The presidential candidates of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have both announced their energy policies. It is regrettable that their policies do not address international concerns.
Due to climate change and an energy crisis, the international community is increasingly emphasizing the development of distributed generation, renewable energy and energy flexibility. The KMT and TPP presidential candidates still propose relying on nuclear power. They also suggest reactivating old nuclear power plants. Their outdated thinking is reminiscent of the government’s policy 40 years ago, which focused on developing large-scale generation of electricity at centralized facilities.
In the 1980s, the government opened several nuclear power plants to meet the fast-growing demand for electricity. At the time, the government determined the amount of supply based on the amount of demand, and focused on centralized generation. This policy led to energy rationing in certain regions.
The Ministry of Economic Affairs allowed the private sector to establish independent power producers to generate electricity for sale between 1995 and 1999. These independent power producers have provided 19 percent of the nation’s annual electricity consumption, showing that the best solution for power system instability lies in investment in the private sector.
After four decades, due to the Renewable Energy 100 project and the goal of reaching net zero emissions, Taiwan’s demand for electricity has been coupled with the development of green energy. It is not that Taiwan has failed to generate enough power. The major problem is that it does not have enough green energy.
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co thought about building its own renewable energy power system, but chairman Mark Liu (劉德音) concluded that it was “way too complicated.” Liu’s comment demonstrated how many hurdles a private company needs to overcome to develop green energy for its own use.
The next government must outline policies and agendas that would encourage corporations to invest in improving the nation’s green energy systems. Companies that need to rely on green energy can be both the manufacturer and the consumer, and hence the burden of green power generation can be distributed more equally.
The government has failed to achieve its goals in terms of green energy development. One reason is that the ruling party’s policy has been too dependent on state-run Taiwan Power Co, which has monopolized the energy market for some time.
The US government has introduced energy tax credits, an incentive that reduces the cost for people and businesses to use alternative energy sources. The purpose is to encourage corporations to develop green energy and be self-reliant. As long as a business has established solar power facilities or invested in photovoltaic projects, it can claim tax deductions in proportion to either the investment or the amount of electricity generated.
Such a measure is worth considering. The government must offer more economic incentives for Taiwanese businesses.
Greenpeace Taiwan hopes that the presidential candidates will offer new energy policies that are more original and pioneering. Through policy subsidies, incentives and collaboration, the government must help firms transform from consumers of green energy to producers, so that they can achieve the goal of “self-generation and self-consumption.”
The government, businesses and wider society would then be able to work together and help Taiwan solve the problem of renewable energy development.
Chen Yung-jen is climate and energy project manager at Greenpeace East Asia..
Translated by Emma Liu
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
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
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Taiwan’s business-friendly environment and science parks designed to foster technology industries are the key elements of the nation’s winning chip formula, inspiring the US and other countries to try to replicate it. Representatives from US business groups — such as the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office — in July visited the Hsinchu Science Park (新竹科學園區), home to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) headquarters and its first fab. They showed great interest in creating similar science parks, with aims to build an extensive semiconductor chain suitable for the US, with chip designing, packaging and manufacturing. The