[Event Review] Taiwan Risk Society Forum: What is the Future of Taiwan's Energy Transition after the Referendum?
The Risk Society and Policy Research Center (RSPRC), National Taiwan University, held a forum as part of our series of Taiwan Risk Society Forums, on 5 December, 2018. The forum, titled, "What is the Future of Taiwan's Energy Transition after the Referendum?", was held in conjunction with several energy-related referendums that were held at the end of November 2018.
On 24 November 2018, Taiwan held three referendums on energy-related issues, which were all passed. The three questions asked if the public agreed that the electricity output of thermal power plants should be lowered by at least one percent every year (under question seven), that Taiwan should prohibit the construction of new coal-fired power plants or generators (under question eight), and that the first section of Article 95 of the Electricity Act, which stipulated that, "all nuclear-energy-based power-generating facilities shall completely cease operations by 2025", should be abolished (under question 16).
 |
| Figure 1: Our Center Chief Director Professor Kuei-Tien Chou moderating the Taiwan Risk Society Forum. To his left is Our Center Executive Director Professor Kuo-Hui Chang, and to his right is Sinogreenergy Group's Kun-Hung Chen |
At the forum, our center's Chief Director Professor Kuei-Tien Chou explained that the forum aimed to tackle questions raised from the referendum results and asked if Taiwan is ready for energy transition. He highlighted that whereas renewable energy as part of Taiwan's power generation has increased from 4% in 2014 to 5% in 2017, the increase has been lower than that of other developed countries. Japan's renewable energy use has increased from 13% to 16%, whereas in other developed countries, the share of renewables in the power mix has increased to around 15% or higher. In Sweden and Germany, renewable energy comprised 58% and 34% of their power mix, respectively, in 2017. Professor Chou explained that in order to meet the emissions reduction target set by the Paris Agreement, renewable energy use needs to be increased to 80% by 2050 globally, however Taiwan's progress has been slow.
 |
|
Figure 2: RSPRC Executive Director Professor Kuo-Hui Chang sharing our center's survey results on Taiwanese's perceptions of energy transition |
The forum's key speaker, our center's Executive Director, Professor Kuo-Hui Chang, shared that in a survey that the center conducted this year to 1,078 participants, respondents felt that it was urgent for Taiwan to undergo energy transition, however they were also of the opinion that the way policies are currently promoted is chaotic, lacks a coherent strategy and is somewhat unfair. Also, respondents aged 29 years old and above and those above 60 felt most urgently about energy transition in Taiwan.
In fact, among the respondents, 82% of them said that they were concerned about the development of energy transition in Taiwan, however when asked if they knew what the main source of power generation in Taiwan was, only 32% of our respondents were able to correctly identify coal-fired power, and 44% of the respondents had the misconception that nuclear energy is the main power generation source. When broken down by age, the misconceptions were held by 43% of those aged 18 to 29 years old and over 50% of those aged 30 to 39 and 40 49 years old. In addition, the government had set a target of attaining a 20% renewable energy target by 2025 but only 41% of the respondents were aware of this target, and 57% who were not clear about this policy goal.
This suggests that there is a need for greater energy awareness among the Taiwanese, however 64.9% had indicated an unwillingness to partake in any online or offline workshops conducted by the government. When asked about the incentives that would drive participants to be more agreeable with having renewable energy installations in their neighborhoods, 40% said that if they were able to receive adequate financial incentives, they would do so. Indeed, our survey also showed that 80% of the respondents were willing to install solar panels in their homes and communities, however the lack of subsidies to offset initial investments costs as well as inadequate installation spaces were barriers to their uptake.
This led to the question of whether participants would be willing to pay higher prices for electricity, for which about 20% of the respondents were resolutely against any price increases in electricity prices. 60% of the respondents were willing to pay higher prices to support replacing nuclear energy with renewable energy, however this is lower than the 85% in the survey that our center conducted in 2015.
It was also found that when respondents had higher energy knowledge, they would also be more willing to accept higher electricity prices and energy taxes. Our survey thus makes clear that in order to increase the public's acceptance of higher electricity and fuel prices, our focus should be placed on enhancing the public's knowledge on energy-related issues, as well as to emphasize the health benefits of price adjustments in air pollution reduction.
A panel discussion followed Professor Chang's talk, among whom were Kun-Hung Chen, Co-Founder and Executive Director of Sinogreenergy Group; Professor Wen-Chen Chang, Director of Policy and Law Center for Environmental Sustainability at the National Taiwan University, and Yu-Ying Chang, Chairman of Environmental Jurists Association.
 |
|
Figure 3: RSPRC Chief Director Professor Kuei-Tien Chou kicking off the panel discussion as the moderator |
The discussion was moderated by Professor Chou, who began by highlighting that there were contradictions in the results of the referendums, in that the whereas the public rejected the goal of a nuclear-free homeland by 2025 on one hand, they also rejected importing agricultural products and food from the Fukushima area where a nuclear accident occurred. He explained that there is a need for energy communication to be strengthened, and that the government should provide a clearer energy transition pathway, and to engage in dialogue with society, so as to enhance the trust that the public would have towards energy reform.
