The signing of an alliance between Brazil and the US on Friday to cooperate in the promotion of ethanol has greatly boosted the prestige of the Latin American nation, but at the same time it has raised a number of tough questions such as, "if Brazil can do it, why can't we?"
Many believe Brazil's example in promoting ethanol demonstrates to the world what a determined nation can do to reduce its dependence on petroleum. But the fact is, there are many yet-to-be-resolved questions or myths about ethanol, even though it does have an important part to play as an alternative energy source of the future.
Certainly, Brazil deserves credit for its leadership in biofuel development. Its sugar cane-based ethanol production began as a large and costly government project in the early 1970s. It has now grown to support a sizable number of jobs at home and has made Brazil the world's second-largest ethanol producer -- after the US -- and the world's only major exporter of biofuel. Brazil has more than 30,000 stations nationwide to provide pure ethanol fuel and gasoline that is blended with 20 percent to 25 percent ethanol. Eight out of every 10 new cars in Brazil are capable of running on ethanol.
Brazil's example is encouraging, but it does not mean that nations like Taiwan can rely solely on alternative fuels like ethanol when seeking to greatly reduce reliance on oil. Ethanol is certainly a valuable part of the mix, but when you consider that Brazil still consumes far more petroleum than it does ethanol, while in the US ethanol currently only comprises about 4.2 percent of gasoline supply it is obvious that ethanol is not the panacea to the world's future fuel needs.
But Taiwan does need to accelerate its development of alternative energy sources in view of continued high oil prices, stricter restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions and the important issue of energy independence.
The government has acknowledged the desirability of biofuels and earmarked NT$300 million (US$9.1 million) for work in this regard. Government-run laboratories have researched the use of grain-based additives in gasoline and have found that producing ethanol from sweet potatoes is cheaper and more energy efficient than sugar cane and rice straw. Meanwhile, a scheme that will see government vehicles in Taipei City run on ethanol gasoline is set to go ahead this year, before the fuel becomes available to the public in 2011.
But this is way too slow and close scrutiny of the development of the nation's energy industry shows that any potential ethanol industry in Taiwan appears risky. The government has still not canvassed opinion from the business sector on the possibility of establishing a commercial ethanol industry and it has yet to work out plans with automobile makers to produce vehicles that can run on gasoline and ethanol mixes.
Before jumping on the ethanol bandwagon, the government needs to consider how to prevent any possible increase in demand for sweet potatoes for fuel production from driving up the price to the disadvantage of consumers. It also has to investigate the possible environmental pros and cons, for example whether grain-based ethanol production releases more greenhouse gases than gasoline usage.
The story of Brazilian ethanol shows we in Taiwan still have a long way to go. It will be many years before we can use alternative energy to replace oil.
In the meantime, if the government is really serious about improving the nation's energy independence and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, what it should do is further liberalize the energy market as Brazil has done, and most importantly, begin serious energy conservation moves now.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS