The No. 2 reactor at the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County was shut down on the evening of Saturday last week. It took less than two days before baseless and malicious rumors began to spread, misleading the public into mistakenly equating the decommissioning of nuclear power with air pollution and even claiming that Taiwan Power Co’s (Taipower) electricity would become “dirty.”
Allow me to compare the proportion of nuclear-generated electricity since 2016 with air pollution and carbon emission coefficients resulting from power generation. Let the numbers speak for themselves.
The gradual decommissioning of Taiwan’s nuclear reactors caused the share of nuclear energy in Taipower’s total electricity generation and purchases to drop from 13.49 percent in 2016 to 6.99 percent in 2023, further dropping to 4.66 percent last year. Air pollutant emissions from Taipower’s plants simultaneously decreased from 107,000 tonnes in 2016 to 37,000 tonnes in 2023 — a 65 percent reduction. The carbon emission coefficient for electricity also dropped from 0.53kg of carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour (kWh) in 2016 to 0.494kg carbon dioxide per kWh in 2023.
From the data, it is evident that neither air pollution nor carbon emissions from power generation increased during this period, despite the decreased proportion of nuclear energy.
Relying on nuclear energy is not the answer to reducing the amount of air pollution caused by power generation — the solution to this issue lies in advancing air pollution control technology.
The reality is that air quality is affected by several factors, such as pollution sources, terrain and atmospheric conditions. Hastily attributing air pollution to thermal power generation alone is a myth that does nothing to solve the problem at hand, and distorting thermal power as being “dirty electricity” while overlooking the difficult issue of nuclear waste management is not helpful to Taiwan’s sustainable development.
Shieh Jyh-cherng is a retired National Taiwan University professor.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS