普羅米修斯與潘朵拉-核能科技的沉思

張東瀛

原載  
自立早報 1990-02-05 (上)
自立早報 1990-02-06 (下)

很久以前，世界上只有男人沒有女人。普羅米修斯對人呵護備至；他不只教人築厝，從天上偷盜火種嘉惠於人，並施用巧計，使人分得祭品中的上肉，而讓諸神啃食肥油和骨頭。諸神不甘受愚，於是設計報復，將年輕貌美的潘朵拉送給男人作伴。潘朵拉下凡時，諸神以禮相贈，其中有個寶箱，裝滿災厄，特別交待，不可開啟。

男人為美色所迷，遂不顧普羅米修斯的警告，將潘朵拉迎進小屋，共效于飛之樂。平時男人出外狩獵，潘朵拉閒來無事，以猜測箱中寶物自娛。有一天她終於忍不住誘惑，掀開箱蓋一探究竟，於是猜忌、悲傷、疾病等災禍蜂湧而出。潘朵拉一時情急，放下箱蓋，可惜為時已晚，只有「希望」被留下來。

提出這段神話，無意冒犯女性讀者。只是用以闡釋西方世界對於能源科技的看法；普羅米修斯盜取天火，使人獲得生氣與活力，因而觸犯天神，被鐵鏈囚於高加索山，鷲鷹天天啄其肝臟，但是新肉隨即生成，由於生命永續，終日受鷹啄之苦。潘朵拉的故事則說明人類對知識的好奇，有時不是福祉而是災禍。核能科技，便是典型事例。

萬一爐內失水或爐心冷卻功能失效

核能發電與火力發電的差別在於前者以核子反應器取代傳統鍋爐，並用原子核分裂產生的熱能代替石油或燃煤產生的熱能。目前世界各國，除了蘇聯和法國建造滋生式反應器以外，絕大多數採用輕水式反應器，也就是利用普通水作為緩和劑，將核子分裂後放出的快中子速度減低，轉變成慢中子，並利用普通水為冷卻劑以維持核燃料在一定溫度下反應。輕水式反應器分為兩型，第一型為輕水式沸水反應器，壓力較低，水在反應器內沸騰化汽，如金山的核一，國聖的核二。第二型為輕水式壓水反應器，爐內壓力甚高，水不汽化，如南灣的核三。一般電廠中比較少見的還有兩類：一種是氣冷式反應器，用二氧化碳或氦做為冷卻劑，石墨為緩和劑。另一種則是採用重氫與氧的化合物，俗稱重水，做為冷卻劑兼緩和劑的重水式反應器。

反應器是核能電廠的心臟，也是核燃料進行分裂的主要場所。由於核燃料具有高度的輻射危險，為了防止輻射線侵入周圍環境，燃料必須加上層層保護。以輕水式核能電廠為例，二氧化鈾製成的燃料丸先用陶瓷體加以拘束，再裝入鋯合金護套。護套外圍有8-10吋的合金鋼板焊接而成的反應器本體及管路系統。第四重為7-10呎的混凝土屏蔽牆，最外層則是將整座反應器包封在內的容器外殼。

靜態燃料在多重防護下，輻射釋出的可能性不大，但是運轉中的反應器一旦爐內失水，或爐心冷卻功能失效，放射性分裂物所產生的大量衰變熱無法移除，爐心熔解，這時一場核子災變便無可避免。

核能電廠與核子彈一起聯想，只因核能電廠的爐餘剛好可用來製造核子彈

輻射線造成的災害，不論對人體或生存環境早有定論。除了核子武器以外，反應器是大量輻射的主要來源。能源短缺，迫使台灣早在六十年代末期便著手規劃核能電廠。中美斷交後，我方採購軍備，日益困難，雖然應否製造核武，眾說紛紜，然而擁有核武製造技術卻逐漸形成共識。

