After the disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan in March 2011, German Chancellor Angela Merkel got together academics and experts from different backgrounds, such as the social sciences, politics, religion and economics. She also made sure that these people represented different points of view on the issue at hand. An ethics commission co-chaired by former German environment minister Klaus Toepfer and German Research Foundation president Matthias Kleiner was established and discussions on whether Germany should abolish nuclear energy were held, with a special focus on important issues such as the ethics of nation’s future energy policies and sustainable development.
If we look closely at the commission’s official report to Merkel, what stands out is not the process adopted by Germany’s leaders to hold this national affairs conference, as Taiwan has also done this on many occasions, but rather what was discussed and the depth of the discussions.
Members of the ethics commission had very different opinions about the use of nuclear power, but the report issued after the discussions came up with two key points that would decide Germany’s ethical position toward its future development of nuclear energy: sustainability and responsibility.
Not only did the members feel that they had to consider the relationship between humankind and nature, they also felt that it was necessary to consider the burdens and assets that social development would leave for future generations.
The ethics commission also debated nuclear power and how it is related to important issues such as risk management, climate change, energy security, cost effectiveness, the financial burden, national competitiveness, research and innovation, and avoiding relying on imported energy resources.
Within the ethics commission, at the start, there was no common ground between those against and for nuclear power, but — given the high risk of nuclear power and its failure to stand up to ethical scrutiny — as the talks went on, there was growing common ground around issues such as whether or not there are other forms of energy available that can replace nuclear power, whether or not Germany had the ability to carry out such a large change of energy sources, and what the costs and benefits of such a change would be.
The report concluded that given Germany’s current situation, it would be possible for the nation in the short-term to abolish nuclear power and to start using other energy sources. It also concluded that this required the full agreement of all of German society and its commitment to move in that direction. The report also gave concrete suggestions for measures to be taken.
However, the premise of all of these suggested measures was that all Germans would have to cooperate wholeheartedly and that for things to succeed, politics, law, economics and technology would need to be fully integrated, with everyone involved taking on equal responsibility for the new goals.
Could we hope that the same kind of thing could happen here in Taiwan?
When it comes to Taiwan’s development, is the government able to open up and let the public understand what the options are, and about the related discourse on ethical and social issues?
The government should not keep using scare tactics and incorrect information, and stop its sly political scheming.
Tsai Yueh-hsun is an associate professor of law at National Yunlin University of Science and Technology’s Graduate School of Science and Technology.
Translated by Drew Cameron
When former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) first took office in 2016, she set ambitious goals for remaking the energy mix in Taiwan. At the core of this effort was a significant expansion of the percentage of renewable energy generated to keep pace with growing domestic and global demands to reduce emissions. This effort met with broad bipartisan support as all three major parties placed expanding renewable energy at the center of their energy platforms. However, over the past several years partisanship has become a major headwind in realizing a set of energy goals that all three parties profess to want. Tsai
An elderly mother and her daughter were found dead in Kaohsiung after having not been seen for several days, discovered only when a foul odor began to spread and drew neighbors’ attention. There have been many similar cases, but it is particularly troubling that some of the victims were excluded from the social welfare safety net because they did not meet eligibility criteria. According to media reports, the middle-aged daughter had sought help from the local borough warden. Although the warden did step in, many services were unavailable without out-of-pocket payments due to issues with eligibility, leaving the warden’s hands
Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesman Randhir Jaiswal told a news conference on Jan. 9, in response to China’s latest round of live-fire exercises in the Taiwan Strait: “India has an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our trade, economic, people-to-people and maritime interests. We urge all parties to exercise restraint, avoid unilateral actions and resolve issues peacefully without threat or use of force.” The statement set a firm tone at the beginning of the year for India-Taiwan relations, and reflects New Delhi’s recognition of shared interests and the strategic importance of regional stability. While India
A survey released on Wednesday by the Taiwan Inspiration Association (TIA) offered a stark look into public feeling on national security. Its results indicate concern over the nation’s defensive capability as well as skepticism about the government’s ability to safeguard it. Slightly more than 70 percent of respondents said they do not believe Taiwan has sufficient capacity to defend itself in the event of war, saying there is a lack of advanced military hardware. At the same time, 62.5 percent opposed the opposition’s efforts to block the government’s NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.6 billion) special defense budget. More than half of respondents — 56.4
RSS