The new government has been in power for just over two weeks and while it has not had enough time to produce any major accomplishments, it has succeeded in trivializing the hugely important issues of global warming and how the nation should tackle its disproportionately high carbon emissions.
If the government is to be believed, Taiwan and mankind can reverse the dramatic climatic changes afoot across the globe and prevent the melting of the polar ice caps simply by taking off one’s suit jacket, abstaining from eating meat and swapping one’s car for a model with a slightly smaller engine.
No wonder President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) was heckled last week when he attended an environmental conference, with one activist telling him: “Environmental protection is not just about taking off your suit.”
So far the government has concentrated on cherry picking, focusing on individual actions that can reduce personal carbon footprints. But this will not achieve anything in the long term unless tough, concerted action is taken to tackle the industrial, power-generation and transport sectors at the same time.
One initiative the government seems keen on is the mass planting of trees here and abroad to offset carbon emissions from the industrial sector. But if our new leaders had been paying attention to environmental news, they would have known that the global ecology department at the Carnegie Institution of Washington in Stanford, California, rubbished such activity as “a waste of time” back in 2006.
The government has also talked about nuclear power as a way to meet the nation’s power generation needs, but any new projects would take decades to come on line and would be extremely unpopular. The Atomic Energy Council’s indecision over what to do with all the barrels of waste generated thus far makes this option even more unappealing.
Ma’s problem is a result of his campaign platform. On the one hand he talked about cutting carbon emissions and meeting Kyoto Protocol requirements, but on the other he promised massive infrastructure investment and plans to increase economic output.
The two seem like strange bedfellows, but contrary to popular belief they are not mutually exclusive.
However, to achieve results the government will need to invest vast amounts of money in clean energy and force very tough and unpopular environmental standards on the industrial sector.
Another strategy would be to transform the Environmental Protection Administration’s Environmental Impact Assessment Committee from the role of a rubber stamp that only makes cosmetic changes to applications into something with the power to force future projects — like Formosa Plastics’ petrochemical factory — to include mitigating measures, such as carbon scrubbers on chimney stacks and solar or wind generation to make them energy self-sufficient.
Current indications, including the apparent reluctance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)-dominated legislature to pass the long-stalled carbon emission reduction law, suggest that none of this is going to happen anytime soon.
Yesterday’s announcement on clean energy is a start of sorts, but to cut carbon emissions the Ma administration will also have to pressure the legislature into passing comprehensive environmental regulations. It cannot afford to bet on the goodwill of the industrial sector, otherwise Ma may well end up losing his shirt, not just his jacket.
The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has sent the vast Asian chemicals industry into a tailspin. Deprived of the likes of Qatari natural gas and Saudi Arabian oil, the region’s fertilizer and plastics plants are slowing production or even shutting down. Everywhere except China, that is. In petrochemicals, China is unique. As well as a traditional industry that uses oil and gas as feedstock, it has parallel output that relies on its abundant domestic coal. Unsurprisingly, India and other regional powers want to copy and paste the Chinese method. This would not be easy — or climate friendly. The
KMT Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun’s (鄭麗文) recent visit to Beijing and her upcoming visit to Washington will serve as a high-level test of her diplomatic mettle. In Beijing, Cheng was received with symbolic gestures, a warm reception, and high-level access. In Washington, she will receive far less pomp and far sharper questions about the KMT’s vision for the future of Taiwan. Her challenge will be to persuade Washington that the KMT’s engagement with China can coexist with strong deterrence. Cheng’s April 7-12 visit to mainland China coincided with an intense period of conflict in Iran. Despite the strategic significance of Cheng’s trip,
History might remember 2026, not 2022, as the year artificial intelligence (AI) truly changed everything. ChatGPT’s launch was a product moment. What is happening now is an anthropological moment: AI is no longer merely answering questions. It is now taking initiative and learning from others to get things done, behaving less like software and more like a colleague. The economic consequence is the rise of the one-person company — a structure anticipated in the 2024 book The Choices Amid Great Changes, which I coauthored. The real target of AI is not labor. It is hierarchy. When AI sharply reduces the cost
US President Donald Trump recently repeated his claim that “Taiwan stole America’s chip industry,” reigniting public debate on the issue. As a former Taiwanese minister of economic affairs and an entrepreneur deeply involved in semiconductor supply chain development, I feel a responsibility to clarify this misunderstanding. From the perspective of global industrial evolution and the economic principle of comparative advantage, such a statement appears overly simplistic and risks obscuring the essence of the issue. The rise of Taiwan’s semiconductor industry was not built on “replacing America,” but rather emerged as a result of countries pursuing different development paths within the
RSS