Time and again when a typhoon hits Taiwan, the Suhua Highway linking Suao (
At the beginning of the year, hotel owner Stanley Yen (
Then the Chinese-language magazine Business Weekly published an article entitled "Big construction, big destruction." And so, in the blink of an eye, the construction of the new freeway was cursed, turned into a road that was damaging the environment and that had no practical use whatsoever.
As a professional civil engineer and a future user of the road, I hope that during this typhoon season everyone can give the issue more thought.
It's ironic that even though Taiwan has entered the ranks of developed countries, people still have to risk their lives driving on the Suhua Highway.
Every day thousands of people drive on this road with fear in their hearts. There are 20 dangerous curves on this stretch of the east coast highway, and the death rate is 130 times as high as on freeways on the western side of Taiwan.
Life is priceless, and I hope that those who oppose the freeway can sympathize with those who have to drive on the highway, as well as their relatives and friends.
The freeway will be an ecologically friendly road. Apart from wildlife corridors, safety ramps and the road itself, the construction of the freeway does not include construction access roads in order to avoid digging out large areas from the surrounding slopes.
The dated technology used in building the Central Cross-Island Highway involved large-scale digging and destruction of mountain slopes, but these are things of the past. The methods of construction for the freeway are trustworthy.
Arguments in this debate should be based on data, not emotion. The Business Weekly article "Big construction, big destruction" was intended to encourage protests; however,. much of its content is removed from the reality.
It says, for example, that the freeway will run across 11 fault lines, twice as many as the Chiang Wei-shui Freeway between Taipei and Ilan.
But according to a publication by the Central Geological Survey, there are only 44 active fault lines in all of the country, none of which are in the area where the new freeway is to be built. The only active fault line in the vicinity is the Milun Fault in Hualien City.
In addition, the railway has been in use since February 1980, and in all those 25 years, through many big and small earthquakes, safety has not been compromised. How can one then argue that the Suhua Freeway would be unsafe?
Then there are the cold springs of Suao. The Business Weekly said the freeway would travel through a groundwater control area, and that as soon as digging starts, tunnels would be flooded and the precious cold springs of Suao would face catastrophe.
But the fact is that the railway also crosses the same groundwater control area, and nothing catastrophic has happened there in 25 years.
The freeway will also be at least 2km away from the Suao cold springs, and between them there will still be the old and the new tracks of the railway line.
Moreover, the height of the freeway tunnel will be between 30m and 80m, the same as for the railway tunnel. The latter tunnel has never influenced the Suao cold springs or caused land subsidence, so it is quite improbable that a freeway tunnel would do this.
I hope those who oppose the construction of the freeway will direct their fervor toward supervision of the freeway's construction so that this safe and fast road can bring the people of eastern Taiwan more convenience, all the while meeting ecological demands and the criteria for sustainable development.
Lin Tzu-chiang is a civil engineer and a resident of Taitung County.
Translated by Anna Stiggelbout
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS