The thermal power station in Taichung produces the single largest amount of carbon dioxide of any power plant in the world, an article in the British scientific journal Nature reported recently.
And another plant in Mailiao comes in sixth.
These figures may not surprise anyone who understands Taiwan's environmental issues. Predictably, the Taiwan Power Co and government agencies will respond with figures proving the nation's power plants are actually fairly efficient. Yet we must look behind these figures to grasp the truth of the matter.
Between 1990 and 2005, Taiwan's carbon-dioxide emissions rose from 5.19 tonnes to 10.2 tonnes per capita, the fastest rate of growth in the world.
In 2004, the average carbon dioxide emissions per capita in Taiwan ranked 18th internationally. Excluding the oil producing nations of the Middle East, Taiwan would be first in Asia, ahead of countries with higher national income, such as South Korea and Japan.
For every US dollar of national income generated, Taiwan produces 0.829kg of carbon dioxide, placing it fifth in the world.
Without a doubt, Taiwan's carbon emission rate is too high. More shocking, however, is the fact that the situation is getting worse. Bureau of Energy estimates show that between this year and 2015, electricity demand is expected to rise by 36 percent. More power plants will have to be built to "promote sustainable energy consumption."
Who should be held accountable for this situation? Reprehensibly, it is apparent that both the government and the general public are unwilling to tackle the problem. Everyone appears willing to rely upon the Environmental Protection Administration's environmental impact assessment (EIA) mechanism to resolve carbon emission problems. This does not give the issue the attention it deserves.
Since last year, I have been a member of an EIA team investigating a proposal for a new coal burning thermal station. Most members of the team are very conscientious about their responsibilities. Because of the tenacity of the established view, however, the attention given to greenhouse gas emissions remains inadequate.
My notes show that out of the 524 comments made during our meetings, only 11.8 percent were concerned with greenhouse gases, electricity demand estimates, energy efficiency, alternative energy and other related issues -- a tiny proportion when weighed against the importance of the topic.
Practical discussion was difficult because whenever a team member raised questions about greenhouse gases or similar issues, government representatives and development organizations either avoided the basic questions or dodged responsibility by saying the development of new energy sources was the nation's established energy policy.
Apparently, the EIA mechanism is intended to simply provide input after policy has been determined, not to question the premises upon which the development plans were established.
Given the claims that economic development and environmental protection must both be prioritized, the evaluation team ruled that the proposed coal burning thermal station had passed the assessment criteria.
If the plant is actually built, Taiwan's annual output of carbon dioxide will increase by another 3 percent. Have economic development and environmental protection really been placed at the same level of priority?
Obviously, in this instance, the EIA mechanism, like the government and the public, does not give serious consideration to possible alternatives for true sustainability. Instead it is bogged down by the notion that as long as the demand for development exists, greenhouse gas emissions can be justified. The end result is that Taiwan continues to significantly increase its carbon dioxide output, while the international community cries out for action to stem climate change.
Perhaps this is not so surprising: Our politicians occupy themselves daily with political issues; the upper middle class occupies itself with getting wealthy and boosting its children's competitive advantages. Every member of society with political or economic influence can find adequate excuse to ignore global warming, allowing the responsibility to fall upon the EIA mechanism.
While we may not fear punishment from the international community, how can we own up to our moral responsibility toward the disadvantaged victims of environmental damage in other nations and the future of our own children?
Tai Hsing-sheng is an assistant professor at the Hualien University of Education.
Translated by Angela Hong
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
RSS