Construction of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County’s Hengchun Township (恆春) started in 1978. It began commercial operations in 1984. Since then, it has experienced several accidents, radiation pollution and fires. It was finally decommissioned on May 17 after the operating license of its No. 2 reactor expired. However, a proposed referendum to be held on Aug. 23 on restarting the reactor is potentially bringing back those risks.
Four reasons are listed for holding the referendum: First, the difficulty of meeting greenhouse gas reduction targets and the inefficiency of new energy sources such as photovoltaic and wind power. Second, the corruption surrounding photovoltaic power projects that have led to high costs of purchasing electricity, resulting in losses. Third, the importance of energy resilience in the event of a blockade of Taiwan by China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Fourth, plans to continue operating once the nuclear power plant passes a safety assessment.
However, does passing a safety assessment guarantee that the nuclear power plant would be safe to operate?
Taiwan People’s Party Chairman Huang Kuo-chang (黃國昌), who advocates extending the service life of nuclear power plants, used to be a representative of the anti-nuclear camp during the 2018 referendum on nuclear power. He said at a public hearing that despite the pro-nuclear side’s claim that Taiwan Power Co (Taipower) and the Nuclear Safety Commission (NSC) would play a gatekeeping role, the lightning arrester of the No. 2 reactor at the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant in New Taipei City’s Wanli District (萬里) in 2016 exploded when it was connected for paralleling. It had just completed its overhaul and passed the NSC’s safety inspection. Moreover, in November 2019, soon after its overhaul, the No. 1 reactor of the Ma-anshan plant had to be shut down for maintenance due to a gas leak. Incidents like these show that safety assessments might not necessarily identify all risks.
During the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine was frequently attacked by artillery fire and drones; the Chernobyl Power Plant, which in 1986 suffered the worst nuclear disaster in history, was also attacked by drones and caught fire.
Even China worries about its nuclear power plants becoming the primary target of attack if a war breaks out.
If Taiwan resumes nuclear power, it would obviously increase the risk of exposure to radiation disasters during a potential war.
Although corruption has been seen in photovoltaic power projects, it is not uncommon in nuclear power projects, where equipment often needs to be customized and is expensive. The director of the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant, Tseng Wen-huang (曾文煌), was in April detained for accepting bribes during a procurement process.
Moreover, the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant was built on the Hengchun active fault — methane once escaped through the site when installing seismometers. For such a high-risk site, it would cost a lot of money to improve its safety — it is expensive enough just to evaluate its safety and update old equipment.
In a public hearing for the 2018 referendum, Huang, who then represented the anti-nuclear camp, said that the cost of nuclear power generation has been overly optimistic due to underestimates of the costs behind decommissioning and nuclear waste treatment over the years.
The risky solution of using nuclear power should not be the only way to reduce greenhouse gases. In 2023, when both of its reactors had not yet been decommissioned, the power generated by the Ma-anshan plant was only 17.8 billion kilowatt-hours, which was lower than the 20.6 billion kilowatt-hours energy-saving goal by 2027 proposed by the Ministry of Economic Affairs.
At the end of last year, the ministry proposed a geothermal target of 3.4 gigawatts by 2030, which is much more than the total installed capacity of 1.9 gigawatts of the Ma-anshan plant.
Rather than risk restarting an old nuclear power plant built in a fault zone, it would be much better to implement deep energy saving and renewable energy.
Tsai Ya-ying is an attorney at the Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS