福岛核电站事故评估

The re-evaluation for the 4th Nuclear Power Plant was carried out by a special committee with members from the government agencies, legislative bodies, academia institutes, and industries. It was the first open debate on the major energy issues in the last half century that was a vigorous, extensive and argumentative discussion and struggle between the pros and cons. From the conclusions and recommendations of both the pros and cons, we might be able to find out the trends and visions for the energy policy and measures that are to be implemented in this economy in the near future. The summary are given as following: I. Mutual Consensus   The construction of a nuclear power plant is something much more than the provision of electric power, they involve the issues on energy supply, environmental protection, economic and social development, politics and the overall social security, which are prone to be debatable and argumentative.   To maintain a normal economic development and to meet daily needs for the general public, the government should plan for a system with reasonable, reliable and adequate power supply, in spite of whether or not to construct the 4th Nuclear Power Plant.   To cope with the facts that we are lack of indigenous energy resources, the global advocacy of sustainable development and the international movement on environmental protection, our energy policy must be able to address various issues we meet. It should implement positive energy conservation, to raise the energy efficiency both on energy use and power generation, to promote the greater development and use of renewable energy, to re-adjust the industrial structure, to liberalize the power utility for a better operational efficiency.   The proposal plan for current and future nuclear wastes, including those from the operation and decommission of current and planned nuclear power units must be sound and complete, in spite of construction of the 4th Nuclear Power Plant or not. II. Conclusions and Recommendations   Due to the remarkable difference between the opinions of the pros and cons, the committee decided to report their conclusions and recommendations separately. The members in favor to continue the construction claim that the nuclear power plant provides the power at the lowest cost, bluntly stopping the current construction project will cause us a price too high to pay and there is no reasonable alternate project, the technology for nuclear power generation is safe and mature, the problems of nuclear wastes can be solved. The members against the construction project claim that Taipower underestimated the cost of nuclear power generation, there would be no power shortage even without the 4th Nuclear Power Plant, the construction of the 4th Nuclear Power Plant will not only exacerbate the problems of nuclear wastes but also bring greater risk of nuclear catastrophe to local people. Their points of view are summarized as follow: A. The group that prefers sustainability to the nuclear power plant suggest the following conclusions: 1. The construction of the 4th Nuclear Power Plant(NPP) is against the trends of energy development in the international community. 2. The construction of the 4th NPP will bring the public a greater risk of nuclear catastrophe. 3. In an island of limited land space, with dense population, frequent earthquakes and typhoons, we do not have the safety grounds to develop nuclear power facilities. 4. The construction of the 4th NPP will aggravate the problems of nuclear wastes and passed them to our offspring. 5. The costs of decommission and disposal of a nuclear power plants is high and will create recumbent nuclear wastes. The construction of the 4th NPP means to set up another nuclear graveyard. 6. The construction of the 4th NPP will destroy the precious eco-system around north-eastern Taiwan, definitely inconsistent to the goals of founding the Northeast Coast Scenic Area and the Marine Resources Preservation Area. 7. To stop the construction of the 4th NPP will not cause any shortage of electric power, does no harm to the economic development either. 8. The Taipower underestimates the costs of power generation by nuclear energy and overestimates the costs of other alternatives, therefore, their cost analyses are not trustworthy. 9. An appropriate estimation on the internal and external costs of the 4th NPP will indicate a total price unbearable to the society. 