A nationwide blackout on Thursday last week — the first major power incident since a blackout on Aug. 15, 2017 — sparked public dissatisfaction as people were trapped in elevators, offices went dark and factories were forced to suspend operations after a malfunction at an ultra-high-voltage substation in Kaohsiung triggered four generators at the Hsinta Power Plant (興達電廠) to go offline shortly before 3pm.
On that day, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) apologized to the nation for the rolling power outages that ensued, and the following day, Taiwan Power Co (Taipower), which said that human error was to blame, proposed a plan to compensate affected households and businesses.
If a national crisis could result from a Taipower employee flipping a switch by mistake, how stable is the nation’s power grid? Is this just more evidence of poor management at the state-run utility?
Taipower said that it had predicted peak power consumption of 35 million kilowatts (kW) during the middle of this month, but power usage on the day of the incident was 36.7 million kilowatts.
At the time, some generators at the Linkou Power Plant (林口發電廠) in New Taipei City, the Mailiao Power Plant (麥寮發電廠) in Yunlin County and the Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant (馬鞍山核三廠) in Pingtung County were down for annual maintenance, Taipower said, while the water shortage had reduced hydropower generation by 800,000kW, and lower-than-expected solar and wind power output failed to provide the needed power when the Singda plant went offline.
This time, human error coincided with a worst-case scenario to trigger the rolling outages, but the incident left many puzzled, as Taipower’s operating reserve ratio — a key indicator of available power that the utility posts daily on its Web site — stood at more than 10 percent and flashed “green,” indicating ample power.
A Taipower spokesman said that the rolling outages were a grid issue, not a case of power usage exceeding supply, but why did the grid not react correctly to the shutdown at the Hsinta plant? Is Taiwan’s overall power supply sufficient? Is the nation capable of maintaining stable power during emergencies? Most importantly, is the government held accountable for its energy policy?
Minister of Economic Affairs Wang Mei-hua (王美花) has instructed Taipower to be more realistic when estimating its reserve capacity, especially during a water shortage. However, of greater importance is how to boost the national grid’s resilience during a sudden supply shock.
The government needs to step up efforts to build a smart grid, including the development of effective storage of energy from renewable sources, which could immediately be brought online when the grid needs support.
The government is determined to increase the percentage of renewables in the power mix to 20 percent by 2025, but the main renewable power sources — sunlight and wind — depend on nature, so storage facilities must be constructed that can ensure a stable power supply.
Construction of power infrastructure should prioritize system stability and regional balance. Taiwan’s grid system is designed to within seconds activate automatic protective mechanisms when something abnormal is detected, to keep the entire grid from collapsing.
While this incident demonstrated the grid’s self-protection mechanism, it also exposed the regional imbalance of power generation in Taiwan. Generating power at large, centralized plants involves risks.
Sufficient power infrastructure dispersed throughout the nation would help maintain grid stability, while reducing the harm when an unanticipated shock emerges somewhere.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS