There are no guarantees in this world that anything is completely safe and nuclear power is no exception.
Today we face extreme weather events and frequent seismic activity. Given the attendant risks, not even cutting-edge technology can provide safety guarantees, and this is also true for nuclear power stations.
In the past, anti-earthquake designs were built to withstand peak ground accelerations (PGAs) of 0.3G (the acceleration of the Earth’s gravity, equivilant to g-force) or 0.4G, and stand up to quakes registering magnitude 6, 7 or 8.
Then, Japan suffered the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear disaster caused by a major quake on March 11, 2011, that registered magnitude 9, creating a tsunami more than 40m high and shattering any illusions of assured nuclear safety.
The subsequent chain of events brought about by these disasters, combined with the damage wrought to the nuclear power plant facilities, cost at least 15,854 lives, and the destruction of over a million buildings. This was the most tragic natural disaster, in terms of the human cost, in post-war Japan.
From the way Taiwan Power Co is constantly putting back its timetable for upgrading the earthquake-proof facilities at the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s (新北市), Shihmen District (石門), forcing the Atomic Energy Council in November last year to announce an ultimatum using the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法), it seems that the earthquake-proofing of the nation’s nuclear power facilities is cause for concern.
The Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市), is reputed to include safety precautions such as shut down at a PGA of 0.4g, making it able to withstand earthquakes of magnitude 8. Still, it is not known whether it could cope with quakes measuring magnitude 9.
Like Taiwan, California lies on the Pacific Ring of Fire and last year the US Geological Survey said there is a 46 percent probability that the state will experience a major earthquake of magnitude 7.5 or over before 2038. Experts have also said that an earthquake of more than magnitude 9 is due in the Manila Trench, which extends from the west of the Philippines to the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwan is also the only country in the world to place a nuclear power plant within 50km of its capital city, and political and economic center.
According to the UK-based global risk and strategic consulting firm Maplecroft, more than one in 10 of the world’s 442 nuclear power plants are located in areas designated as high or extremely high risk. Taiwan is one of these areas, and experts warn that these plants face the same risks as Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi plant, but lack Japan’s ability to address them.
Not so long ago the concept of extreme weather disasters had yet to percolate into the global consciousness. A recent US National Climate Assessment report showed that the mainstream media were ignorant of the risks of earthquakes and tsunamis, and were inadequately informed about the earth sciences.
Taiwan is not a suitable place to build nuclear power plants, given the high incidence of natural disasters in this area.
Irene Chen (陳藹玲), founder of Mom Loves Taiwan, an association for mothers against nuclear power, put it best when she asked: “How much compensation would it take to make gambling the lives of millions of people, and the very future of the country, worthwhile?”
“This isn’t a question for the experts, it’s a simple question of logic,” she added.
How right she is.
Lu I-ming previously served as a member of a watchdog monitoring Taiwan Power Co.
Translated by Paul Cooper
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS