Taiwanese and Western experts offer divergent views as local activists oppose nuclear revival

Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te (賴清德) has signaled a potential restart of decommissioned nuclear reactors, reigniting debate among economists, foreign experts, and environmental groups over the island's energy future.

The issue has gained urgency as Taiwan grapples with rising electricity demand driven by AI, semiconductor manufacturing, and data centers, alongside heavy reliance on imported energy. With approximately 97% of its energy sourced from abroad, concerns over supply security have intensified amid geopolitical tensions and global market volatility.

Proponents: Nuclear as a necessary pillar of energy security

Supporters of nuclear energy argue that diversification is not merely desirable but essential. Economist Liang Chi-yuan (梁啟源), a former minister and consultant of the National Security Council, frames the issue in stark terms.

Liang told TCN that Taiwan’s energy vulnerability leaves it exposed to external shocks, and nuclear power offers a rare form of domestically generated stability. He emphasized that nuclear energy aligns with global decarbonization trends, potentially aiding Taiwan in meeting its 2030 emissions reduction targets.

Liang, who also teaches at National Central University’s Graduate College of Sustainability and Green Energy, told TCN that while not classified as renewable, nuclear falls within a broader “green energy” framework — one that encompasses low-carbon sources beyond renewables alone.

Andy Liang (梁永煌), president of Taiwan’s financial magazine Business Today, said on March 25 at the 2026 ESG Sustainable Taiwan International Summit 43% of Taiwanese companies stated that they were unable to obtain sufficient renewable energy.

From a technical standpoint, Liang Chi-yuan highlighted nuclear’s advantages in energy storage and cost efficiency. Nuclear fuel, once loaded, can sustain operations for up to 1.5 years, compared to roughly 40 days for coal and just 11 days for natural gas reserves, he said.

Economically, he noted that nuclear power generation costs approximately NT$1.1 (approximately US$0.034) per kilowatt-hour, significantly lower than many alternatives, which range from NT$3 to NT$7.

Liang also raised concerns about Taiwan’s reserve capacity. He told TCN that while official figures suggest a reserve margin of around 10%, this metric primarily reflects daytime conditions.

At night — when demand rises and solar generation ceases — the margin frequently dips below 10%, with 119 such days recorded in 2024 alone. He added that instances of margins falling below 7% and even 5% have also increased from 2024 to 2025, signaling a tightening supply-demand balance.

Given these constraints, Liang said that he is for restarting existing plants such as Kuosheng Nuclear Power Plant and Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant — the ones Lai has indicated could potentially be restarted.

As for the Lungmen Nuclear Power Plant, Liang said that its restart could also be discussed as long as three conditions are met: assured safety, viable waste management solutions, and broad social consensus.

Diverse Western perspectives regarding Taiwan’s nuclear restart

International voices inject a note of caution. Gabriela Svárovská, a member of parliament for the Czech Green Party, underscored the structural challenges facing nuclear development worldwide. At a March 25 Czechia-Taiwan Forum, she said construction timelines for nuclear facilities are frequently delayed and costs often exceed initial projections.

More fundamentally, she questioned the notion of nuclear energy as a guarantor of sovereignty. Even with domestic reactors, counties would remain dependent on imported uranium, perpetuating external reliance, she said. From her perspective, this undermines the argument that nuclear power enhances true energy independence.

Svárovská also highlighted the concept of opportunity cost. Capital-intensive nuclear projects may crowd out investments in renewable energy systems, which she argues are better suited to building resilience through decentralization.

Distributed energy sources — such as solar, wind, and storage systems — offer flexibility that centralized nuclear plants cannot match, she stated.

Rachel Bernstein, a non-resident fellow at the National Bureau of Asian Research who also works at the Taipei-based think tank CAPRI, emphasized at the same event that both Taiwan and the broader international community must strike a delicate balance among energy resilience, national security, and economic development.

Bernstein noted that in Taiwan, energy policy remains a highly contested and politically salient issue, often influencing electoral dynamics, and stressed that any sustainable path forward will depend on sustained communication and a concerted effort to build consensus.

At the same ESG Sustainable Taiwan International Summit, former head of Germany’s emissions trading authority Jürgen Landgrebe stated that while Taiwan must improve its energy system, it must simultaneously address inherent risks — particularly given its seismic conditions — arguing that the issue ultimately hinges on policymakers’ willingness to weigh trade-offs and assume responsibility.

