National Taiwan University’s College of Public Health on Thursday last week held a news conference to announce the results of its new study into the health risks to Changhua County residents from a naphtha cracker in Mailiao Township (麥寮) in neighboring Yunlin County.
Formosa Plastics Group representatives have asserted the company’s innocence, saying that the findings are “completely unrelated” to the plant’s operations and calling on the research team to assemble a panel of specialists to review its findings prior to publication to avoid “spreading panic among the public and squandering public resources.”
However, what the public really wants is to know is why the urine samples of residents of Taisi (台西) and Dingjhuang (頂庄) villages in Changhua County’s Dacheng Township (大城) — which lies about 8km north of the industrial zone where the plant is located — contain a cocktail of heavy metals and other pollutants at levels that are demonstrably higher than those of residents living in areas farther from the plant?
Why is it that, when the wind blows from the direction of the naphtha plant during the summer months, equipment at Yongguan Elementary School in Dacheng Township’s Gongguan Village (公館) measures high levels of benzene, a carcinogen?
The public would also very much like to know why Taisi Village residents are 2.66 times more likely to develop cancer than the residents of other villages in Dacheng Township — and 2.29 times more at risk than Jhutang Township (竹塘) residents. In addition, why is it impossible to ascertain who and what is responsible for this prevalence?
Who is able to provide frightened Taisi and Dingjhuang residents with answers to these questions? Having been left without help for so many years, they are filled with despair, rage and indignation.
If it is not the case that these phenomena were already in existence before Formosa Plastics turned up, then perhaps it is pure coincidence that they only began to appear once the naphtha cracker commenced operations.
To argue that there is no causal relationship between the naphtha cracker, evidence of carcinogens and a high risk of cancer — and pretending that this is all some sort of a fantastic coincidence — is surely asking people to suspend their rationality.
It is doubtful whether Formosa Plastics’ strategy of adopting an attitude of “nothing to do with us, ask someone else” will be sufficient to isolate it from the objective facts: The existence of carcinogens and a high risk of cancer in areas not far from the plant.
It is also highly doubtful whether the company’s attempt to slander the university’s research team by saying it is “spreading panic among the public and squandering public resources” would dispel doubts and dissenting opinions, and prove beyond question that the naphtha cracker is safe and has nothing to do with the carcinogens and high prevalence of cancer.
In April last year, a steel mill in Vietnam owned by Formosa Plastics was implicated in the illegal discharge of toxic wastewater linked to the sudden deaths of fish in the country’s central region.
Following the protests of local residents, Formosa Plastics said that the wastewater was managed in accordance with the conclusions of the plant’s environmental impact assessment before being released into the sea and that there had not been one instance of non-compliance.
The company said the Vietnamese government at the beginning of April last year publicly announced that it had identified the cause of the problem, which it attributed to algal bloom that had no direct connection with the Formosa Plastics steel mill.
This type of outright denial is heard time and again in Taiwan and it always seems to be effective. However, it is clearly different in Vietnam because two months later, the Vietnamese government slapped a US$500 million fine on the “wholly innocent” steel mill. Not only did Formosa Plastics raise no objection, choosing to pay the fine immediately, it also issued an apology for the illegal discharge.
It is certainly odd that despite initial claims that the plant was operating in accordance with laws and regulations, two months later the company paid a massive fine without hesitation and issued a public apology.
If following a short two-month investigation the Vietnamese authorities were able to get Formosa Plastics to accept responsibility, pay a large fine and publicly apologize for the pollution it caused, why are the Taiwanese authorities unable to do the same?
It is high time that justice is done to the defenseless villagers of Taisi and Dingjhuang, who have for 16 years been forced to endure the effects of Formosa Plastics’ polluting naphtha cracker.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association of University Professors and a retired associate professor at National Hsinchu University of Education.
Translated by Edward Jones
Chinese actor Alan Yu (于朦朧) died after allegedly falling from a building in Beijing on Sept. 11. The actor’s mysterious death was tightly censored on Chinese social media, with discussions and doubts about the incident quickly erased. Even Hong Kong artist Daniel Chan’s (陳曉東) post questioning the truth about the case was automatically deleted, sparking concern among overseas Chinese-speaking communities about the dark culture and severe censorship in China’s entertainment industry. Yu had been under house arrest for days, and forced to drink with the rich and powerful before he died, reports said. He lost his life in this vicious
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
In South Korea, the medical cosmetic industry is fiercely competitive and prices are low, attracting beauty enthusiasts from Taiwan. However, basic medical risks are often overlooked. While sharing a meal with friends recently, I heard one mention that his daughter would be going to South Korea for a cosmetic skincare procedure. I felt a twinge of unease at the time, but seeing as it was just a casual conversation among friends, I simply reminded him to prioritize safety. I never thought that, not long after, I would actually encounter a patient in my clinic with a similar situation. She had
RSS