Professor Chou also explained that energy policies should be appraised from a holistic perspective that includes having a long-term view of sustainable development, while also respecting the rights of local communities. Fundamentally, we need to care for our societies. Professor Chou explained that, the earlier we are able to make a paradigm shift from a brown economy model, and to move away from the shackles of social confrontation, the faster we will be able to catch up to the global trend of a low-carbon and green economy model.
 |
|
Figure 4: Sinogreenergy Group's Kun-Hung Chen sharing his company's experience with solar panel installation in Taiwan |
In his sharing, Sinogreenergy Group's Kun-Hung Chen explained that from the experience his company has had in installing solar panels in communities, it is important to learn the local dialects to communicate with local communities. He also explained even though rooftops in Taiwan provide an avenue for solar installation, however legislation has prevented solar panels to be installed on some rooftops due to their weak infrastructure. One way that his company had worked around this has been to also fund the upgrade of the infrastructure on the rooftop, so as to enable solar panels to be installed on more rooftops. He said that many companies might baulk at having to pay more, but for the sake of sustainable development, he believed that this would be a worthwhile investment that companies should make. He also shared that, in his experience, the best way to encourage local communities on the benefits of renewable energy is to show them existing installations that have been done, to allow them to have actual insights of the benefits. Chen also spoke of a visit that the Apple company had made to his office and had shared that even though Apple is committed to the RE100 100% renewable energy goal, that Apple is concerned at the same time that their suppliers might not be able to work towards the same target. Chen, therefore, made a call for companies to work together towards sustainable development and energy transition.
 |
|
Figure 5: Director of Policy and Law Center for Environmental Sustainability Professor Wen-Chen Chang speaking about the implications of Taiwan's nuclear energy referendum |
Speaking next, Professor Wen-Chen Chang, Director of Policy and Law Center for Environmental Sustainability at the National Taiwan University explained that even though the referendum result required the first section of Article 95 of the Electricity Act, which was intended to phase out nuclear energy by 2025, to be abolished, but under another legislation – the Basic Environment Act – nuclear energy would still need to be phased out at some point. She, therefore, explained that in effect, the referendum had only served to delay the phase out of nuclear energy. Professor Chang also explained that from RSPRC's survey which showed that respondents had inadequate energy knowledge, this has, therefore, allowed misconceptions about nuclear energy to be easily spread. Pointing to successful examples where the local groups and lawyers in the Netherlands had petitioned to the courts to protest against the central government for not meeting their obligations to reduce carbon emissions, and how these groups had been effective in demanding their government to revise the country's energy policies, she suggested that this was something Taiwan could emulate. Therefore, academia and lawyers in Taiwan should work harder on educating the Taiwanese on energy policies and laws, and to look into these using similar legal mechanisms to protect Taiwan's energy transition.
 |
|
Figure 6: Chairman of Environmental Jurists Association Yu-Ying Chang discussing the implications of using the referendum to decide on energy policies |
The last speaker, Yu-Ying Chang, Chairman of Environmental Jurists Association, pointed out that referendums should not be used on issues such as energy transition and human rights, as voters can be influenced by populist sentiments when voting for the referendums, and this can be counterproductive. He also pointed out that in one of the referendum questions, on reducing the electricity output of thermal power plants by at least one percent every year, the proponents had said that the aim of the referendum was to also reduce air pollution, but directly connecting the two was misleading to voters. He said that even though the referendum had removed the deadline of nuclear phase-out, it would not be possible to extend the operation licenses of the existing nuclear power plants, as many of them were already ineligible for license renewal. In addition, new nuclear power plants would have to be built which would take a few years. As such, in order to reduce air pollution and find new energy sources for Taiwan's energy transition, the best way would still be to enhance the energy efficiency and development of renewable energy, Chang said. Chang also pointed out that even though RSPRC's survey showed that a majority of the Taiwanese had misconceptions on Taiwan's energy policies. On the other hand, there were more than 80% of the respondents who were also concerned about Taiwan's energy transition. Given more information, he believed that Taiwan's energy transition is still hopeful.
Our center Chief Director Professor Chou concluded the forum by explaining that Taiwan's companies have been currently unwilling to invest to innovate and transit into higher-value production, which he said is not sustainable for Taiwan's development. In addition, he said that there is a need to strengthen risk communication in Taiwan and echoed Professor Wen-Chen Chang, by saying that referendum laws should be reviewed, so that the referendums would enable more time for discussion on issues to be made. Finally, on the Ministry of Economic Affairs announcing that it would come out with new energy policies within the next two months in response to the referendum results, Professor Chou cautioned that this has to be done carefully so as to not compromise with Taiwan's long-term goal of energy transition.
 |
|
Figure 7: The panel of speakers at the Taiwan Risk Society Forum (from left to right): Chairman of Environmental Jurists Association Yu-Ying Chang, RSPRC Executive Director Professor Kuo-Hui Chang, RSPRC Chief Director Professor Kuei-Tien Chou, Sinogreenergy Group's Kun-Hung Chen, Director of Policy and Law Center for Environmental Sustainability Professor Wen-Chen Chang |
Error
Joomla Gallery makes it better. Balbooa.com