Geothermal alone has at least 40GW of potential. Right now Taiwan is only using 30GW. Throw in ocean current, other renewables and potential energy storage, that’s more than enough to cover even the extreme cases. Nuclear Plant 4 had a planned capacity of 5GW. Even if Plant 4 is operational, you would need 7 more nuclear plants to match geothermal potential. Where do you plan to build 7 more nuclear power plants in Taiwan, and the waste storage to match that increased demand?
That’s assuming the capacity gets built out. We’re lucky if we even use a fraction of that.
Renewable uses more fossil fuel than the fuel themselves. Energy storage, load balancing, and resin for making turbine blades…
We should build 6 more nuclear plants. Waste can be reprocessed, or I don’t know, I bet if it comes to war with china it may come in handy.
Do you think water coming off a geothermal vent isn’t radioactive?
I say build more nuclear plants and Greenpeace should just hold their peace.
Renewable energy is greenwashing. Truth is we will just keep using fossil fuel. They’ve obviously deemed that climate change is not a problem.
Really? Has Taiwan done this successfully? Please provide a source, @Taiwan_Luthiers .
Guy
If there’s a will, there’s a way.
Or we will just keep burning fossil fuel and stop pretending to care about climate change.
If we are not building massive number of nuclear plants, we do not care, that simple.
In other words, you have no source.
In other words, your breezy “solution” to an intractable problem—namely, what to do with nuclear waste in Taiwan—does not exist.
Thanks for clarifying that part, yet again.
Guy
I’m saying very smart people have come up with solutions, and politicians who has shit for brains rejected every single one of them.
It’s clear democracies can never accept nuclear power because the people will not accept it. Not until a campaign is made to demystify nuclear power and radiation in general.
So only authoritarian countries can do it.
Where are those “solutions”? Surely such a game-changing development will have appeared somewhere, in papers, in reports, somewhere. You continue to claim it exists when you cannot show anything. Until you do, you’re basically calling to further a problem—adding more radioactive waste to the existing supply now in Xinbei, in Pingtung, and on Orchid Island—without a solution in sight.
I’m still waiting for your source(s). Until I see them, I’m done discussing this with you.
Guy
Let’s see, the us government built a waste repository, and guess what, rejected because of politics.
Or would you prefer they grind it up and just release the stuff? That’s what fossil fuel power stations do daily.
Some relevant data can be found in sources below.
To find out how much radioactivity goes into the air in Taichung we would need to know the efficiency of their filtration system.
Additionally, Radon is not filtered out (it’s a gas)
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/1997/fs163-97/FS-163-97.html
In the majority of samples, concentrations of uranium fall in the range from slightly below 1 to 4 parts per million (ppm). Similar uranium concentrations are found in a variety of common rocks and soils, as indicated in figure 2. Coals with more than 20 ppm uranium are rare in the United States. Thorium concentrations in coal fall within a similar 1–4 ppm range, compared to an average crustal abundance of approximately 10 ppm. Coals with more than 20 ppm thorium are extremely rare.
During coal combustion most of the uranium, thorium, and their decay products are released from the original coal matrix and are distributed between the gas phase and solid combustion products.
Malaysian study from IAEA website has more references.
Fly ash from the stack of power plants containing radionuclides that are concentrated a few times more that their content in coal or surface soil has played a big role in the phenomena. Apart from inhalation, the main additional radiation hazard can be solid fallout resulting in elevated concentration of natural radionuclide in surface soils around the power plant [8], The collected fly ash has also become the subject of interest because of the usage in the building materials and for filling underground cavities.
You’re doing pretty much the same though, when the alternative is burning more fossil fuels and/or greenwashed “sustainable” energy production. There’s no solution in sight for those either.
Taichung have subcritical broilers, unlike the later Dalin and Linkou plants which have ultra supercritical broilers. Although those describe the state of the water in the broiler, typically ultra supercritical broilers are more efficient at generating more power with less coal, and also more efficient burning the fuel to release less particles.
The half-life of the worse radon isotope is 3.8 days. It sucks to be ankle deep in it, as Madam Skłodowska-Curie would tell you, but its far worse if you get ¹³⁷CS or god forbid a hot particle.
Actually from what I read (but don’t quote me on this, I might be wrong) the goal of the greens is that we go back to pre 1700s where everyone work fields, hand to mouth, human population never exceeding 800 million, and people died from diseases that we forgot about.
Basically, no industry. If we rely on renewables, that’s exactly what will happen.
