On the evening of Monday, March 25, Premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺), who stands with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in supporting nuclear power, met with Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌), New Taipei City (新北市) Mayor Eric Chu (朱立倫) and Keelung Mayor Chang Tong-rong (張通榮) to discuss the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City, and related issues.
According to media reports, Jiang said at the meeting that “it is true that the government does not have a complete plan on how to handle nuclear waste.”
One reason nuclear power plants are so frightening is precisely that “it is true that the government does not have a complete plan on how to handle nuclear waste.”
Although he tried to moderate his statement, Jiang’s inadvertent admission that the government has no plans for the safe handling of nuclear waste will undoubtedly have an impact on the eventual fate of nuclear power plants in Taiwan.
If Jiang had any academic conscience and political morals, what he should have said was: “It is true that, so far, our government does not have a complete plan on how to handle nuclear waste. Not only that, the US, Japanese, Russian or French governments, despite their advanced use of nuclear energy, also don’t have a complete plan on how to deal with nuclear waste.”
There are three levels to this statement. On the first level, by virtue of having nuclear power plants, there will be nuclear waste. This waste is not the kind of poison that will be around for a mere 100 years: It is something we will have to live with for centuries.
Without a complete plan for the handling of nuclear waste, why is there so much talk about “nuclear safety? Does it not mean Ma’s statement that “without nuclear safety, there will be no Fourth Nuclear Power Plant” is just hot air?
On the second level, be it at nuclear waste storage sites on Lanyu (蘭嶼), also known as Orchid Island, or at any of the nation’s other three nuclear power plants, the existing temporary storage sites for nuclear waste are becoming overfull.
Since Ma and his clique have no way of handling the nuclear waste at these sites, how can they go on talking about building a fourth plant and producing more nuclear waste?
Finally, on the third level, at a time when there is no complete plan for dealing with nuclear waste, one wonders what astronomical sums will have to be spent before a solution is found, if ever.
Since it cannot be estimated how deep the money pit of nuclear waste treatment will be, how can Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) go on claiming that “nuclear power is the cheapest” of all energy sources? Does Taipower not include the cost of a final solution for the treatment of nuclear waste in the cost of nuclear energy production?
In short, Jiang’s statement that “it is true that the government does not have a complete plan on how to handle nuclear waste materials” is sufficient to poke a big hole in the balloon of lies about how cheap nuclear energy is.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past