An environmental impact assessment (EIA) for the fourth developmental stage of the Central Science Park in Erlin Township (二林), Changhua County, was passed recently. The Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) said that the EIA was passed using stricter requirements than the preliminary review and it rejected criticism from environmental groups that the case is moving further and further away from environmental protection standards.
After looking closely at the EIA review process, we have to ask whether the EIA adequately addressed concerns raised by local residents and the environmental groups.
The EPA found that plans for two ocean outfall pipes were acceptable because, based on environmental protection expertise, the main environmental goals of protecting public health and not affecting irrigation and coastal aquaculture breeding could be guaranteed. This is utter nonsense.
The apple snails in Siaoli River (霄裡溪) — designated by the government as a “Category A water body” — were unable to survive after the river started receiving waste water from optoelectronics factories in the area.
The EPA even sent out an official letter instructing local residents not to use water from the river and then transported water there for local resident use.
Farmers who used the waste water to irrigate crops had to abandon them because the rice could not mature.
Waste water is still being pumped into the Siaoli River, and the EPA has been unable to solve this problem despite holding an endless number of meetings.
How are we supposed to believe that EIAs are being carried out professionally? Let us not forget that optoelectronics factories belonging to AU Optronics and Chunghwa Picture Tubes on the upper reaches of the Siaoli River also passed EIAs.
If the waste water really is as safe as the EPA guarantees, why do plans for waste water management continue to change?
In response to questions and concerns from legislators and county commissioners, and in an attempt to soothe public concern, Premier Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) said the waste water would be channeled through dedicated ocean outfall pipes that will pump the water 3km further out to sea.
EPA Minister Stephen Shen (沈世宏) also said that common sense should tell us that a plan devised by the Cabinet would be “better” than conclusions reached by an environmental impact assessment committee.
If so, shouldn’t this “common sense plan” be subjected to an EIA instead of being turned into a supplementary executive resolution that is not binding on the developers, thus allowing them to act as they see fit?
Through this process, the worth of Wu’s promises has been greatly diminished.
Just as the policy of increasing US beef imports extends beyond the question of personal choice, so is the EPA’s decision in this case a threat to the health, safety and sustainability of the nation’s food supply and the environment. It is not enough for the government to claim it has fulfilled its responsibilities and expect citizens to deal with the risks themselves.
The waste water drainage that the EPA claims to be safe will now affect 60 percent of Taiwan’s vegetable supply. Along the Jhuoshuei River (濁水溪) and near its mouth there are 5 million pigs and chickens, cows that produce fresh milk, as well as clam and oyster farms worth NT$6.4 billion (US$197 million) per year. Who will take responsibility for the damage to the health of the public once these resources are tainted?
Whether it be policies for importing US beef or the EPA’s Central Science Park dealings, the government has ignored sound public objections, imperiling both public health and the credibility of environmental impact assessments.
Now, when a problem arises, the government is calling on the public to deal with the issue themselves. This kind of administrative logic is tantamount to declaring that Taiwan has become a society that ignores — and even indulges in — high risk.
Tu Wenling is an associate professor in the Department of Public Policy and Management at Shih Hsin University and Chair of the Taiwan Environmental Action Network.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with