On Sunday, the eve of the eighth anniversary of the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami in Japan — which triggered the disaster at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant — former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and former premier Jiang Yi-huah (江宜樺) organized a forum on nuclear energy.
The purpose was to call on the government to respect the result of last year’s “Go nuclear to go green” referendum, which received 5.89 million “yes” votes.
The forum’s sponsors advocate postponing the decommissioning of the nation’s three operational nuclear power plants — the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Shihmen District (石門), the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant in the city’s Wanli District (萬里) and the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County’s Ma-anshan (馬鞍山) — and completing the construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, the mothballed Longmen site in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮).
At the event, several intellectuals calling themselves academics said that President Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文) administration was treating the referendum process “as a joke.”
However, this is the wording on Referendum No. 16: “Do you agree that subparagraph 1, Article 95 of the Electricity Act (電業法), which reads: ‘Nuclear-energy-based power-generating facilities shall wholly stop running by 2025,’ should be abolished?”
There is no mention of suspending the decommissioning process for Taiwan’s three oldest plants, nor any mention of completing construction of the Longmen plant. In other words, the “Go nuclear to go green” referendum was not a referendum on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant.
As the Chinese idiom says: “Horses’ jaws don’t match cows’ heads.” Ma and Jiang’s latest intervention on nuclear power is incongruous with the question put to voters in November last year.
As for whether to implement an amendment to the act that abolishes Article 95, in accordance with the outcome of the referendum, this should be decided by whichever party is in power in 2025, not the present government.
When the time comes, the government should take into account national electricity requirements and decide whether to implement a complete or partial shutdown of nuclear power plants.
Furthermore, before the Legislative Yuan passes an amendment to the act, the executive branch must only enact policy in accordance with the law as it stands to avoid accusations of malfeasance. The government cannot exceed its authority and act arbitrarily in contravention of the law.
Additionally, the ultimate goal of the referendum is to convert the nation’s energy supply to green energy, so nuclear energy is but a means to that end. If the government implements policies that promote the development of green energy, including the provision of incentives, there might be no need to continue operating nuclear power plants.
While Ma and Jiang were in office, they did not pursue a policy of completing construction of the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant. The plant was mothballed by the Ma administration following the Fukushima Dai-ichi disaster, yet now they are calling for the plant to be completed. This does not add up.
Those who support completing and starting the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should put the question to the public by proposing a referendum with the following wording: “Do you agree that the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant should be completed and started?”
Hung Yu-chiang is an assistant professor at Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital’s Department of Academic Research.
Translated by Edward Jones
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs