The nuclear crisis unfolding at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan has gained the attention and sympathy of people around the world. The crisis has also brought the issue of economic development versus environmental and ecological protection back into focus.
As human beings, we are never satisfied and are constantly striving to outdo what the previous generations have achieved — and in most cases, lack restraint in our quest for development. We need to change our approach to how we treat the natural world, and try not to be so destructive in the rush to progress.
First, it is true that global oil prices are soaring. However, this is not necessarily because global energy resources are about to be exhausted. While oil fields are scattered around the world, the right and the means to exploit these resources are mainly controlled by energy firms from the UK, the US, the Netherlands and France. Moreover, a majority of the oil-exporting nations have less-developed democracies. The most likely explanation for sudden oil price hikes, apart from increased demand from emerging markets, is that after 2000 we saw a different group of economic powers uniting in their attempts to monopolize access to the supply of energy sources. These factors, combined with access to easy financing and the subsequent financial crisis, which saw trade dry up and companies and governments’ finances fall into the red, all conspired to cause a considerable drop in the US dollar’s value.
Second, there are several sources of renewable energy that have been heavily subsidized by governments, despite not having any inherent commercial value. For example, additives for biodiesel can be extracted from corn, and that these crops are used on land that could otherwise have been used for food crops has been a major factor in huge increases in food prices. These huge subsidies have caused huge fluctuations in the price of corn within the US. Even in Germany, where people are very environmentally conscious, there has been a great deal of difficulty in selling the idea of biofuels. The US company DuPont has already developed the technology to extract fuel additives and maximize combustion efficiency. However, during the administration of former US president George W. Bush, oil companies put pressure on DuPont to withdraw its support for legislation on fuel additives being proposed in the US Congress.
The technology for making ethanol out of sugar cane, the cheapest form of fuel, has been around for a long time. However, this technology still has not made it to the supply chains of advanced nations. There has been no legislation that would allow auto manufacturers to change engine designs to enable cars to run on this cheaper form of fuel. If they did, gas stations would be able to sell a much cheaper alternative to gasoline.
Lastly, South Korea and Germany are still heavily dependent on nuclear energy, while Russia, the US and China have plans for more nuclear plants. Iceland’s economy, which is mostly reliant on renewable energy, is on the verge of collapse, while continued economic competition between Taiwan, Japan and South Korea is unavoidable. Therefore, I see no end to the development and use of nuclear power in the near future. If 250km is supposed to be a safe evacuation distance in the event of a nuclear disaster, even New York would be at risk since it has the Indian Point nuclear reactor located a mere 80km away. With so many nuclear-powered submarines and aircraft carriers cruising around near the Taiwan Strait, Taiwan is definitely not safe from nuclear energy.
When discussing energy policies, we need to put ideology aside and take on more responsibility for our future generations and the environment. We also need to have a good understanding of the international economic situation and the limitations of technological developments and their use. This is the only way to avoid being used by people and groups with vested interests. During the recent series of disasters in Japan, we saw the universal, humanitarian values that Taiwanese have. This is a good thing. If we could take things to a new level and get the public to take part in discussions on major policies, Taiwan would be setting an example for other nations.
Lu Hsin-chang is a professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of International Business.
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
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
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.