Speaking at the same ESG summit, Taiwanese meteorologist-turned Minister of Environment Peng Chi-ming (彭啟明) emphasized that Taiwan had already achieved a 9% reduction in carbon emissions by 2025 — even without factoring in low-carbon nuclear energy — despite an unusually robust 8% economic growth rate.

He added that following Lai’s indication that nuclear power could be reconsidered, any eventual reintroduction of nuclear energy would further accelerate emissions reductions, underscoring its potential importance to Taiwan’s climate goals.

Domestic opposition: Safety, justice, and public trust

Within Taiwan, opposition to nuclear revival remains deeply entrenched, particularly among environmental groups.

At a March 26 press conference, the National Nuclear Abolition Action Platform stressed that restarting nuclear plants constitutes a major public policy decision requiring government accountability to clearly respond to the public’s questions and demands — especially regarding nuclear waste disposal and safety risks.

Activists staged a dramatized nuclear disaster scenario to illustrate potential consequences. Drawing parallels to the Fukushima incident, they noted that a 30-kilometer evacuation radius around Kuosheng Nuclear Power Plant would affect approximately 6.83 million people in northern Taiwan, including Taipei, New Taipei, and Keelung.

In the south, a similar radius around Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant would impact around 57,000 residents in Pingtung County.

Green Citizens' Action Alliance stated at the press conference that Taiwan’s current emergency planning zone — limited to an 8-kilometer radius — is nadequate by international standards. It further argued that in a densely populated island where nuclear facilities are situated near urban centers, risk mitigation measures must be significantly expanded.

With both plants now under consideration having operated for more than four decades, Green Citizens' Action Alliance said that failure to even implement a basic enlargement of evacuation perimeters raises serious questions about the credibility of official safety assurances.

At the same event, the Taiwan Green Party cautioned that if the rationale for restarting nuclear power is rooted in wartime contingencies, policymakers must also confront the inherent vulnerabilities of large, centralized power plants and transmission systems under such scenarios.

Nuclear facilities, the party argued, do not necessarily enhance energy security in times of conflict. Rather, a truly resilient wartime energy system would depend less on a handful of centralized assets and more on alternatives such as localized grid networks.

Etta Lee (李若慈), a research fellow at Citizen of the Earth, told TCN about another layer of concern. She pointed to a series of past technical incidents at Kuosheng Nuclear Power Plant, including cracked reactor components and damaged fuel rods, as evidence that safety assurances have failed to inspire public confidence.

Beyond technical risks, Lee emphasized the social and historical dimensions of nuclear development. Local communities, she noted, have borne disproportionate costs — from forced relocations to environmental degradation — often with insufficient compensation, falling short of what would be required to purchase a new home.

In some cases, entire villages were displaced, leaving lasting scars on affected populations.

Citing interviews with affected residents, she recalled one individual displaced by the construction of Kuosheng Nuclear Power Plant who described how families were forced into precarious livelihoods, taking on multiple jobs to make ends meet. The resident herself later worked at the very plant that had displaced her, in order to service her mortgage.

Turning to Maanshan Nuclear Power Plant, Lee argued that it reflects a broader pattern in which political decisions made in Taipei impose disproportionate risks on local communities.

The issue, she said, is not only historical, but also deeply embedded in questions of regional justice, pitting the interests of the political center against those of the periphery in southern Taiwan.

She further recounted how, in earlier years, local anti-nuclear advocates in the south would drive from village to village broadcasting announcements of upcoming talks and discussions, only to be countered by promotional vehicles from the state-owned utility, Taiwan Power Company seeking to discredit them by suggesting their motives were financial.

Lee said that as a result, attendance at such events gradually declined, eroding the morale of local advocates, many of whom ultimately disbanded under mounting pressure and dwindling support.

A question of trade-offs and political will

The debate ultimately hinges on competing priorities: energy security, environmental sustainability, economic efficiency, and social equity. While proponents argue that nuclear power offers a pragmatic solution to Taiwan’s energy challenges, critics counter that it introduces risks and dependencies that may outweigh its benefits.

As Taiwan navigates this complex landscape, the question of nuclear revival remains far from settled. The divergence of expert opinions — spanning economics, engineering, geopolitics, and social justice — underscores the multifaceted nature of the issue.

What is clear, however, is that any decision will carry profound implications — not only for Taiwan’s energy future, but also for its democratic governance and societal cohesion.