Pegatron Group chairman Tung Tzu-hsien (童子賢) has strongly advocated for the continued use of nuclear power in Taiwan to supplement the transition to renewable energy sources, portraying himself as a missionary spreading the good news.
In a June 20 report on energy allocation and development, Tung laid out his concerns regarding global warming, a low-cost stable power supply, the effectiveness of Taiwan’s carbon reduction efforts and the possible environmental impact of developing renewable energy sources.
Unfortunately, his use of false data, which has already been fact-checked, makes him more like a rumormonger spreading fake news. It is clear that the misinformation comes from pro-nuclear advocates who are out of touch with reality.
Tung has even publicly compared nuclear waste to a wild beast in a cage, seemingly dangerous, but actually of no jeopardy to the public. This received praise from nuclear supporters and fueled rumors that the government is reluctant to deal with nuclear waste. Once dealt with, there would be no reason to stop using nuclear power, they say.
The problem is that proponents of nuclear power misunderstand the nature of waste disposal. They discuss the issue from technological, economic or environmental perspectives, but fail to realize that nuclear energy is a social issue in Taiwan. Most baffling is that they continue to spread false information that using nuclear power to reduce carbon emissions is the only cure-all for climate change and energy problems.
We should be asking the important questions: Can Taiwan’s nuclear power plants withstand frequent earthquakes? Can the possibility of a nuclear disaster be ruled out? How should nuclear waste, which remains toxic for thousands of years, be dealt with? However, nuclear supporters conveniently turn a deaf ear to these concerns, dismissing them with a smile.
Tung does not like political manipulation, but he seems to have been accepted by pro-nuclear advocates as a “nuclear-loving” pioneer and forgotten that he is heading Taiwan’s carbon reduction initiative. Tung and others see nuclear power as superior to renewable energy sources, implying that the latter have many environmental and ecological problems of their own. Are there no other solutions?
Taiwan has already implemented plans and achieved concrete results in creating a circular economy, as well as in areas such as land planning, sustainable agriculture, environmental protection and tourism.
The nation should work together to find even more comprehensive and feasible approaches.
It must be acknowledged that, like nuclear power plants, the construction and operation of renewable energy plants produce pollutants and waste that are not completely harmless, but after weighing every issue, including Taiwan’s small, densely populated area, frequent earthquakes and societal risk tolerance, it is clear that the positive impacts of renewable energy are far greater than those of nuclear power.
We must keep a practical mindset in facing the challenge of ensuring a stable electricity supply and achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Using nuclear power to reduce carbon emissions is not a magic solution.
To ensure Taiwan’s sustainable future and fulfill carbon reduction goals to combat global warming, renewable energy development and energy conservation is the way to go.
Lin Ren-bin is an academic committee member of the Taiwan Environmental Protection Union.
Translated by Nicole Wong
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS