The Democratic Progressive Party’s policy of making Taiwan into a “nuclear-free homeland” by 2025 has been controversial from the outset. Opponents and proponents of nuclear energy never stop arguing about it.
Comments on news Web sites show that supporters often dismiss wind and solar energies as not worth developing, and quote this as a reason for supporting nuclear power, but this kind of zero-sum mindset will not help Taiwan achieve the goal of energy diversity.
Fourth-generation nuclear reactors are far more advanced than those in commercial operation in many ways, including passive safety and nuclear-waste processing. This technology allows development toward smaller scales and modularization, which greatly reduce the risk of major nuclear accidents and create the potential for dispersed electricity generation that would allow nuclear power to thrive alongside renewable sources of energy.
Unfortunately, the worldwide tide against nuclear power after the 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant has set fourth-generation nuclear energy far back from ever going into commercial operation.
The Volkswagen diesel emissions falsification scandal of 2015 led to a sea change in the global automobile industry. In the four years since then, electric vehicles have become the sole creed of automobile bosses and investors.
Vehicle manufacturers’ limited budgets are now entirely devoted to developing electric motor technology, as each company fears that it will not have a place in the race. Many combustion engine experts have woken up to find that they suddenly have nothing to do. Some have found themselves sidelined and others have lost their jobs. It is a story that probably sounds all too familiar to nuclear power engineers.
The tide of electrification is unstoppable. There is also no doubt that vehicles with electric motors are more suitable for cities than those with combustion engines.
However, does this mean that engines are an outmoded technology that should be eliminated? Clearly not, because there are plenty of other transport applications that are not suited to complete electrification, and because there is still plenty of room for progress with respect to engines and the fuel they use.
By the same token, nuclear power technology might eventually make a comeback, but that is not a good reason to disparage wind and solar energies. The demand for highly electrified transport means that electricity consumption will continue to climb. How, then, can people who only support either nuclear or renewable energy guarantee that their preferred option alone will be enough to meet future challenges?
Considering engineering and safety, the life of Taiwan’s aging nuclear power plants should not be prolonged any further. There is also no chance that work on the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮) will ever be restarted. Existing nuclear power technology is really not suitable for such a densely populated place as Taiwan, so at the present stage, people must go all-out to develop renewable energies.
If the idea of using nuclear energy to nurture green energy does not work, why not try using green energy to nurture nuclear energy? Hopefully, the government after 2025 will continue to pay close attention to developments in nuclear power technology.
It is never a good idea to put all your eggs in one basket. Maintaining a diverse range of technologies and sources of energy can only be good for Taiwan’s energy security and development.
Pu Yi-hao is an automotive engineer in the UK.
Translated by Julian Clegg
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS