On Feb. 14, a magnitude 7.3 earthquake occurred off the coast of Japan’s Fukushima Prefecture. The fact that the Fukushima Dai-ichi and Fukushima Dai-ni nuclear power plants have been decommissioned, and the Onagawa, Tokai Dai-ni, Higashidori and Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plants are not operational might have prevented a nuclear accident.
Following the March 11, 2011, Tohoku earthquake, tsunami and resulting Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan’s nuclear reactors were shut down in stages for safety checks. In June 2012, Japan for a while ran on zero nuclear power, which it did again for 11 months from September 2013.
As of Feb. 8, 24 of Japan’s reactors have been decommissioned, while nine have not applied to be reactivated. Permission has been granted for the configurations of seven reactors to be modified, while 11 others are under review, based on new regulatory requirements. Only nine reactors have been reactivated, of which just four are operating.
Nuclear power’s contribution to Japan’s power generation fell from 25 percent in 2010 to 6 percent in 2018, while renewable energy grew from 9 to 17 percent. Denuclearization seems to encourage the development of green energy.
The epicenter and depth of the Feb. 14 earthquake were close to those of the 2011 earthquake. Both quakes were caused by the subduction of the Pacific Plate under the North American Plate.
The Feb. 14 earthquake is considered to be an aftershock of the 2011 quake. That there can still be aftershocks 10 years later in a region where a powerful earthquake triggered a nuclear disaster demonstrates the importance of carefully locating nuclear power plants.
A statement that accompanied the referendum on the Longmen (龍門) Nuclear Power Plant, also known as the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant, in New Taipei City’s Gongliao District (貢寮) said that no active faults had been discovered in the geological zone of the plant and that the nearest active fault is 35km away.
However, geological records for the seabed near the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant — provided by the Central Geological Survey at a seminar on Sept. 2, 2019 — showed that faults F4, F5, F6, F7 and F8 were probably active, and that fault F2 might become active. The records also showed that faults F4, F7 and F8 could join into a single fault and that fault F2 could be joined with them.
A Control Yuan investigative report concluded that before the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant was built, two low-velocity zones had been found between its two reactors, and that multiple discontinuous shear results or disturbance zones had been found within the plant.
Denser shear zones where discovered as the plant was being built. When the foundations were being dug, these features were filled with concrete, strongly suggesting that attempts were being made to cover up the problem and prevent it from being examined.
Following the Fukushima disaster, the Legislative Yuan demanded that the area around the plant be given a thorough “health check.” The results of this investigation showed that there is an active normal fault about 90km long in the sea off the plant’s site, which has serious implications for its safety. Oddly, this was not followed by any in-depth investigation and discussion.
The passage of time might dilute people’s memory of a nuclear disaster, but geological structures do not forget where an earthquake took place. Given that the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant lies on a fault zone, Taiwanese must not forget the lessons of the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
Tsai Ya-ying is a lawyer affiliated with the Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association.
Translated by Julian Clegg
Taiwanese pragmatism has long been praised when it comes to addressing Chinese attempts to erase Taiwan from the international stage. “Taipei” and the even more inaccurate and degrading “Chinese Taipei,” imposed titles required to participate in international events, are loathed by Taiwanese. That is why there was huge applause in Taiwan when Japanese public broadcaster NHK referred to the Taiwanese Olympic team as “Taiwan,” instead of “Chinese Taipei” during the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics. What is standard protocol for most nations — calling a national team by the name their country is commonly known by — is impossible for
China’s supreme objective in a war across the Taiwan Strait is to incorporate Taiwan as a province of the People’s Republic. It follows, therefore, that international recognition of Taiwan’s de jure independence is a consummation that China’s leaders devoutly wish to avoid. By the same token, an American strategy to deny China that objective would complicate Beijing’s calculus and deter large-scale hostilities. For decades, China has cautioned “independence means war.” The opposite is also true: “war means independence.” A comprehensive strategy of denial would guarantee an outcome of de jure independence for Taiwan in the event of Chinese invasion or
A recent Taipei Times editorial (“A targeted bilingual policy,” March 12, page 8) questioned how the Ministry of Education can justify spending NT$151 million (US$4.74 million) when the spotlighted achievements are English speech competitions and campus tours. It is a fair question, but it focuses on the wrong issue. The problem is not last year’s outcomes failing to meet the bilingual education vision; the issue is that the ministry has abandoned the program that originally justified such a large expenditure. In the early years of Bilingual 2030, the ministry’s K-12 Administration promoted the Bilingual Instruction in Select Domains Program (部分領域課程雙語教學實施計畫).
Former Fijian prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry spoke at the Yushan Forum in Taipei on Monday, saying that while global conflicts were causing economic strife in the world, Taiwan’s New Southbound Policy (NSP) serves as a stabilizing force in the Indo-Pacific region and offers strategic opportunities for small island nations such as Fiji, as well as support in the fields of public health, education, renewable energy and agricultural technology. Taiwan does not have official diplomatic relations with Fiji, but it is one of the small island nations covered by the NSP. Chaudhry said that Fiji, as a sovereign nation, should support