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
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS