Without mining, industry would not be possible: Most of the raw materials needed for industry and manufacturing come from mining.
In 2015 the total production from mining in Taiwan was 18.06 million tonnes, consisting predominantly of marble, limestone and serpentine, in addition to more modest volumes of dolomite, silicon, mica, talc, Taiwan jade, rose stone and blue chalcedony. These were in addition to the petroleum and natural gas produced by CPC Corp, Taiwan.
Although the reserves of marble and limestone are the most plentiful of that list, the amounts extracted can regulate supply and demand, and stabilize prices, both of which are beneficial in retaining downstream industries in Taiwan, and creating and maintaining jobs.
Mining inevitably causes an environmental impact. There are voices in Taiwan that would prefer people did not mine in their own backyard. The natural corollary is of course that the mining is carried out in somebody else’s backyard.
In 2015, Taiwan imported 177.72 million tonnes of minerals and rocks, and exported 1.52 million tonnes. Therefore, the amount of rocks and minerals that are imported far outstrips the amount it exports.
The amount of carbon emissions from shipping these rocks and minerals all the way from overseas is considerable, and runs counter to the global effort to reduce such emissions. Indeed, the most environmentally responsible approach would be to use raw materials in the same place they are extracted.
The Legislative Yuan is considering amendments to the Mining Act (礦業法), with eight versions proposed by legislative committees, in addition to a version proposed by the Cabinet.
The two most important points in these proposals concern whether mining rights remain valid during the period between the expiration of those rights and the approval date for application for an extension — in other words, can mining continue — and whether it is necessary to reapply to use land approved for mining operations after the extension of mining rights has been approved.
According to Article 13 of the act, mining rights expire after 20 years, but after this period, organizations can apply for an extension.
There is a considerable difference between investing in mining and investing in other projects, because of the high risks, slow returns and high initial investment involved. To protect mining sector investors, many nations allow mining rights to extend until the project ends, rather than imposing an expiry date on them.
To the second point, it makes no sense for an organization whose mining rights have been extended to have to reapply for permission to operate. As the land was approved for mining operations, an enterprise will obviously continue to work on the same land if its permission is extended. It will not look to develop a different area. So what is the point in requiring them to reapply?
Mining provides the natural resources that people need to live. The question is: How do we balance mining and environmental protection?
Would it be possible to mine in people’s backyards — others’ as well as our own — if commitment to planning how the land is to be repurposed before it is cut into could be made, proper attention is paid to environmental and water conservation, engineering safety during the mining process is assured and the land could be properly repurposed when the operation is complete?
Tsai Sui is chairman of Sinyan Engineering Consultants Co.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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