Taiwan’s electricity sector is undergoing a revolution. The legislature early this month passed draft amendments to the Electricity Act (電業法), which are aimed at liberalizing the electricity market, promoting a “renewable” supply and terminating nuclear power by 2025.
While this is the most fundamental legal change in three decades of pushing competition in the sector, questions remain as to whether the amendments go far enough and how more reform could be implemented.
Globally, many governments fail to achieve energy security, energy equity and environmental sustainability simultaneously, which is referred to as the “energy trilemma.” The power sector has proved even more difficult to reform in light of the challenges posed by climate change.
Looking at the revised energy bill, it might be pointed out that recent electricity reform in Taiwan has mainly focused on the supply side, and powerful economic incentives remained non-existent for the demand side. In fact, demand-side participation is particular important in energy policy, where the public is expected to contribute by changing their lifestyles.
Demand-side participation refers to policy instruments that aim to reduce end-user energy consumption by clear price signals over time or to modify electricity demand from peak to off-peak.
A more active demand side can reduce costs and lower resource requirements at every stage of electricity supply. Ideally, end customers, including large industrial users and residential consumers, should be well informed about the opportunities for cutting costs through demand reduction and efficiency improvement.
The US’ 1992 Energy Policy Act established the basis for utility investments in demand-side management and energy efficiency technologies. In the US’ Energy Policy Act of 2005, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 and in other key orders issued by the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, regulators further recognized the economic benefits of demand-side participation and its importance for improving the competitiveness of wholesale electricity markets.
In the EU, the value of demand side is clearly reflected in the European Network Codes, Energy Efficiency Directive and other energy consumption provisions. In addition, the UK launched an electricity capacity auction in late 2014, and is now experimenting with a variety of initiatives for long-term demand reduction.
All these measures view demand-side flexibility as a critical enabler of efficient supply, consumer empowerment and integration of renewable energy sources. Furthermore, demand response can create new business models and promote innovative technologies, such as low-energy consulting services, “smart” meters and home energy management appliances.
Taiwan’s industrial demand for electricity still accounts for more than 50 percent of supply — compared with 29 percent in the UK and 26 percent in the US. These figures remind decisionmakers of a high potential for demand-side management and its high-reward benefits to reduce energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions.
Relatively low electricity prices in both residential and industrial sectors make the timing of this reform politically difficult.
Based on the experiences of other nations, it is possible reforms will be proposed sooner rather than later, and demand-side considerations should be integrated into new policy thinking more explicitly.
Yang Chung-han is a doctoral researcher at the University of Cambridge’s Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance.
The headline of this piece has been changed since it was first published.
As the incursions by China into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone intensify, the international community’s anxiety has risen over the question of whether the US military would become directly involved in the case of an attack on Taiwan. Washington’s long-held policy of “strategic ambiguity” does little to ease the trepidation. The rationale universally espoused on “strategic ambiguity” is that an announced commitment from Washington to directly defend Taiwan would encourage Taiwanese independence and consequently bring forth a Chinese military attack and a possible nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. However, this line of argument could soon lose steam if the subject is viewed from
Having deceived the world about its nuclear capabilities while preparing for an arms race, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now using its increasing nuclear forces for virtual nuclear coercion. This new threat will continue until the United States, Japan, and Taiwan can restore the CCP’s sense of fear. This dynamic is a familiar one for Taiwan. As the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) capabilities have grown, its inhibitions about conducting larger and more frequent coercive military demonstrations have shrunk. The PLA now more openly practices for the destruction of Taiwan’s democracy and the murder of its citizens. In the nuclear realm,
In an unprecedented move, a group of democratic nations led by the US, UK and EU in a joint statement on Tuesday accused the Chinese Ministry of State Security of having carried out a major cyberattack earlier this year and stealing data from at least 30,000 organizations worldwide, including governments, universities and firms in key industries. Western officials were reportedly perplexed by the attack’s brazen execution and unparalleled scale. In an article on the attack, BBC security correspondent Gordon Corera wrote: “Western spies are still struggling to understand why Chinese behavior has changed.” The attack raises the fear “that they [China]
At the conclusion of the G7 Leaders’ Summit on June 13, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who participated virtually, called for the reform of multilateral institutions as the best signal of commitment to the cause of open societies. His comments are significant in light of China’s ongoing and successful efforts to control international organizations, and, in particular, to keep Taiwan out of critical health agencies amid the COVID-19 pandemic. China’s influence over the WHO is well known. It has used this control to deny Taiwan a place at the World Health Assembly (WHA), the decisionmaking body of the WHO. Taiwan’s absence