On Tuesday last week, Kuo Way (郭位), president of City University of Hong Kong, made a presentation on nuclear power at the Presidential Office in Taipei, during which President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) asked about global trends. Kuo was an almost permanent fixture in the media during the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear crisis, speaking in his capacity as an expert on nuclear safety about the crisis at the Fukushima plant itself and of the implications for the Daya Bay Nuclear Power Plant in Guangdong, China, and refuting claims that eating salt could protect humans against radiation.
Kuo, a Tsing Hua University graduate with a background in nuclear engineering, spoke of the need to be careful over the impact of violent unrest on the future of nuclear power stations in Taiwan, and — particularly risible — the danger posed by a lack of understanding about nuclear power plants and nuclear safety, and the many serious misconceptions that these lead to, threatening to cause social unrest. He said that it was therefore extremely important to devise effective and persuasive arguments to address these misconceptions, and asked what might be the best way forward.
Kuo is a great advocate of nuclear power. When Ma asked him about global trends in nuclear power, everybody already knew what his answer would be, even before Ma had lowered the microphone. There are as many opinions and perspectives on whether we should develop nuclear power as there are people giving them, so he has the right to express his own beliefs. Nevertheless, if he were trying to promote nuclear power while feigning neutrality, one wonders whether he is protecting certain energy interests.
According to the World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2010 co-authored by Mycle Schneider, who visited Taiwan last year, the percentage of global power provided by nuclear power stations peaked in 1993, when it stood at 17 percent, after which it has steadily declined.
In 2011, it represented only 11 percent. The overall output of nuclear energy globally reached its highest point in 2006, when it stood at 2,660 terawatt hours (Twh, equivalent to 1 billion kilowatts, kWh), falling to 2,518 Twh in 2011. The vast majority of countries producing nuclear power have already passed their peak in terms of the construction of nuclear power plants.
Even before the Fukushima Dai-ichi disaster, the global nuclear power industry had already hit a wall, due to all the uncertainty surrounding it, and this saw a corresponding and gradual rise in the development of renewable energy sources.
While soliciting the advice of authorities undoubtedly contributes to the debate, when such expert opinion has long been monopolized by those in power, it is also important to continue to bring in differing expert opinions. The meeting in the Presidential Office added little to the public debate. The message the office wanted to pass on to the public was loud and clear: Nuclear power is the way forward, it is the policy the government needs to take.
When Ma goes from saying, as he did almost exactly a year ago at a press conference, “We felt that no one was against [nuclear power] at the time,” to saying the public is just in a blind panic over the issue and that the government needs to be more persuasive, he is treating the public like children, and insulting its intelligence.
More recently, the government has systematically used the state mechanism in tackling public opinion, in the mistaken belief that merely by rolling out a few pro-nuclear spokespersons it will be able to dispel the massive wave of anti-nuclear sentiment among the public.
Ma has said that the issue of the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City (新北市), can be resolved through a referendum. While this may appear to be a democratic solution, it is nothing of the sort, as the government holds a monopoly over relevant information.
Also, the government’s policy of gradually phasing out nuclear power is simply a delaying tactic designed to pull the wool over our eyes. One can imagine that next the government will attempt to use the advantage of access to resources to try to brainwash people and make them believe that we need nuclear power. The government is already resolved to promote nuclear power, and is not willing to hear what the public has to say on the matter.
Tsui Shu-hsin is secretary-general of the Green Citizens’ Action Alliance, Taiwan.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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 the opening remarks of her meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on Friday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) framed her visit as a historic occasion. In his own remarks, Xi had also emphasized the history of the relationship between the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Where they differed was that Cheng’s account, while flawed by its omissions, at least partially corresponded to reality. The meeting was certainly historic, albeit not in the way that Cheng and Xi were signaling, and not from the perspective
RSS