10.To reduce the emission of carbon dioxide through the establishment of the 4th NPP is a wrong approach. 11. The construction of the 4th NPP will interrupt the new government from implementing its energy policy and from obtaining the goal of setting up an island of green silicon. 12. The earlier to abolish the 4th NPP, the less the loss on resources, and the more we can save our costs on power generation. 13.It is beneficial to the general public to abolish the 4th NPP and facilitates the local sustainable development. B. Conclusions and Suggestion from the group in favor to the construction of the 4th NPP are: 1. The price to stop the construction of the 4th NPP at this stage is too high, and it will damage the overall social security and our good image. 2. There is no sound alternate plan for the 4th NPP ready yet. 3. The 4th NPP will be an important element for the balance of power supply between the south and north island. 5. The technology of power generation by nuclear source is safe and mature already, our operational capability is international known. 6. The standards of safety for the 4th NPP is much higher than those for existing facilities, the operational records of same models in Japan verified its safety. It is no guinea pig. 7. There is no technological difficulties for decommission of nuclear power plant, the reclaimed land can be re-used. 8. The power generation by nuclear source brings less overall environmental impacts than other approaches. 9. A power system with various sources, sufficient and reliable supply is essential to the security of our society and the stable economic development. 10.The renewable energy is worthy of our positive exploitation. Due to the technology limits and cost, it tends to be an auxiliary source of energy. 11.We need to continue our positive efforts on promotion of energy conservation and raising energy efficiency, but it is not a replacement for nuclear power. 12.The results of analyses on overall costs for power generation, nuclear power is our best choice. 13.An appropriate mixture of nuclear power can reduce the emission of carbon dioxide. 14.There is no world-wide stalemate on the trend of development for nuclear power generation. 15.From the view point of seeking a balance development on economic growth, energy and environmental protection, the 4th NPP is necessary to our society. 16. The construction of the 4th NPP should be continued. With the provisions of full participation for overseeing by the general public to assure a safe use, the establishment of mandatory organization for nuclear waste disposal, effective promotion on energy conservation and energy efficiency, strengthening the technological development and international cooperation on nuclear wastes disposal are the prequisites. 今年我國對於核能四廠存廢的再評估是政府五十年來對於重大能源建設案集合產官學各界人士所作過最公開、激烈、澈底的討論，從結論，尤其贊成與反對雙方所提論點可以看出我國政府在推動各項能源政策及措施的觀點和各界的反應。茲將討論結果摘要如下： 壹、共識結論   核能電廠之興建，不但是電力供需之議題，且與能源、環保、經濟、社會、政治及國家安全息息相關，爭議難免。   為支持經濟發展及民生需求，無論核四續建與否，均應規劃合理、穩定且不虞匱乏之電力供應。   為因應我國自產能源之不足，並符合永續發展及國際間之環保趨勢，我國能源政策必須多管齊下，積極推動節約能源及提高能源效率（發電及使用）、推廣再生能源之開發與利用、調整產業結構、以及推動電業自由化以提高電業經營效率。   無論核四是否續建，現有核廢料及未來核能電廠運轉與除役拆廠產生的廢料，均須予以妥善處置。 貳、分組結論與建議   由於委員間對核四應否續建有不同看法，故委員會決定分別研提續建與停建之分組結論與建議。其中支持續建委員認為核能發電成本最低，現階段停建核四代價太高，亦無適當替代 方案 气瓶 现场处置方案 .pdf气瓶 现场处置方案 .doc见习基地管理方案.doc关于群访事件的化解方案建筑工地扬尘治理专项方案下载 ，而且核能發電是安全成熟的技術，核廢料也是可以解決的問題。而主張停建之委員則認為台電低估核能發電成本，不建核四並無缺電之虞，而興建核四不但將使核廢料問題更加嚴重，且將使全國人民承擔更高的重大核能災變風險。雙方結論與建議如下： 一、贊成廢除核四之分組委員主張確保台灣永續發展 1.興建核四違反國際能源發展趨勢。 2.興建核四將使全國人民承擔更高的重大核能災變風險。 3.台灣地狹人稠、地震颱風頻繁，缺乏發展核電所需的安全條件。 4.興建核四將使核廢料問題更加嚴重，留給後代子孫更多的負擔。 5.核電機組除役、拆廠的費用高昂，且產生的核廢料難以處置，興建核四將增加另一個核廢墳場。 6.興建核四將破壞台灣東北角的生態瑰寶，與設置「東北角海岸國家風景區」及「海域資源保護區」之目的相衝突。 7.不建核四並無缺電之虞，亦不致影響經濟成長。 8.台電低估核電發電成本，高估其他發電方式之成本，所提核電及其他發電方式之成本並不足以採信。 9.將核四之內部和外部成本適當考量，其社會總成本非常高昂，台灣人民難以承受。 10.興建核四以削減二氧化碳排放是錯誤的作法 11.興建核四妨礙新政府能源政策的落實，使得台灣無法邁向綠色矽島的目標 12.愈早廢止核四，國家資源損失愈少，發電支出節省愈多 13.廢止核四符合台灣人民的利益，並可促進台灣的永續發展 二、贊成續建四電廠之分組所提結論與建議如下： 1.現階段停建核四廠，代價太高，且不利於國家安全及形象 2.整體考量，核四並無適當替代方案 3.核四廠是平衡南北電力供需的重要方案 4.核廢料是可以解決的問題 5.核能發電是安全成熟的技術，我國已具國際水準的營運能力 6.核四廠安全性更高，已有日本同型機組之營運經驗可印證，並非「白老鼠」 7.核能電廠除役並無技術困難，廠址土地可再供開發利用 8.核能發電相較於其他發電方法，對環境的整體影響較小 9.能源多元化及充足與穩定的供電，攸關國家安全及經濟發展 10.再生能源應積極推動，惟囿於技術與成本，僅可作為輔助性電力 11.推動節約能源及提高能源使用效率應持續加強辦理，惟無法作為核四替代方案 12.發電總成本分析結果，以核四最為有利 13.適當比例之核電可抑制二氧化碳排放量的增加 14.核電發展的停滯，並非世界趨勢 15.經濟、能源、環保均衡發展，核四興建不可或缺 16.建議核四廠應繼續興建；提供全民參與之監督管道，確保核能使用之安全；國內應設立核廢料專責營運單位，以處理核廢料相關問題；推動節約能源及提高能源使用效率；加強核廢料之技術發展及國際合作研究。 文档已经阅读完毕，请返回上一页！