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
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
In recent weeks, Taiwan has witnessed a surge of public anxiety over the possible introduction of Indian migrant workers. What began as a policy signal from the Ministry of Labor quickly escalated into a broader controversy. Petitions gathered thousands of signatures within days, political figures issued strong warnings, and social media became saturated with concerns about public safety and social stability. At first glance, this appears to be a straightforward policy question: Should Taiwan introduce Indian migrant workers or not? However, this framing is misleading. The current debate is not fundamentally about India. It is about Taiwan’s labor system, its
RSS