Ensuring a stable supply of electricity and an efficient allocation of the nation’s energy resources are key considerations for the government to sustain growth and seek energy security.
As the issue of power supply involves social equity, market openness and national security, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government’s recent push for amendments to the Electricity Act (電業法), which has seen only minor changes in the past three decades, has attracted public attention, with some expressing admiration for the government’s courage to deal with the complicated law, along with the anticipation of a more liberalized power industry.
However, the Executive Yuan’s policy stance toward the amendments — following a meeting between Premier Lin Chuan (林全) and several DPP legislators last week — might dampen hopes of market liberalization any time soon, because state-run Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) would still have a monopoly over the industry in the foreseeable future.
Some people said the amendments are a great step backward from the proposals the Bureau of Energy drafted a few months ago.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs said the bureau will send a final version of the proposed amendments to the Executive Yuan this week for approval, before submitting it to the Legislative Yuan for further review.
However, according to Cabinet spokesman Hsu Kuo-yung’s (徐國勇) remarks on Thursday, the DPP government would focus on the promotion of “renewable” energy in the first phase of the amendment and is planning to push it through the legislature as quickly as possible.
Hsu said the goal of liberalizing the energy industry would be achieved in the second phase of the amendment, when Taipower would be split into two: a power generation company and an electrical grid company.
Hsu said that the second-phase amendment would come into effect about six years after it is passed by the legislature, which can be interpreted as a sign that there is no prescribed timeframe for the liberalization of the electricity market.
The government is being careful not to push the liberalization of the electricity sector too hard to avoid a confrontation with Taipower employees and opposition parties. It is taking this approach at a time when there is a long list of draft bills that it desperately needs to deal with to prop up its flagging approval ratings.
Also, the DPP and its lawmakers might not want a repeat of the tense situation that arose over draft amendments to the Labor Standards Act (勞動基準法) involving the controversial “one fixed day off and one flexible rest day” in every seven working days.
However, a major course correction is necessary, as the demand for breaking Taipower’s monopoly and welcoming private participants to the energy industry keeps rising, while the idea of separating the industry into three categories — power generation, distribution and sales — becomes more accepted.
A reset of the nation’s energy development policy is long overdue and it cannot happen without pain. The liberalization of the nation’s telecoms market about 10 years ago led to lower prices and improved services.
No matter what its political strategy is, the government must understand that the liberalization of the energy industry would not only provide a solution to the dispute over nuclear energy, but also promote price rationalization and energy efficiency in the long term through free and fair competition, and equal participation.
The government should know that the harder it tries to please everyone, the more likely it will end up achieving little or even nothing at all.
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies. As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect. Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way. UNACCEPTABLE Viewing the