|
Nuclear future
referendum needed
By Chang Kuo-tsai 張國財
Earlier this month, one of the reactors at the Jinshan Nuclear Power Plant — in
Shihmen District (石門), New Taipei City (新北市), the oldest of Taiwan’s three
functioning atomic power stations, experienced a “scram,” or automatic emergency
shutdown. At about the same time, news emerged that anchor bolts at Taiwan’s
Fourth Nuclear Power Plant in Gongliao District (貢寮), New Taipei City — also
known as the Longmen Nuclear Power Plant — which is still being built, had been
broken through faulty workmanship.These negative reports have once again focused
people’s attention on the issue of nuclear safety and the question of whether
the Longmen plant should go on being built or should instead be scrapped.
A year and seven months have passed since the Tohoku Earthquake and resulting
tsunami struck northeast Japan on March 11 last year, causing a serious accident
at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant. The disaster response efforts
that followed the Fukushima accident can be summed up in two words —
helplessness and prayer.
The US, the former Soviet Union and Japan are universally recognized as being
among the world’s leaders in science and technology, yet these countries have
experienced the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents.
The promise made by nuclear experts that nuclear power is absolutely safe has
been shown to be nothing but a myth.
Taiwan is a crowded island that is frequently shaken by earthquakes, and nuclear
reactors depend on fallible human beings for their operation. Taiwan’s nuclear
power stations have been the most expensive in the world to build.
That the US-based General Electric Co charged US$2.92 million for replacing six
broken or cracked anchor bolts at the Guosheng Nuclear Power Plant — in Wanli
District (萬里), New Taipei City (新北市), earlier this year shows just how serious a
problem this is.
The reality is that personnel management in Taiwan’s nuclear energy industry
cannot compare with Japan.
Just how sloppy the Taiwan Power Co’s personnel management is can be seen from
an incident that took place during major repair and maintenance work on the
Jinshan plant at the end of last year, when O-ring gaskets were damaged by being
reinstalled in the wrong position. That is what caused the shutdown on Oct. 7
this year.
Taiwan Power Co, better known as Taipower, also continues to assure the public
that there is no need to worry about the safety of nuclear waste disposal, but
at the same time it has avoided disposing of the waste in its own backyard and
chooses to dump it on the neighbors instead. It ships its waste hundreds of
kilometers away to Orchid Island (蘭嶼), where it has set up a nuclear waste
storage facility while deceitfully telling island residents that it would be a
fish cannery.
All these incidents make it clear that the question of whether to keep or scrap
nuclear energy is an issue that Taiwanese cannot avoid addressing.
This is especially true of the Longmen plant. Construction of the plant has been
delayed for various reasons and has dragged on for 17 years so far, with the
parts used in its construction sourced from a variety of manufacturers. Nobody
knows when the plant’s hardware and software, pieced together from various
sources, will finally be ready for commercial operation.
Furthermore, the costs involved in building the plant are like a bottomless pit,
with the budget being increased again and again. Nobody seems to know where it
will end. The original budget of NT$169.7 billion (US$5.8 billion) has already
gone up to nearly NT$330 billion. By the time it is eventually finished, or even
if construction is permanently halted, the final cost will be astronomical.
All these problems bring to mind the old adage that bad policies are even worse
than corruption.
Returning to Japan, recognized as it is for its advanced management practices
and a strong sense of responsibility, the indecision and helplessness of
Japanese nuclear energy experts in the face of the Fukushima nuclear accident
revealed that there were few issues for which they could really take
responsibility.
As for compensation for ruined lives and damaged property, it would be a mere
“pie in the sky” idea if left to the power company to arrange. In the end, the
huge cost of disaster relief operations could only be shouldered by the state,
in other words by the public as a whole. This makes it all the more worrying to
think about how Taiwan will eventually pay for the shambles that the Longmen
power station project has become.
In the realm of politics, the modern age is no longer one of rulers who are
supposed to teach their subjects and make up their minds for them. In our day,
the public should be able to participate in policy decisions and share
responsibility for the outcome. In the sphere of science and technology, this is
an age in which people no longer have unquestioning faith in experts, and one in
which people doubt and question authority.
Given the controversy that exists over the construction of the Longmen Nuclear
Power Plant, the proper way to resolve the issue would be to put it to a
referendum.
Should Taipower go on building the plant and make it operational, or should it
be scrapped entirely? The public could decide and bear collective responsibility
for the outcome. That is real democracy in action. That is real popular
sovereignty.
A referendum is a collective exercise and expression of the will of a country’s
citizens. It is nothing to be afraid of.
In January last year, the people of South Sudan voted for independence in a
referendum, and on Feb. 26 this year Syria held a referendum on a new
constitution. The democratic structures of these countries may not be as well
founded as those of Taiwan, but in some ways they are ahead of Taiwan.
A referendum on the Longmen plant would be less fundamental for Taiwan than
those held in South Sudan and Syria, so why has Taiwan never gone beyond just
talking about it?
In Taiwan’s presidential elections there is no requirement that more than half
of all people entitled to vote cast a ballot, nor that the winner must receive
more than half the valid votes. So why, according to the existing Referendum Act
(公民投票法), must a referendum proposal meet such strict requirements to be
approved, even after getting over a number of hurdles such as examination by the
Referendum Review Commission?
A national leader who respects the public and sees voters as the true masters of
the nation has no good reason to prevent the public from freely exercising their
right to hold a referendum, still less to impose all kinds of fetters on the
rules of the referendum game.
Germany and Japan, both world leaders in science and technology, have announced
timetables for becoming nuclear-free countries.
Does Taiwan want to keep its nuclear power stations, which are like ticking
timebombs that could go off at any moment? Or would it be better to formulate
policies allowing present and future generations to live free of the threat of
nuclear accidents?
The question of whether to finish building the Longmen plant or scrap it is the
most urgent question in this respect. Holding a referendum on the question would
form a consensus encompassing a relative majority of the public as the basis for
future policy. Without doubt, a referendum is the solution that best suits the
principles and spirit of democracy.
Chang Kuo-tsai is a former deputy secretary-general of the Taiwan Association
of University Professors and a retired associate professor of National Hsinchu
University of Education.
Translated by Julian Clegg
|
