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
A series of strong earthquakes in Hualien County not only caused severe damage in Taiwan, but also revealed that China’s power has permeated everywhere. A Taiwanese woman posted on the Internet that she found clips of the earthquake — which were recorded by the security camera in her home — on the Chinese social media platform Xiaohongshu. It is spine-chilling that the problem might be because the security camera was manufactured in China. China has widely collected information, infringed upon public privacy and raised information security threats through various social media platforms, as well as telecommunication and security equipment. Several former TikTok employees revealed
For the incoming Administration of President-elect William Lai (賴清德), successfully deterring a Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attack or invasion of democratic Taiwan over his four-year term would be a clear victory. But it could also be a curse, because during those four years the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) will grow far stronger. As such, increased vigilance in Washington and Taipei will be needed to ensure that already multiplying CCP threat trends don’t overwhelm Taiwan, the United States, and their democratic allies. One CCP attempt to overwhelm was announced on April 19, 2024, namely that the PLA had erred in combining major missions
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
The Constitutional Court on Tuesday last week held a debate over the constitutionality of the death penalty. The issue of the retention or abolition of the death penalty often involves the conceptual aspects of social values and even religious philosophies. As it is written in The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay, the government’s policy is often a choice between the lesser of two evils or the greater of two goods, and it is impossible to be perfect. Today’s controversy over the retention or abolition of the death penalty can be viewed in the same way. UNACCEPTABLE Viewing the