Europe has been experiencing a heat wave, with temperatures exceeding 40oC in parts of the UK, France and Spain, leading to fires, traffic accidents and deaths from hyperthermia or related conditions. The record-breaking heat wave shows how the challenge of climate change is growing more severe with each passing year.
The EU’s European Climate Law stipulates that Europe’s economy and society must become climate-neutral by 2050, and the war between Russia and Ukraine has exposed the bloc’s urgent need to reduce its energy dependence on Russia.
Under the dual pressures of net-zero carbon emission targets on the one hand and energy supply and demand on the other, the European Parliament changed direction earlier this month, narrowly approving the EU Taxonomy Complementary Climate Delegated Act, which, under strict conditions, allows specific gas and nuclear energy activities to be listed as “sustainable.”
This law stipulates very stringent conditions for recognizing natural gas and nuclear energy activities as “sustainable.” They include the need to obtain a construction permit by 2045, to propose long-term disposal facilities for high-level nuclear waste by 2050 and to have guaranteed funding in place. These conditions are economically, technologically and environmentally hard to meet, and only a few EU member states are capable of doing meeting them.
Nonetheless, several EU member states have strongly criticized the law. They say that it “greenwashes” nuclear power, and that it is illegal and invalid.
Germany, Luxembourg and Austria are among those who strongly oppose this new “greenwashing” law. Each country has its own situation.
In Austria’s case, its government finished building the Zwentendorf Nuclear Power Plant in 1977, but it met with fierce opposition from civic groups and individuals. Following a 1978 referendum in which a small majority of voters voted against commissioning the plant, it never went into operation. The 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident reinforced anti-nuclear attitudes in Austria, and in 1999, the Austrian Parliament enacted the Federal Constitutional Act for a Non-Nuclear Austria.
As well as familiar issues such as nuclear waste and safety, Austria’s strong anti-nuclear stance might also be a legacy of the Cold War. The dark clouds of the Chernobyl accident floated over Europe for a long time, spreading nuclear radioactive substances across the continent. Despite being neighbors of the then-Soviet Union, European countries could not do anything about the changes happening within the Iron Curtain or stop the nuclear pollution from floating through the sky. Last year, environmental groups in Austria still detected traces of radioactive contamination from Chernobyl in Austrian mushrooms. This painful experience has made Austria determined to say no to nuclear energy.
Taiwan, with its small size and dense population, could hardly meet the new EU law’s standards on nuclear waste disposal. So far this summer, Taiwan’s electricity consumption has exceeded a record high of 40 gigawatts, but solar power’s contribution of more than 4.61 gigawatts at peak hours has ensured an unbroken supply of electricity. This is a remarkable achievement on the path of energy transition.
As for the new law that the European Parliament barely passed even under intense internal and external pressures, Taiwan can take it as a point of reference, but no more than that.
Chen Ping-hei is a distinguished professor at National Taiwan University’s Department of Mechanical Engineering. Chiang Ya-chi is an associate professor of intellectual property law at National Taipei University of Technology.
Translated by Julian Clegg
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS