On Monday last week, the Taipei Times published an opinion piece by National Tsing Hua University senior vice president Chen Sinn-wen (陳信文) titled “Creating a future with zero waste.”
In the op-ed, Chen quoted President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) from her Earth Day speech on April 22 last year, in which she said: “Most countries around the world are talking about achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, and Taiwan is actively preparing to take steps toward this goal.”
Bringing up concepts like sustainability and a circular economy, Chen wrote that National Tsing Hua University had since 2014 promoted research and innovation on green technologies needed to achieve net-zero emissions.
Chen’s insightful article has inspired me to discuss the trend of net-zero emissions and the “original sin” of cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrencies, such as bitcoin, decentralize the transaction validation process, relying instead on users to cross-validate each other’s data. The validated user then adds the transaction to a new “block,” which is called “mining.”
The process of validation relies on deploying computers to solve complex mathematical problems based on a cryptographic hash algorithm.
“Miners” compete with their peers to zero in on a hash value generated by a crypto coin transaction, and the first miner to crack the code gets to add the block to the ledger and receive coins as a reward.
However, given the power-intensive nature of mining coin transactions — cryptocurrency’s “original sin” — it was not a surprise when Tesla CEO Elon Musk went back on his decision to accept bitcoin as payment. Musk said the electric vehicle maker would not accept bitcoin until concerns over the energy-intensive requirements of mining and its contribution to climate change could be solved.
Tesla, a brand famous for being eco-friendly, needed to consider the net-zero trend spreading worldwide. At the COP26 climate summit, nearly 200 countries signed the Glasgow Climate Pact, an agreement to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.
To regulate carbon-intensive imports to the EU and prevent the risk of carbon leakage, the EU is launching a “carbon border adjustment mechanism” next year, and is to levy a carbon border tariff on certain industries from 2026.
After Tsai announced that Taiwan would also be working to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) said that it would amend the Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Management Act (溫室氣體減量及管理法). The amendments cover the following:
First, the goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 has been added.
Second, in Article 2 of the act, the level of climate governance has been enhanced. Different sectors are to be responsible for more concrete goals and task delegation: For example, the reduction of industrial greenhouse gas emissions would be overseen by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, building emissions by the Ministry of the Interior, transportation emissions by the Ministry of Transportation and Communications and agricultural emissions by the Council of Agriculture.
Third, the government can impose carbon levies on domestic sources of emissions.
The Financial Supervisory Commission has amended the Regulations Governing Information to Be Published in Annual Reports of Public Companies (公開發行公司年報應行記載事項準則) to include an environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure.
As part of ESG reporting, companies would be required to disclose key performance indicators on the environment, such as the amount of gas emissions, water consumption and waste disposal.
As British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said at COP26: “It’s one minute to midnight on that doomsday clock and we need to act now. If we don’t get serious about climate change today, it will be too late for our children to do so tomorrow.”
Whether following a global trend, amending local policies or facing the inconvenient truth that “we only have one planet,” cutting greenhouse gas emissions and achieving net-zero emissions should be a responsibility shared by all humanity.
Chen Wan-yu is a Chiayi district court judge.
Translated by Rita Wang
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
India is not China, and many of its residents fear it never will be. It is hard to imagine a future in which the subcontinent’s manufacturing dominates the world, its foreign investment shapes nations’ destinies, and the challenge of its economic system forces the West to reshape its own policies and principles. However, that is, apparently, what the US administration fears. Speaking in New Delhi last week, US Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau warned that “we will not make the same mistakes with India that we did with China 20 years ago.” Although he claimed the recently agreed framework
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) on Wednesday last week announced it is launching investigations into 16 US trading partners, including Taiwan, under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to determine whether they have engaged in unfair trade practices, such as overproduction. A day later, the agency announced a separate Section 301 investigation into 60 economies based on the implementation of measures to prohibit the importation of goods produced with forced labor. Several of Taiwan’s main trading rivals — including China, Japan, South Korea and the EU — also made the US’ investigation list. The announcements come
Taiwan is not invited to the table. It never has been, but this year, with the Philippines holding the ASEAN chair, the question that matters is no longer who gets formally named, it is who becomes structurally indispensable. The “one China” formula continues to do its job. It sets the outer boundary of official diplomatic speech, and no one in the region has a serious interest in openly challenging it. However, beneath the surface, something is thickening. Trade corridors, digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence (AI) cooperation, supply chains, cross-border investment: The connective tissue between Taiwan and ASEAN is quietly and methodically growing
RSS