading to worries that it will be difficult to discuss the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant and energy policy rationally.

The DPP benefitted from the support of the social forces that came together in opposition to the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, but after coming to power, the DPP government's unskilled handling of the issue has tainted the reputation of the anti-nuclear movement. Now Hsieh reaffirms that the DPP is against building any new nuclear reactors, but says existing reactors can continue to operate. This not only goes against the spirit of the DPP's charter, but also eradicates a piece of popular history. It is in fact the same view that the KMT took during the debacle surrounding the government's attempt to close down construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in 2000.

The reality is that choosing nuclear energy to counter global warming doesn't contribute to the sustainable development of Taiwan and will instead delay and reduce the development of renewable energy sources.

Academia Sinica's statement said that if the safety of nuclear energy can be assured and nuclear waste can be handled properly, construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should continue, while the continued operation of the first three power plants with additional reactors could be considered. But the statement didn't fully assess whether those first two prerequisites have been met. The statement also ignores recent news that the Taiwan Power Company decided on its own to change the design of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in 395 places, thus potentially creating a safety hazard.

As to the nuclear waste issue, the Taipei County government was recently fined NT$300 million (NT$9.7 million) for storing too much nuclear waste from the first and second nuclear power plants in water basins. Doesn't this alert us to the fact that the nuclear waste problem still has not been solved?

While academics argue that a "nuclear-free homeland" goes against the international mainstream, Let us not forget the results of a 2006 poll carried out by the EU. In the poll, 61 percent of respondents said that even though nuclear power can reduce carbon emissions, they still hoped that the proportion of nuclear energy could be reduced because of the latent danger, in particular since large volumes of carbon dioxide are emitted in the extraction of nuclear fuels, the construction of power plants and the treatment of nuclear waste.

Past estimates of energy needs during Taiwan's industrial development resulted in predictions that the country would encounter power shortages, hence the need for the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. But 20 years later, Taiwan doesn't suffer from power shortages and we have learned that the main issues are power management and estimating power needs.

Princeton University professors Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow conducted research on how to solve the climate problem with existing technologies. Their research shows that if global production of nuclear power triples over the next 50 years, carbon dioxide emissions could be reduced by 1 billion tonnes. However, improving the energy transport system could reduce carbon emissions by twice as much, and increasing energy efficiency could reduce emissions by three times as much. Even measures like reforestation can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by twice as much as the use of nuclear power. Against the current backdrop of greenhouse gas considerations, to propose the continued construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant and the continued use of existing nuclear power plants with additional reactors and hope that nuclear energy will reduce greenhouse gas emissions is unrealistic.

The good news is that at the last moment of the presidential election campaign, energy policy is being discussed.

Unfortunately, while both candidates scramble for ideas brought up by academics, bending their former positions or emphasizing that quick action is needed, they quietly put the recommendation aside. On the one hand they talk about saving energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, while on the other hand they quietly allow the construction of Formosa Plastics Corp's steel mill and a Kuokuang Petrochemical Technology plant, two projects that consume a lot of energy and emit 10 percent of the country's greenhouse gases. Politicians and academics should talk with the people who live near those sites.

Let us hope the public can understand why greenhouse gas emissions must be reduced and soon and can change their ideas on production and consumer behavior. Only then will there be an opportunity to avert the global warming crisis.

A "nuclear-free homeland" must be realized. The wish for a Taiwan without nuclear power plants comes from social forces that care about Taiwan's environment. It's a value every person could subscribe to and it must not be used for the advantage of any one political party.

Tan Ui-chi is secretary of the Green Citizens' Action Alliance.

Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
This story has been viewed 1000 times.