Brian Hioeby Brian Hioe
語言:
English
Photo Credit: lienyuan lee/WikiCommons/CC BY 3.0
ENVIRONMENTALISTS HAVE criticized sand erosion in Gongliao, due to the construction of a heavy cargo pier for the No. 4 Nuclear Reactor in the 2000s.
In particular, environmentalists affiliated with the Green Party have highlighted that sand erosion is highly visible when the beach is often used for music festivals and sand sculptures. Beach sand depth decreased from 20 meters to 10 meters from 1995 until last year, meaning that beach sand depth decreased by half in 30 years.
As such, environmentalists have called for an investigation into the sand erosion, suggesting that Taipower may have falsified reports on the matter. Although a report was supposedly carried out by National Taiwan University into the matter and published in its name by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, third-party investigators never received the report. It has been suggested that the report may not have been carried out by National Taiwan University at all.
The No. 4 Nuclear Reactor in Gongliao has long been controversial, due to its use of mixed parts and the numerous stops and starts in its construction. Taiwan’s nuclear debate has itself proven contentious, with longstanding concerns about nuclear waste storage when few localities are willing to allow for the construction of storage facilities. Likewise, there are concerns about a Fukushima-style nuclear disaster, given that Taiwan also sees frequent seismic activity.
However, the haphazard construction of the No. 4 Nuclear Reactor has made it uniquely controversial, even among some proponents of nuclear energy. That being said, the KMT now calls for its restart, as an emblem for broader nuclear restarts. The KMT further calls for recommissioning nuclear power plants that have already begun undergoing the decommissioning process.
This is mostly a political stunt by the KMT. Had the KMT been serious on the issue of nuclear energy, it could have forced the issue earlier using its current control of the legislature. The recommissioning process will take several years, and the amount of time that recommissioned nuclear power plants could operate is limited, given that Taiwan has limited fuel storage capacity. Though the KMT controls a number of local governments, there is little political willpower from the KMT to construct nuclear waste storage facilities there, given the likelihood of pushback from the voter electorate.
It is in this context that Reactor No. 4 has again become a salient political issue. That being said, the DPP has itself undergone a shift in its position on nuclear energy. Because of the possibility that energy supply will be cut off in the event of an invasion, the DPP has become increasingly open to the idea of allowing for nuclear restarts in the event of an invasion or embracing small-scale modular nuclear reactors.
By contrast, the KMT capitalizes on nostalgia for a previous era of Taiwan in which economic growth was strong, during which it held power as the sole ruling party, the authoritarian period. This was also a period in which nuclear energy constituted a significantly higher portion of Taiwan’s energy mix, constituting 52.4% of all power consumed by Taiwan in the mid-1980s. During the period, nuclear energy was framed as a key element of Taiwan’s scientific successes.
In this sense, the KMT’s nuclear advocacy is linked to its embrace of political nostalgia. To this extent, the DPP’s opposition to nuclear energy is linked to its origins in the Taiwanese democracy movement, during which environmental protests were a substrate of opposition to the KMT. The KMT was framed as ruthlessly exploiting Taiwan’s natural resources because of its goals of returning to Taiwan, while in line with national identity concerns, the DPP framed itself as interested in the responsible stewardship of Taiwan’s national resources.
The KMT’s pro-nuclear advocacy is decidedly not tied to consideration of Taiwan’s security needs, then. The KMT has, after all, repeatedly blocked efforts to increase defense spending, even in the midst of Chinese military exercises conducted around Taiwan. Still, in the polarized discourse around nuclear energy, and with Taiwan’s security needs increasingly forcing the embrace of environmentally destructive infrastructure, such as nuclear power plants or liquified natural gas receiving stations, it is possible that ecological concerns will simply be pushed aside.