by Brian Hioe

語言:
English
Photo Credit: Terry Gou/Facebook

IN A STRANGE series of events, the KMT has come to double down on a proposal of Foxconn founder Terry Gou that was initially mocked.

That is, Gou faced a wave of criticism over a proposal to build a small-scale nuclear reactor on Mount Banping in Kaohsiung, something that was criticized as unrealistic. Gou suggested, however, that a nuclear reactor would bring economic prosperity to Kaohsiung.

This took place in the same timeframe as Gou proposing that Taiwan could rely on robots for its defense. Gou claimed that he would fund the construction of 80,000 robots to defend Taiwan against the threat of Chinese invasion. In particular, Gou seemed to be trying to mimic UMC founder Robert Tsao, who previously promised to commit funds to developing one million combat drones for Taiwan. Tsao’s proposal seemed to be aimed at pressuring the Taiwanese military toward asymmetric warfare tactics, though Gou simply was throwing the idea out there. More outlandish comments by Gou recently include proposing the restoration of the Taiwan Garrison Command that existed in authoritarian times.

FoxConn founder Terry Gou. Photo credit: Terry Gou/Facebook

It proves unusual, then, for the KMT to commit to Gou’s idea. The idea has now shifted to taking the form of calling for the development of small-scale nuclear reactors in every administrative reason of Taiwan. The notion has, unsurprisingly, been criticized by anti-nuclear groups as significantly increasing the amount of nuclear waste that Taiwan would have to deal with when there are already issues with nuclear waste storage in Taiwan.

KMT pro-nuclear advocate Huang Shih-chiu, the convener of the KMT’s pro-nuclear referendums to date, previously suggested that Taiwan deal with its issues with nuclear waste storage by each household being issued a plastic bottle of nuclear waste. In this way, the burden of nuclear waste disposal could be shared equally among society as a whole.

Ironically, however, Gou has backed away from the notion of restarting the controversial Lungmen No. 4 reactor, something that pan-Blue pro-nuclear advocates such as Huang have long called for. Gou also initially apologized for his proposal about building a nuclear energy plant in Mount Banping.

But it proves an odd sequel to Huang’s plastic bottle nuclear waste proposal for the KMT to double down on suggesting that every part of Taiwan should have a nuclear energy plant. This illustrates, too, the polarized nature of the energy debate in Taiwan, in that nuclear energy advocates commit to wholesale support for pro-nuclear proposals no matter how unscientific or unsound.

One has seen similarly with regard to the debate around Lungmen Reactor No. 4. Lungmen Nuclear Reactor No. 4 is especially controversial even among pro-nuclear advocates because of its use of mixed parts, as well as the numerous stops and starts in its construction. Nevertheless, pro-nuclear advocates such as Huang have sought to call for its completion, primarily as a symbol of nuclear energy in Taiwan more than anything else, when it would be a conceivable position to advocate for nuclear energy but not necessarily for Lungmen Reactor No. 4.

Photo credit: lienyuan lee/WikiCommons/CC BY 3.0

This proves a way in which the energy debate in Taiwan is often not about a cost-benefit analysis of Taiwan’s energy needs. Instead, the debate takes place along the lines of differing views of history, with the KMT crediting Taiwan’s period of economic prosperity to its leadership, and suggesting that nuclear energy played a large part in this. Hence one has seen statements in the past by Huang and other pro-nuclear advocates suggesting that Taiwanese have an obligation to continue using nuclear energy, seeing as past generations grew up with it. The DPP, on the other hand, frames the KMT’s fixation on nuclear energy as a way in which the KMT simply exploits Taiwan’s natural resources for its own benefit, even when this destroys the land.

Either way, it is to be seen how the KMT’s newest proposal plays over with the Taiwanese public when one of the main concerns over nuclear energy in Taiwan is that because of Taiwan’s frequent seismic activity, Taiwan could potentially see a nuclear disaster in the mold of the 2011 Fukushima nuclear meltdown, which took place in the wake of the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami. The idea of having reactors all across Taiwan is likely to stoke such fears. Certainly, the proposal is more likely to give ammunition to environmental critics of the KMT than anything else. At the same time, seeing as Gou made the proposal as part of his efforts to secure the KMT’s presidential nomination, that the proposal was embraced by the party may reflect the strength of his position in the party at present.

No more articles