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
Before 1945, the most widely spoken language in Taiwan was Tai-gi (also known as Taiwanese, Taiwanese Hokkien or Hoklo). However, due to almost a century of language repression policies, many Taiwanese believe that Tai-gi is at risk of disappearing. To understand this crisis, I interviewed academics and activists about Taiwan’s history of language repression, the major challenges of revitalizing Tai-gi and their policy recommendations. Although Taiwanese were pressured to speak Japanese when Taiwan became a Japanese colony in 1895, most managed to keep their heritage languages alive in their homes. However, starting in 1949, when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) enacted martial law
“Si ambulat loquitur tetrissitatque sicut anas, anas est” is, in customary international law, the three-part test of anatine ambulation, articulation and tetrissitation. And it is essential to Taiwan’s existence. Apocryphally, it can be traced as far back as Suetonius (蘇埃托尼烏斯) in late first-century Rome. Alas, Suetonius was only talking about ducks (anas). But this self-evident principle was codified as a four-part test at the Montevideo Convention in 1934, to which the United States is a party. Article One: “The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: a) a permanent population; b) a defined territory; c) government;
Chinese agents often target Taiwanese officials who are motivated by financial gain rather than ideology, while people who are found guilty of spying face lenient punishments in Taiwan, a researcher said on Tuesday. While the law says that foreign agents can be sentenced to death, people who are convicted of spying for Beijing often serve less than nine months in prison because Taiwan does not formally recognize China as a foreign nation, Institute for National Defense and Security Research fellow Su Tzu-yun (蘇紫雲) said. Many officials and military personnel sell information to China believing it to be of little value, unaware that
The central bank and the US Department of the Treasury on Friday issued a joint statement that both sides agreed to avoid currency manipulation and the use of exchange rates to gain a competitive advantage, and would only intervene in foreign-exchange markets to combat excess volatility and disorderly movements. The central bank also agreed to disclose its foreign-exchange intervention amounts quarterly rather than every six months, starting from next month. It emphasized that the joint statement is unrelated to tariff negotiations between Taipei and Washington, and that the US never requested the appreciation of the New Taiwan dollar during the