Taiwan Energy Policy Analysis

English Version (中文版本在下方)

Introduction

Because of the referendum, Taiwan’s energy issues suddenly became a major public topic. The third LNG terminal, algal reefs, and the possible restart of Nuclear Plant No. 4 were repeatedly discussed in the media, but the arguments on each side often pointed in completely different directions. Whenever I looked more closely at those competing claims, I kept feeling that the discussion was missing the bigger picture. That was what pushed me to gather information and write this piece.

To better understand how Taiwan should plan its energy policy, and what difficulties it is currently trapped in, I decided to start from the overall structure of the energy mix. By looking at the current situation and planning of other countries, I tried to think through how Taiwan should allocate the shares of different energy sources in the future, and then work backward from the desired end state to see what kind of planning Taiwan should make in the coming years.

So I first compiled the current energy mixes and planning approaches of several countries, then sorted out the underlying patterns and trends. After that, I returned to Taiwan’s present situation and the development potential of each energy source, and finally summarized what kind of energy policy may fit Taiwan best.

Energy Mixes and National Planning

United States

“Domestically produced natural gas, an effort to balance energy sources and diversify risk, acceptance of nuclear power, and strong renewable growth in 2020, with wind up 14% and solar up 26%.”

2020 Natural gas: 40% Coal: 20% Nuclear: 20% Renewables: 20%

European Union

“Net-zero emissions, a neutral stance toward nuclear power, treating nuclear as clean energy, and strong development of renewables including wind and solar.”

2020 Renewables: 38% Coal, natural gas, and other fossil fuels: 37% Nuclear: 25%

Germany

“A non-nuclear target by 2022, a net-zero emissions goal, aggressive renewable development, fossil fuel generation as a bridge, the advantage of being connected to the continental European grid, and one of the highest nominal electricity prices in Europe.”

First half of 2021 Renewables: 44% (wind: 22%, solar: 9%; renewables were 17% in 2010) Coal: 27% Natural gas: 14% Nuclear: 12% (22% in 2010)

France

“A pro-nuclear country and one of the few places where nuclear power makes up the dominant share.”

2018 Nuclear: 73% (highest in the world) Renewables: 20% Fossil fuels: 8%

United Kingdom

“Strong development of offshore wind, a net-zero target, no rejection of nuclear power, one nuclear plant under construction and two more in planning, with high electricity prices due in part to rising natural gas prices.”

First quarter of 2020 Renewables: 44% (wind: 24%, solar: 12%) Natural gas: 29% Nuclear: 15% Imported electricity: 7% Coal: 3%

Japan

“Less hostile to fossil fuels than Europe and the United States, while also strongly promoting renewables. Japan recently announced nuclear restarts, targeting 36-38% renewables and 20-22% nuclear by 2030.”

2020 Coal: 30% Natural gas: 30% Renewables: 23% Nuclear: 6%

South Korea

“South Korea has wavered on nuclear power. The government has also tried to push renewables while constraining nuclear, but public opinion has gradually leaned back toward nuclear because of power shortage concerns.”

2019 Coal: 40% Natural gas: 25% Nuclear: 25% Renewables: 5%

Taiwan

“Thermal power remains the main baseload source. Natural gas has steadily increased, coal has steadily declined, nuclear continues to trend down, and the government is pushing renewable development harder, especially offshore wind and solar.”

2020 Natural gas: 40.8% Coal: 36.4% Nuclear: 12.7% Renewables: 5.8% (wind: 0.82%, solar: 2.2%)

My Observations

Taiwan Energy Analysis

Natural gas Over the past decade it has risen from 30% to 40%. Its carbon emissions are lower than coal, but its costs are higher. It can still serve as baseload power.

Coal Over the past decade it has fallen from 40% to 36%. It creates the most serious air pollution, but because it remains cheap, its share has stayed high. It can also serve as baseload power.

Nuclear Nuclear power in Taiwan has fallen from 20% to around 11-13%. The upfront cost of plant construction is high, but the later cost of generation is relatively low, so it can serve as baseload power. Nuclear Plant No. 1 has already been decommissioned, and Plants No. 2 and No. 3 are scheduled to retire between 2021 and 2025. Restarting Nuclear Plant No. 4 would require roughly 5-15 years, depending on whose estimate you believe, and a restarted plant would be expected to operate for about 40 years, meaning roughly until 2065-2075.