This is where my position differs. I am of the opinion that much more can be done to reduce our collective energy footprint, and I have been very consistent about this over the years (just as my position is completely consistent in opposing the expansion of the nuclear power industry in Taiwan).
Two immediate places to address (and again I am consistent on these points):
-
Personal transport and the failure of policy, notably with the mindboggling proliferation of massive SUVs on Taiwan’s roads. Why are these monster cars permitted? Why are German and other car manufacturers happily producing them, and why are consumers in Taiwan throwing money at them? I would support banning these vehicles outright, but if this is politically difficult I would tax the daylights out of them and charge extra fees for parking them anywhere on public space. All fees collected in this way would go straight to speeding up our transition to renewables.
-
Taiwan’s industrial structure and Taiwan’s ongoing policy failures as public money continues to be thrown at highly polluting and energy intensive industries, notably the petrochemical industry. Why are we supporting this industry? Beijing recently announced some sudden change in their tarrif system for petrochemical products imported from Taiwan—typical election year harrassment right? Do we use this moment as a chance to adjust our industrial policy and attempt to reduce our emissions? No, we instead throw more money at them—massive amounts, close to NT$8 billion according to this report:
So no, I do not support “burning more fossil fuels.” I oppose support for the fossil fuel industry and I oppose the DPP’s current fecklessness in confronting it and the problems they have caused and continue to cause.
Guy
absurdum much?
What do you think China’s whole “one child policy” came from? Someone up there thought human population is too much and we have to reduce them.
Except it worked TOO well for China.
Uh huh.
You going to give us a loan for the first one?
last one cost something like 10 billion USD and we still haven’t got a watt out of it.
Politics and stupid regulation.
Get rid of those stupid regulations and we can build at least 4 of them for 10 billion dollars,
Well if you can’t take all 1-7 children, ama, agong, and the distant family too, really why bother? And of course, the average Taiwanese businessman just needs that much space to not feel claustrophobic while commuting alone to work. And how could one ever hope to carry all the valuables they win at the claw machine center home with the storage space in a normal sedan?!
I fucking HATE big cars and their monopolization of road space and this stupid fucking uneducated “car bigger = right of way” mentality that exists here (and, mind you, definitely elsewhere). I get it for some farmers, or if a family really does have a shitton of kids – in which case a condom probably would’ve been a better investment a long time before, but that’s beside the point. But God the cars I see single fucking losers driving to work makes my blood boil.
My rule in addition to what you’ve wrote? All city lanes HOV for cars, exceptions only for those whose car is their work ala handymen and whatnot. Out in the boonies it’d be different, and need more specific attention, obviously. If you’re alone, either you get your dumb ass on the scooter or you’re walking. Maybe some exceptions for elderly who can demonstrate driving competence and adequate eyesight. It’s Taiwan. Really, almost all the shit one needs is within walking distance. It’s not the US where my progressively less aware and capable grandmother HAS to drive a car because we’re so first world you’d have to walk a hour to the local supermarket for some water – optionally with the jug balanced on your head. Sometimes I really hate that extended fucking stroad strip mall of a country. Today is one of those days, in case people can’t tell.
(I know the Taiwanese police already don’t enforce worth a damn but it’s a nice dream 
)
I think that would be a super smart plan, especially if the money is put into getting more PT set up outside of goddamn Taipei. Taichung is such a sad state of a second city. One shitty metro line which is mostly serving the HSR and big business streets. Busses which due to stupid cars always arrive late. A BRT line terminated in its infancy. Only good transportation in this city is the 台鐵 and it’s probably because it’s got nothing to do with this city. But for now, we content ourselves with thousands of cars parked illegally all the time and just nothing actually done about it, streets way too narrow for curbside parking being marked with white lines because otherwise people would bitch, and just general bad traffic anytime people aren’t at work.
It’s sad that Taichungers can’t realize how shit their city is in comparison to how much nicer it could be. At least youbike is around, not that there’s really much good bike infrastructure anywhere.
I support this sentiment. 
Guy
They came to that conclusion because China was at odds with very nation and their antiquated agricultural technology and relatively tiny ratio of arable land compared to the entire territory under their control couldn’t sustain their rate of population growth. They paid for it with millions starving to death.
Saying no renewable energy could work is as absurd as saying no nuclear energy could work. Taiwan with its piss poor geology is terrible for our current fission power plants, but perfect for geothermal power and other forms of renewable energy as well as non-sustained, no-breeder fusion power.