Premier Jiang Yi-hua is reported to have suggested he would have the future of Taiwan's fourth nuclear power plant fully and publicly discussed and then seek a referendum to decide whether it should start operation or shut down. Media reports quoted him as telling the Kuomintang legislative caucus last Thursday he would “go with public opinion in the end and it'll be the political decision.”
Well, Su Tseng-chang, chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party, wants a referendum on the nuclear power plant still under construction at Gongliao in New Taipei City, popularly known as Nuke 4. The opposition party began collecting signatures last year for initiating the referendum to shut down the Longmen Nuclear Power Plant, the official name given to Nuke 4 by its operator Taiwan Power Company.
As a matter of fact, he is planning to hold it alongside the seven nationwide local elections in one scheduled for November or December next year. Eligible voters will go to the polls to elect their municipal governors and municipal councilors, city mayors and county magistrates as well councilors, town chiefs and council representatives, and village/borough chiefs.
On the other hand, President Ma Ying-jeou wants to have construction of Nuke 4 completed, its safety tested by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the World Association of Nuclear Operators, and, if the tests prove it is safe to operate, let it start commercial operation. Last Friday night, however, he echoed Premier Jiang's approach by telling Kuomintang lawmakers at a Nuke 4 discussion meeting “let us all make the decision together and let us all share the responsibility,” when he was asked if a referendum is an option to solve the issue.
Construction on Nuke 4 began in 1997. It was delayed by President Chen Shui-bian, who is now doing time for corruption and graft. Chen had the construction suspended in 2000 because he wanted to scrap Nuke 4, a pet project of the previous Kuomintang administration. Construction resumed eight months later, delaying the commercial operation originally set for 2007 by three years with a loss of NT$400 billion (US$12 billion) in penalties, cost overruns and extra outlays. Taipower then delayed the operation, asking for NT$40 billion (US$1.2 billion) more to get the first of its two generating units started. After Japan's Fukushima nuclear disaster, triggered by the magnitude-9 earthquake of 2011, the operation is being delayed again, although construction is about 95-percent complete.
Why not hold a referendum? Not just for the future of Nuke 4 but on banning nuclear power altogether by decommissioning all three existing nuclear power plants in Taiwan as well to satisfy anti-nuclear politicians and some 30,000 activists all set to take to the streets in Taipei, Taichung, Kaohsiung and Taitung on March 9? Those in Taipei are planning to besiege the Presidential Mansion and keep a vigil at the Presidential Plaza to accentuate their opposition to keeping Nuke 4.
President Ma's nuclear power policy aims at ultimately creating a zero nuclear Taiwan. It may be just like his party's ultimate objective to eventually reunify with China, which, of course, won't be achieved in any foreseeable future. Unless there should occur some miracle, such as Taiwan being able to harness the Kuroshio or the Japan Current to generate enough power to supply all needs, a zero nuclear possibility seems unlikely.
Italy held a successful referendum a couple of decades ago to ban nuclear power. The Germans have just voted to close all nuclear power plants. They could afford to do so, because in time of power shortage, they can buy power from their neighbor France. Taiwan is an island, and we can't buy it from any neighboring countries that also rely on nuclear power. South Korea and China continue to develop nuclear energy. Japan, like Taiwan, remains committed to eventually banning nuclear power in the distant future.
Let's face reality. If Taiwan insists on pursuing renewable energy sources and its people keep on refusing to pay higher power rates, it can't be the “zero-nuclear paradise” Mr. Su wants. In Germany, the household power bill is the equivalent of NT$10 per kilowatt hour, whereas we in Taiwan pay a mere NT$2.73. Will all of us pay close to four times as much to ban nuclear power? Even if Taiwan succeeds in achieving its ambitious renewable energy development program — adding 12,500 megawatts of generating capability by 2030 — the addition will account for 16 percent of its total installed capacity and approximately 8 percent of its total power supply.
Natural gas power generation is too costly for Taiwan to afford, while coal-burning thermal power generation contributes to green gas emissions. Nuclear energy is practically the only low-carbon energy option open to Taiwan.
The time has come for the Ma administration to tell the people of Taiwan either to accept this reality or persist in outlawing nuclear power at whatever financial cost it may entail. So let's have a referendum not just on whether or not to close Nuke 4 but also to decide the future of the other three nuclear power plants now in operation.
Most of Taiwan's eligible voters are clear-thinking people. They know Taiwan has to rely on nuclear energy. In a poll conducted by the Academia Sinica, the nation's highest academic institution, 85 percent of the respondents said they support a flexible policy of slowly reducing the proportion of nuclear power generation while looking for alternative sources of energy in order to turn Taiwan into the “zero-nuclear paradise,” with a 12.21-percent minority hoping the current proportion of nuclear power generation will be maintained. A mere 2.79 percent insist on closing down all nuclear power plants.
Such a referendum, if called, will tell the anti-nuclear politicians to shut up for a long time. In the unthinkable event that the people voted yes, let all of us suffer the consequences as President Ma said we should.
〈本文僅供參考，不代表本會立場〉
（本文刊載於102.02.25，The China Post）
胡思聰
(
2007年6月12日 09:50
)
林祖嘉
(
2018年4月17日 16:11
)
王順民
(
12月6日 16:45
)
張瑞雄