Nuclear-related problems

1. Taiwan sits on an earthquake belt
2. The unresolved location for nuclear waste storage
3. Disposal issues after decommissioning

Renewables Over the past decade, renewables in Taiwan have grown from 3% to around 5-6%. Their generation cost is high and they cannot serve as baseload power on their own. At present, Taiwan is mainly developing solar and offshore wind. The government hopes renewables can reach a 20% share by 2025, but Taiwan is still, at this stage, a relatively low-renewables country.

Renewable-related problems

1. They cannot act as baseload power and require storage support
2. Generation costs are high, while electricity prices in Taiwan remain too low

---

台灣能源政策分析

中文版本

前言

由於公投的舉行，台灣的能源議題受到大眾熱烈的關注，關於三接與藻礁、核四重啟議題屢屢被新聞媒體提及，但正反雙方所抱持的論點往往南轅北轍。每當細究彼此論述時，總會感到「見樹不見林」的侷限性，也催生我自主蒐集資料並撰寫本文的動機。

為了更瞭解台灣在能源策上該如何規劃，目前又陷入那些困境？我決定從整體能源配置的方向出發，並援引各國的現狀與規劃，去思考未來台灣應如何配置各能源的比重，並用「以終為使」的角度回推未來幾年台灣應如何在能源議題上做出相應的規劃。

因此我首先彙整了目前各國的能源配置與規劃，並從中梳理脈絡與趨勢，接著回歸台灣目前的現狀與各能源的發展潛力，最後總結台灣適合的能源政策，並提出我的看法。

各國能源配置與規劃

美國

「自產天然氣，旨在平衡各能源來源（分散風險），接受核能，2020年再生能源年增長9%，風力增長14%，太陽能增長26%」

2020年 天然氣：40% 煤炭：20% 核能：20% 再生：20%

歐盟

「零碳排，對核能中立，將核能視為乾淨能源，大力發展再生能源，包括風電與太陽能」

2020年 再生能源：38% 煤炭、天然氣等化石能源：37% 核能：25%

德國

「2022非核家園，目標零碳排，大力發展再生能源，計畫由火力發電作為過渡，且享有歐洲大陸電網優勢，名目電價歐洲最高」

2021年上半年數據 再生能源：44%（風力：22%、太陽能：9%，2010年再生能源為17%) 煤炭：27% 天然氣：14% 核能：12%（2010年時為22%）

法國

「擁核，少數核能佔大宗的國家」

2018年 核能：73%（全球第一） 再生：20% 化石燃料：8%

英國

「大力發展離岸風電，目標零碳排，不排斥核能，目前有一興建中核電廠與二規劃案，由於天然氣價格上漲，電費高昂」

2020年第一季 再生能源：44% (風電：24%、太陽能：12%) 天然氣：29% 核能：15% 進口電力：7% 煤炭：3%

日本

「對化石燃料不如歐美國家排斥，大力推動再生能源，日前宣布重啟核能，目標2030再生能源達36–38%，核能達20–22%」

2020年 煤炭：30% 天然氣：30% 再生能源：23% 核能：6%

韓國

「在核電上搖擺不定，政府也欲推動再生能源並限縮核能，但民間由於缺電逐漸傾向核電」

2019年 煤炭：40% 天然氣：25% 核電：25% 再生：5%

台灣

「火力發電目前依舊為主要基載能源，其中天然氣逐年上升而煤炭逐年下降，核能也呈現穩定下降趨勢，政府愈大力推動再生能源發展，包括離岸風電與太陽能」

2020年 天然氣：40.8% 煤炭：36.4% 核能：12.7% 再生：5.8%（風力：0.82%、太陽能：2.2%）

我的觀察

台灣能源分析

天然氣 近十年自30%上升至40%，碳排相較燃煤低，但成本較煤炭高昂，可當基載能源

煤炭 近十年自40%下降至36%，空氣污染最為嚴重，但價格低廉因此居高不下，可當基載能源

核能 台灣核能發電自20%下降至11–13%，建廠成本高但後續發電成本低廉，可當基載能源，目前核一已除役，核二與核三在 2021–2025 將相繼除役，核四重啟需要 5–15 年（眾說紛紜），預計運轉 40 年（意即可運轉至2065–2075 左右）

核能問題

1. 台灣位處地震帶
2. 核廢料安置地點
3. 除役後處置問題

再生能源 台灣再生能源近十年自3%成長至5-6%，發電成本高，無法作為基載能源，目前主要發展太陽能與離岸風電，政府希望2025年再生能源可佔比20%，但現階段台灣尚屬低再生能源發展國家。

再生能源問題

1. 無法擔任基載能源，需搭配儲能設備
2. 發電成本高，而台灣電費又過於低廉

• Tags:
• Policy
• Energy