After two companies were investigated by prosecutors in Kaohsiung City recently for providing incinerator operators with low-grade activated carbon — used to absorb dioxin emissions during waste incineration — the plans current Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) had as chief of the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) to build an incineration plant in each city and county have once again received a lot of attention. The EPA hoped to build 36 incinerators around the country capable of handling 24,000 tonnes of trash per day. Because of doubts expressed by environmental protection groups, experts and academics and protests from local residents, however, plans to build some of the incineration plants were canceled.
EPA statistics show that the 24 incineration plants now operating around the country are capable of handling approximately 20,000 tonnes of trash per day. There is a trash recycling rate of about 30 percent because of government enforced recycling and an increased public awareness. The statistics also show that the trash produced by each Taiwanese per day has dropped to 0.5kg, creating a total of approximately 13,000 tonnes of trash daily.
Government policy is that recycling rates are expected to reach 40 percent by next year. That should mean that the trash produced in Taiwan daily would drop to about 10,000 tonnes per day and most of the incinerators would run out of trash to burn.
The contracts for incineration plants built as BOT projects state that the government must pay operators NT$2,500 per tonne of trash that each plant is certified to handle, even if there isn’t that much trash. To use the BOT incinerator project in Linnei (林內) Township, Yunlin County, as an example, former Yunlin County commissioner Chang Jung-wei (張榮味) signed a contract with the operator guaranteeing 600 tonnes of trash per day for incineration. This implies that the government must pay the operator a total of NT$1.5 million per day, more than NT$500 million a year, in trash disposal fees. This contract was signed for a period of 20 years, even though the daily amount of trash in Yunlin County is currently only 300 tonnes.
The recent report about low-grade activated carbon also dealt a severe blow to the EPA’s ability to monitor incinerator operations. It clearly shows that the government does not know how to control and test dioxin emissions at incinerators and that operators were using activated carbon of poor quality for as long as six years without the authorities finding out. The EPA needs to reassess its policies for monitoring and managing incineration plants.
Incineration is not the best way to handle trash. Apart from the dioxins produced during incineration, other poisonous gasses are also emitted. When we burn trash, it doesn’t just disappear, it is merely transformed into pollutants that are smaller and harder to see. Heavy metals are an example of substances that cannot be disposed of via incineration. Such substances must be sent to special landfill sites for disposal.
Last year, a scandal erupted surrounding dioxin-contaminated ducks. It was caused by illegal disposed dust and slag.
The real source of trash is unbridled consumption. Mass consumption and unbalanced lifestyles waste money for everyone and damage the environment. Politicians should see the bigger picture instead of blindly and persistently encouraging people to consume more and forgetting the high price we all have to pay.
As long as the government fails to clear up the contradictions and inconsistencies of its policies, we must become more responsible and smarter as consumers.
Chang Hung-lin is chairperson of the Green Party Taiwan.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS