Opponents of nuclear energy are sure to be dismayed that the Atomic Energy Council on Monday approved the restart of the No. 2 reactor at the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里).
Technically, there is nothing wrong with the decision, as the reactor’s license runs until 2023 and there are still a few years to go before the government’s pledge to completely phase out nuclear energy by 2025.
The reactor has been mothballed for 600 days following damage in 2016 and, while the concerns of environmentalists are indeed valid, the council said that it has been monitoring Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) maintenance of the reactor and would continue to ensure safe operations according to the law.
However, the council was also supposed to be monitoring Taipower’s maintenance of the reactor before it broke down two years ago.
Fortunately, disaster was averted that time, but it is an old reactor and humans are doing the monitoring, so some things could go undetected.
Furthermore, things do happen that are completely out of Taipower’s control, such as natural disasters or sabotage.
So there is cause for alarm, even if it is just speculation.
The reactor restart also casts doubt on the government’s statements, as in August last year, when then-premier Lin Chuan (林全) “rejected the possibility of restarting inactive nuclear reactors, despite the risk of further power shortages,” asking Taipower to “fill the power gap.”
Premier William Lai (賴清德) in November last year said that he would not consider restarting nuclear reactors in the event of an electricity shortage and later in the same news conference said nuclear energy would be the “last resort.”
On Friday last week, Lai said that Taipower’s application to restart the reactor is standard procedure and that it has absolutely nothing to do with the administration’s pledge to establish a “nuclear-free homeland” by 2025.
Asked about electricity shortages, Lai said that “the company’s power generation would undoubtedly be enough to cover this year’s consumption.”
That statement was made three days before the reactor restart was approved.
Lai knew that restarting the reactor would create a huge public backlash regardless of whether it has anything to do with the government’s pledge, and with public distrust of the administration mounting, it makes one question whether things are more serious than Lai makes out and whether the government’s pledge is realistic.
Taipower claims that the reactor is merely being restarted so it can bolster its energy reserves, but is the nation really in a place where the only option was to restart a broken and aging reactor?
Despite the government’s pledge and years of protests against nuclear power, there are also experts who see nuclear energy as a good thing and as the decision to restart the reactor has already been made and technically does not violate the government’s promises, the public can only hope for the best and that nothing catastrophic happens.
The council on Sunday said that Taipower is still looking for a site to store its nuclear waste.
Taiwan is not the US, where there is plenty of land far away enough from settlements to do this, and hence it was dumped on the Tao Aborigines on Orchid Island (Lanyu, 蘭嶼) in the 1990s.
The government cannot do something like that again and whatever site Taipower finally chooses it is sure to cause a public outcry.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers