There are heaps of threads on this site about nuclear power in Taiwan and its futures. Here’s one thread, so here we go.
Lately, as Taiwan’s policy makers go all-in on AI stupidities and the additional power it will require, there’s been renewed interest in nuclear power and its future in Taiwan.
In response, Michael Turton writing at the Taipei Times sits down to look at the national security and geopolitical issues around using nuclear power. He enumerates countless ways these plants are a geopolitical risk and how they do not—despite what certain interested parties claim—contribute to Taiwan’s resilience.
Turton concludes:
It is not difficult to see why the pro-Taiwan side wants the reactors shut down. Building nuclear reactors on an island subject to terrorism and war from the PRC — building them right on potential invasion beaches (!) — along with quakes and tsunamis, was never a very bright idea. As Taiwan’s nuclear plants age and PLA capabilities expand, it is looking less intelligent every day.
Step one: revise industrial policy (this is not happening).
Step two: at the same time incentivize reduced energy consumption (also not happening at the scale we need).
These are damning points against the DPP. The KMT also has no answers here, but they are more up front and honest about their short termist trashing of this island.
Step three: forcibly move in to help Euro and other companies set up renewables more quickly (it looks to me like local governments and players are messing with this process to grab what they can—again short termist thinking here).
Step four: find a way to deal with the waste (here the pro nuclear side is completely silent and has been utterly irresponsible for more than forty years—they just shrug as their plan to dump it into Indigenous communities is not longer acceptable. This also shows the racist underside to the pro nuke position in Taiwan that’s been there right from the start).
Step five: realize that new nuclear plants cannot be set up quickly. @Mataiou you used the phrase “for the time being”—but when do you think a new plant could be operational? Or are you thinking that the plant in Pingtung should continue to operate? (The two functional plants in the north have already stopped producing power—even as they still hold all that radioactive waste, a hazard left behind by the short termism of earlier industrial policy).
I’m talking about cutting the support for energy intensive and dirty polluting industries such as petrochemicals and plastics. They are energy hogs with razor tight margins. It’s long past time to stop supporting them with cheap land, cheap water, cheap electricity, etc.
Depends. It’s probably not worth responding in detail to this half-cocked “theory” of yours, but there are a number of things that would go on there that would both increase CO2 emissions (e.g., fires, animals and plants decomposing) and decrease them (e.g., far less industrial activity).
I’m not alone in calling for this. From today’s Taipei Times:
The government should provide more incentives to invest in energy-saving technology and equipment, business representatives told a news conference after a climate change committee meeting on Thursday.
Paul Peng (彭浪), chairman of LCD maker AUO Corp, during the meeting called for more incentives for companies to invest in energy storage and energy-saving technology, Presidential Office Deputy Secretary-General Xavier Chang (張淳涵) said.
Lai Po-szu (賴博司), chairman of the Manufacturers United General Association of Industrial Park of ROC, told the meeting that incentives such as tax credits would motivate big and small businesses to double down on efforts to save energy, Chang said.
Fission is already here, all we need is popular consensus on what we will do with those wastes, and that’s not a science problem, it’s politics.
I don’t care if it’s not a good solution, but there needs to be popular consensus on it. Like dig a hole and bury it. I honestly favor recycling, but I understand there’s no consensus on it.
Otherwise we will just burn more stuff for energy.
Yes the ever feasible “dig a hole and bury” high level nuclear waste storage solution in Taiwan, a place with no known earthquakes or other seismic activity. Everything should be fine! How long with the waste remain radioactive in that completely secure spot? Google it and get back to me.
In the meantime, thank you for supporting my point that there is no plan in place in Taiwan for this waste.
In my opinion, dropping it into marinas trench is actually a good solution. Water is a great radiation shield, and eventually they’ll get subducted into the mantle. Doing so also ensures no terrorist will be able to retrieve it.
But we need consensus, not obstruction and indecision. I don’t care if it’s a bad solution either.
Do you know several naval reactors sit at the bottom of the sea?
The marinas trench is really deep, almost no mixing of ecology. Point Nemo is another good location.
We dump far worse stuff into the sea. Those spacecraft that gets landed at point Nemo is in fact full of highly hazardous materials.
Water stops radiation, any long lived stuff isn’t that dangerous. You can build a strong cask and just throw it into an isolated part of the sea, and monitor it for any issue and make sure no one tries to retrieve them.
