In July last year, I visited Japan’s nuclear disaster area in Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures with former vice president Annette Lu (呂秀蓮) and a dozen experts on nuclear energy, medicine and environmental protection. Radiation in Miyagi Prefecture’s Onagawa, Ishinomaki and Sendai was high, but when we reached Watari, about 50km from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, residual radiation was dozens of times higher than the background radiation, and the area was no longer suitable for long-term residence.
As we continued south, radiation levels continued to rise. After passing through Soma, in Fukushima Prefecture, we were getting very close to the 20km-radius evacuation zone. From there, we moved west and entered Mount Ryozen, about 60km northwest of the Fukushima plant. At a rest stop, radiation shot up to more than 500 times the background radiation. Because radiation spreads with the wind and the local topography, it does not remain within a designated area.
A magnitude 8.8 earthquake struck off the coast of the Maule region in southern Chile in February 2010, setting off a tsunami that was more than 10m high and causing great disaster. In late 2004, the third-strongest earthquake ever recorded, measuring 9.2, struck off the western coast of Sumatra, Indonesia, triggering a tsunami more than 20m high that took the lives of 270,000 people along the rim of the Indian Ocean. There were no nuclear power stations in these two major earthquake zones, so there was no radiation threat. It is very likely these areas can be rebuilt in about a decade. In contrast, Japan will be suffering from uranium radiation for a century, maybe even 1,000 years. Which of these disasters is more serious?
Taiwan is located between the world’s largest continental plate, the Eurasian Plate, and the largest sea plate, the Philippine Sea Plate. Earthquakes are frequent and the rate of mountain formation is faster than anywhere else on Earth. With Taiwan’s highest peaks reaching almost 4,000m above sea level, it is also very likely that undersea pressures could create a destructive tsunami.
Northeast of Taiwan is the 1,800km long Ryukyu subduction zone, along which a tsunami struck Ishigaki Island in 1771, a mere 200km from Taiwan. Conservative estimates put the height of the tsunami at 35m. If that were to happen again, the tsunami would reach Taiwan in about 20 minutes.
One thing is certain: There will be other tsunamis. The only question is when or how big they will be. If Taiwan’s nuclear power stations are still in operation when that happens and if their more than 25,000 high-level spent fuel rods remain untreated, Taiwan will be in deep trouble.
In such a scenario, an evacuation zone with a 20km radius centered on the Jinshan and Guosheng nuclear power plants in New Taipei City’s (新北市) Shihmen (石門) and Wanli (萬里) districts, respectively — provided the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), also in New Taipei City, is not yet operational — would include Keelung and parts of New Taipei City. Those affected within a 50km radius would include about 7.5 million people in Taipei, New Taipei City and Yilan.
This whole area would become a disaster zone of the first degree. If it happens during winter, radiation will be carried southward by the seasonal winds and even affect Hsinchu and Taoyuan — the center of the nation’s electronics industry — and other areas within a 100km radius.
Isn’t this risk so great that we must give utmost consideration to creating a nuclear-free homeland?
Lee Chao-shing is a professor at National Taiwan Ocean University’s Institute of Applied Geosciences.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and