On Tuesday, mistakes by CPC Corp, Taiwan personnel stopped gas supplies to the Datan Power Station in Taoyuan for two minutes, tripping all six generators at the plant. At the same time, generators were offline at Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower, 台電) Taichung and Tongsiao power plants, as well as at Ho-Ping Power Co’s plant in Hualien County.
The result was that region after region across Taiwan experienced power outages.
Calls to restore nuclear power were immediately heard, but given the constant problems at power stations, how can anyone have confidence in nuclear power?
The Chernobyl and Three Mile Island nuclear disasters were because of human error.
In Taiwan, oversights during repairs at the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant’s reactor No. 1 in July 2013 caused core cooling to exceed the reactor’s embrittlement alert value for more than an hour; in March last year, reactor No. 2 at the same plant was stopped for four days because a switch had been thrown by mistake.
In March 2003, crane cables at the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant’s reactor No. 1 were connected the wrong way, causing fuel bundles to slip and fall; in November 2012, a circuit breaker of reactor No. 2 at the plant was cut by mistake, resulting in a reactor shutdown.
In April 1996, steam leaked at the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant’s reactor No. 1 because a valve had not been closed; in May, reactor No. 2 at the plant tripped due to operational error.
In May 2010, equipment at the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant reactor No. 1 burned because the wrong equipment was used during cleaning, which caused an error in a control chip; and in July 2010, false firing caused the wrong signal to be sent, resulting in loss of external power for 28 hours.
Had the Longmen plant in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮) been operational during the last of those incidents on the list, Taiwan would have experienced a nuclear disaster.
Problems at non-nuclear power stations mean temporary inconveniences; a nuclear disaster could mean life or death for a small nation like Taiwan.
Article 95 of the Electricity Act (電業法) states that “the nuclear-energy-based power-generating facilities shall wholly stop running by 2025.”
Continued demands that nuclear plants be kept online ignores the law, and even if the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant — which was plagued by problems during construction — was to become operational and fortune kept it free from accidents, making it operational would not be economically feasible, as it would have to be decommissioned in under eight years.
Tuesday’s power outage was not a matter of insufficient power facilities, it was an accident. Fortunately, it was not an accident at a nuclear plant.
Hopefully the government will stick to its guns and make Taiwan a nuclear-free nation.
Tsai Ya-ying is a lawyer at the Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association.
Translated by Perry Svensson
What began on Feb. 28 as a military campaign against Iran quickly became the largest energy-supply disruption in modern times. Unlike the oil crises of the 1970s, which stemmed from producer-led embargoes, US President Donald Trump is the first leader in modern history to trigger a cascading global energy crisis through direct military action. In the process, Trump has also laid bare Taiwan’s strategic and economic fragilities, offering Beijing a real-time tutorial in how to exploit them. Repairing the damage to Persian Gulf oil and gas infrastructure could take years, suggesting that elevated energy prices are likely to persist. But the most
Taiwan should reject two flawed answers to the Eswatini controversy: that diplomatic allies no longer matter, or that they must be preserved at any cost. The sustainable answer is to maintain formal diplomatic relations while redesigning development relationships around transparency, local ownership and democratic accountability. President William Lai’s (賴清德) canceled trip to Eswatini has elicited two predictable reactions in Taiwan. One camp has argued that the episode proves Taiwan must double down on support for every remaining diplomatic ally, because Beijing is tightening the screws, and formal recognition is too scarce to risk. The other says the opposite: If maintaining
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文), during an interview for the podcast Lanshuan Time (蘭萱時間) released on Monday, said that a US professor had said that she deserved to be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize following her meeting earlier this month with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). Cheng’s “journey of peace” has garnered attention from overseas and from within Taiwan. The latest My Formosa poll, conducted last week after the Cheng-Xi meeting, shows that Cheng’s approval rating is 31.5 percent, up 7.6 percentage points compared with the month before. The same poll showed that 44.5 percent of respondents
India’s semiconductor strategy is undergoing a quiet, but significant, recalibration. With the rollout of India Semiconductor Mission (ISM) 2.0, New Delhi is signaling a shift away from ambition-driven leaps toward a more grounded, capability-led approach rooted in industrial realities and institutional learning. Rather than attempting to enter the most advanced nodes immediately, India has chosen to prioritize mature technologies in the 28-nanometer to 65-nanometer range. That would not be a retreat, but a strategic alignment with domestic capabilities, market demand and global supply chain gaps. The shift carries the imprimatur of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, indicating that the recalibration is
RSS