Turning off the lights for one hour to observe Earth Day might eliminate one hour of lighting electricity consumption, but it also means that people have to stop working for that hour.
This can be done once, but it’s impossible to ask people to work in the dark for extended periods. However, it might be feasible if our buildings were designed with natural ventilation and lighting.
Many office buildings are closed structures with sealed windows, and people draw the curtains and turn on fluorescent lights to avoid the heat of direct sunlight.
In fact, simple sunshades with a Venetian blind design can both reduce the use of lights and allow sufficient light to enter. Many convenience stores or grocery stores use dozens of fluorescent lights during the day, raising indoor temperatures and increasing the use of air-conditioning.
It should be possible to reduce artificial lighting while retaining the same indoor brightness. Reducing unnecessary lights would be even more energy-efficient than installing energy-efficient light bulbs.
We should take a comprehensive approach to saving energy and reducing carbon emissions and distinguish symbolic measures from those that require long-term efforts and have long-term effect. While some measures require infrastructure improvements, other can be easily achieved through management or by being implemented in daily life.
For example, we could promote “green consumption,” calling on the public to use green products for basic life necessities, by shopping at “green stores” or staying at environmentally friendly hotels when traveling.
Corporations should also be able to procure green products for their daily necessities, from factory interiors down to office appliances.
The public is often unclear on how to be environmentally friendly. People who think they are protecting the environment often do things that have the opposite effect. One example is a group of students who collected recyclable waste and turned it into art creations to promote recycling, but later threw it away.
Many stores also sell a wide selection of so-called “energy-efficient products,” but these include bogus green products that confuse consumers. Product quality should not drop or prices go up just because a product is labeled a green product.
A while ago there was a detergent sold in simple and environmentally friendly packaging, but the price was higher than detergent in normal packaging.
Policies should be written to prevent similar incidents from reoccurring.
It is very important to build a rigorous certification system to help consumers distinguish certified from non-certified green products.
At present, there are already eco-friendly, energy-efficient, water-saving and green building material labeling schemes.
These schemes use scientific methods and third-party certification to select the most environmentally friendly and energy-efficient products. There are still a lot of products that haven’t yet been included in this system, but if the government and business sector understand this, it should be possible to build a public consensus to expand the scope of green products.
One day, when we cannot buy products without eco-labels and all our buildings are built with green materials, Taiwan will have become a low-carbon emission society. If we all work together, it should be possible to bring about a large reduction in per capita carbon dioxide emissions.
Chen Wen-ching is vice president of the Environment and Development Foundation.
Translated by Ted Yang
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
RSS