In the debate over restarting the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, supporters often cite the Palisades plant in Michigan as a comparison, since both use pressurized water reactors. Yet a closer look shows that the inspection and review process for Ma-anshan’s extension would be far longer and more complex than advocates suggest, and the fundamental differences and safety risks between the two plants cannot be overlooked.
The Palisades plant began operating in 1971. In 2005, its operator applied to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a license renewal, with the original license set to expire in March 2011. After a two-year review, the NRC granted a 20-year extension in January 2007, allowing operations until 2031.
However, in October 2018, then-owner Entergy Corp retired the facility early, shutting it down in May 2022 before selling it to Holtec. In September 2023, Holtec applied to the NRC for approval to restart operations, submitting a plan to bring the plant back online this year. At that point, Palisades still had nearly eight years left on its license.
The Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, by contrast, never applied for a license extension. It completed its 40-year operating period and was decommissioned as scheduled. Many of its components have reached the end of their service life and would need replacement — a fundamental difference from Palisades. Even if its license were still valid, restarting operations would still require approval from the Nuclear Safety Commission.
An NRC inspection report on Palisades last year found stress-corrosion cracking in 1,163 steam generator tubes — an issue that, if unaddressed, could pose a serious safety risk. Steam generators are critical components responsible for heat exchange in pressurized water reactors. Similar problems led to the early decommissioning of other facilities, such as the Crystal River Nuclear Plant in Florida and the San Onofre Plant in Southern California, both of which faced costly and problematic steam generator replacements. As of this year, the Palisades plant still has not received NRC approval to resume operations.
The Palisades plant’s license was legally extended, yet it shut down nearly halfway through its second operating term. The damage to its steam generators was uncovered by NRC inspections only after the closure.
In contrast, the Ma-anshan plant was decommissioned after completing its 40-year cycle and has never applied for a license extension.
Under standard procedures, expecting such an extension to be completed within two or three years is highly unrealistic. As seen in similar cases, the time and costs of maintenance could far exceed the optimistic estimates of pro-nuclear advocates — and could ultimately render an extension impossible.
Throughout its 40 years of operation, Ma-anshan supplied a substantial share of electricity to Taiwan’s economy, serving industrial, commercial and public needs — a contribution that merits recognition. Yet safety remains paramount. Any consideration of restarting Ma-anshan must grapple with the Hengchun Fault line nearby, a long-standing concern for local residents that directly bears on the feasibility of an extension.
The geological assessment alone would require considerable time. Moreover, if the refurbishment process revealed that more components needed replacement than initially anticipated, the likelihood of a swift extension would shrink even further.
To demand that the plant be quickly relicensed without first resolving these critical requirements is not only misguided — it is dangerously irresponsible.
Chen Kuan-lin is a research manager from Taipei.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
Taiwan has lost Trump. Or so a former State Department official and lobbyist would have us believe. Writing for online outlet Domino Theory in an article titled “How Taiwan lost Trump,” Christian Whiton provides a litany of reasons that the William Lai (賴清德) and Donald Trump administrations have supposedly fallen out — and it’s all Lai’s fault. Although many of Whiton’s claims are misleading or ill-informed, the article is helpfully, if unintentionally, revealing of a key aspect of the MAGA worldview. Whiton complains of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s “inability to understand and relate to the New Right in America.” Many
US lobbyist Christian Whiton has published an update to his article, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” discussed on the editorial page on Sunday. His new article, titled “What Taiwan Should Do” refers to the three articles published in the Taipei Times, saying that none had offered a solution to the problems he identified. That is fair. The articles pushed back on points Whiton made that were felt partisan, misdirected or uninformed; in this response, he offers solutions of his own. While many are on point and he would find no disagreement here, the nuances of the political and historical complexities in
Taiwan faces an image challenge even among its allies, as it must constantly counter falsehoods and misrepresentations spread by its more powerful neighbor, the People’s Republic of China (PRC). While Taiwan refrains from disparaging its troublesome neighbor to other countries, the PRC is working not only to forge a narrative about itself, its intentions and value to the international community, but is also spreading lies about Taiwan. Governments, parliamentary groups and civil societies worldwide are caught in this narrative tug-of-war, each responding in their own way. National governments have the power to push back against what they know to be
Taiwan is to hold a referendum on Saturday next week to decide whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant, which was shut down in May after 40 years of service, should restart operations for as long as another 20 years. The referendum was proposed by the opposition Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and passed in the legislature with support from the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). Its question reads: “Do you agree that the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should continue operations upon approval by the competent authority and confirmation that there are no safety concerns?” Supporters of the proposal argue that nuclear power
RSS