Taiwan's Energy Security Dilemma: Choices Between Ecology, Economy, and National Future

In recent years, discussions about energy have intensified in Taiwanese society. Energy policy, which encompasses national security, economic development, and public welfare, has become a critical social consensus issue that cannot be taken lightly. However, Taiwan has entered an "energy security dilemma" caught between ideals and reality, environmental protection and energy needs, economic concerns and national security. As concerned members of society, we must carefully consider Taiwan's path forward.

I. Energy Security = National Security

Some might ask: Is energy truly related to national security? The answer is definitively yes. Our current energy structure means that our nation's most critical power source could be controlled or cut off by external forces, with unimaginable consequences.

Currently, 17% of Taiwan's electricity comes from coal, and nearly 50% from natural gas; the government plans to increase the natural gas proportion to over 50%. The problem lies in the fact that Taiwan relies on imports for almost 100% of its natural gas, transported via large LNG vessels, with hundreds of ships docking annually. Any international political turbulence, shipping route disruptions, or supplier restrictions (even from friendly nations) could plunge Taiwan into an energy crisis. The European natural gas crisis triggered by the Russia-Ukraine war serves as a vivid lesson.

In terms of national defense or wartime scenarios, energy supply becomes an even more vulnerable link. In the worst-case scenario, if Taiwan lacks self-sufficient baseload power generation capacity, the nation's strategic resilience becomes meaningless—including AI, telecommunications, and critical civilian industries, all would be stranded on an energy island.

Taiwan's Solar and Wind Power Equipment: Mainly Sourced from China

While some green energy advocates promote wind and solar power as renewable energy sources—an admirable vision—we must face reality: over 50% of global solar panels (modules) and components come from China. Over-reliance on the supply chain of a political and economic adversary raises concerns about national autonomy and energy security. Moreover, against the backdrop of cross-strait tensions, the green energy industry risks losing its bargaining power.

II. Economic Security and Livelihood—Avoiding Unrealistic "Green Energy Great Leap Forward"

Electricity Prices: Taiwan's "Hidden Poverty" and Industrial Exodus Risk

Electricity prices affect both public livelihood and industrial competitiveness. Taiwan's major electricity consumers, such as semiconductor and steel industries, use billions of kilowatt-hours annually. If electricity prices spiral out of control, industrial costs will surge significantly—ultimately either passing the burden to consumers or forcing businesses to consider relocating overseas (Germany and South Korea's post-energy-transition struggles serve as cautionary tales).

In fact, the government has been heavily subsidizing Taipower's deficit with national treasury funds; otherwise, today's electricity prices might have already doubled. This is unsustainable. When green energy (wind and solar) generation costs are significantly higher than nuclear power (7-10 NT$/kWh versus 1 NT$/kWh post-depreciation for nuclear), blindly increasing the proportion of green energy will lead to enormous expenditure. Over time, this will squeeze budgets for national defense, healthcare, education, and social welfare.

The "Non-Nuclear" Myth and Nuclear Energy's Future Choice

Many worry about nuclear waste and safety issues. These concerns are legitimate and deserve thorough discussion and the highest standards of scrutiny. However, Taiwan's current nuclear power plants have among the world's best operational records, with well-established technology and regulations. Many countries globally—France (60%), Sweden, Switzerland, South Korea, Japan (gradually restarting nuclear power post-Fukushima)—view nuclear energy as a cornerstone of sustainability and climate change mitigation. New generation Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) have significantly improved safety, and nuclear waste management technology is maturing (as seen in Swedish and Finnish deep geological repository cases).

More notably, if Taiwan completely phases out nuclear power, not only will talent be lost, but we'll be left relying on imported high-carbon, high-pollution thermal power generation, only increasing air pollution. As many medical and public health experts point out, central and southern Taiwan's thermal power plants already pose significant health burdens; abandoning nuclear power for coal and gas will only exacerbate air pollution damage.

III. Environmental Protection Misconceptions: "Imagined Green Energy Eden" and Land/Marine Ecological Concerns

Land and Ecological Pressure: Green energy isn't exempt from environmental impact. Offshore wind farms require thousands of turbines, vast marine areas, seabed anchors, ultra-high voltage towers, and infrastructure. Low-frequency noise disturbs marine ecology, affecting whale, dolphin, and fish communication and reproduction. Solar panels often spark land use and wetland controversies, while panel production processes pose pollution management challenges. (Not to mention these equipment have limited lifespans and create end-of-life disposal issues.)

Global Warming and Energy Life Cycle: "Invisible Emissions"
The so-called "clean natural gas" only has lower carbon emissions during combustion, but global methane leakage during extraction and transportation has far greater greenhouse effects than CO2. When we use imported gas, we can't escape the reality of "remote pollution"—the global village's total remains unchanged.

IV. Maintaining Options and Making Practical Choices is Responsible Progress

Looking back, the once-overwhelming "anti-nuclear" sentiment and "nuclear-free homeland" policy were based on idealistic imagination. But global trends have shifted—the US, Europe, Japan, and Korea are all turning toward "low-carbon baseload power," especially nuclear energy. For Taiwan to win the next generation under the net-zero transition trend, we shouldn't let "sacred cows" restrict our options. Instead, we should find a balanced path between practicality and ideals that ensures safety, reasonable prices, and ecological preservation.

This includes comprehensive discussions on legislation, scientific assessment, long-term nuclear waste policy, industry and talent continuity, and fair compensation for vulnerable areas, rather than foreclosing the future with claims of "no social consensus." We should also recognize that society and technology continue to advance; old fears shouldn't limit new generations' choices.

Conclusion: Future Taiwan Deserves Stronger Energy Security

The more diverse our society becomes, the more we need practical thinking, reality recognition, and courage to face dilemmas. While we must maintain our commitment to clean energy ideals, we cannot limit ourselves with simplification or "beautiful illusions." A truly open, progressive, and democratic Taiwan should embrace diverse choices and more advanced solutions, preventing vulnerable energy structure from becoming a weakness in national security and economic welfare.

Energy security is not just about power supply; it's about Taiwan's ability to control its own future. Let's hope we can face these issues together, think critically, and find a sustainable solution that works for Taiwan.