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
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 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
Gogoro Inc was once a rising star and a would-be unicorn in the years prior to its debut on the NASDAQ in 2022, as its environmentally friendly technology and stylish design attracted local young people. The electric scooter and battery swapping services provider is bracing for a major personnel shakeup following the abrupt resignation on Friday of founding chairman Horace Luke (陸學森) as chief executive officer. Luke’s departure indicates that Gogoro is sinking into the trough of unicorn disillusionment, with the company grappling with poor financial performance amid a slowdown in demand at home and setbacks in overseas expansions. About 95