核能電廠與核子彈，不論本質和技術層次都不盡相同。這兩件事被一起聯想，只因核能電廠的爐餘，剛好可用來製造核子彈。核子彈的殺傷力有目共睹，製造原理，卻不困難。大學物理系學生，只要在圖書館花點心思便可理解。嚴格說來，製造技術已不是最高機密，核子俱樂部成員有限，主因還是原料取得困難。在台灣，若要製造核子武器，除了透過核能廢料，別無他途。國際間經由核燃料再加工和鈽的再循繯技術，擁有核武的例子屢見不鮮。滋生式反應器能將不適合做燃料的的鈾238轉變為鈽239，因而加速核武擴散，則是不爭的事實。

核三廠和佳山計劃大約在同一時期先後動工，很少人加以注意，即使部份媒體有意炒作張憲義事件，台灣民眾對於應否擁有核武並不特別關心。至少核子武器不像核能電廠一再受到反核人士垂青。如果現在來做民意調查，結果可能是反對建造核能電廠，贊成擁有核子武力。一般說來，發展軍事用途的核武阻力很小，做為和平用途的電廠反而備受爭議，舉世皆然。這種奇特現象，雖不致曲解為人類好戰心理作祟，卻值得觀察與了解。

反核絕非——宣導、睦鄰等方式可解決

反核勢力有一股聲浪，指責台電壟斷核能知識，濫用專家暴力，甚至意圖欺瞞社會大眾。這種論調，不但使台電有口難言，有時更會誤導民眾，造成管制核能科技的印象。就知識層面而言，現代通訊技術發達，任何有心想了解核能科技的人，不僅可自教育或研究機構習得相關知識，更可透過各種資訊網路向世界各地的核能專家討教或交換研究心得。

就技術層面而言，核能電廠是個複雜龐大的工業組合，它的結構支離特性，即使美國核子工業也很難確實掌握，何況法規不斷修改，科技日新月異，在在需要加以配合。通常核子反應器建造者(如西屋公司)負責反應器和其它核子系統及元件。數個工程建造商(如奇異，ITT)負責其餘架構。營建商(如中華工程，唐榮和本地其他工程包商)進行現場施工。其間的合作與協調，則端賴台電和工程設計顧問公司(如核一的伊白斯公司，核二，核三的貝泰公司)運籌帷幄。

由於核能電廠個別差異頗大，實在無法量產，即使營建數廠也不一定能沿用已往的經驗。台電雖是業主，督造三個電廠下來，充其量只是獲得若干施工和運轉經驗，根本談不上規劃設計和製造技術。即使台電有心進行技術轉移，在國人不能容錯的心態下，也很難有所突破。從核三廠出水明渠備受各界爭議，便可窺見端倪。硬說台電壟斷核能科技，未免言過其實。

執政當局近年來致力溝通民意的努力，並未得到預期效果。民眾疑慮猶存，顯示反核抗爭絕非核能宣導，電廠睦鄰等方式所能解決。反核運動的主要人口，不外電廠附近居民，熱心環保人士，異議份子和部分反對黨成員。某些報導指出，環保抗爭運動經常出現若干熟悉面孔，反核運動業已淪為政爭工具或政治談判籌碼。此一說法固然凸顯反核運動中的政治因素，卻忽略它之所以存在的理由。

同樣的反核運動，觀諸美，日各國，顯得更有理性而較少政治色彩。從另一個角度觀察，不難理解本土民眾對當前政治環境的不滿與無奈，進而以非政治訴求做為抗爭焦點的心理。移情作用與情緒上的反彈有其特殊意義存在，絕非「泛政治化」一詞所能解釋。這種逼迫者兼具被逼迫者的角色功能，莎士比亞在威尼斯商人中便有精湛的描繪。在此並非假藉威尼斯商人影射反核人士的抗爭結果，但是反核情緒如果持續高漲，到最後，付出代價的將是全體國民。

國人對核能的恐懼心理，有不少部分來自電廠的施工品質

就能源的選擇性而言，水力發電是「看天田」。天然氣價昂量少，絕非合理能源。煤炭很難完全燃燒，酸雨和燃煤的後遺症要花費極高的代價來控制。燃油存量有限，產生的二氧化碳對氣候造成嚴重影響。太陽能和海洋溫差發電仍在實驗階段，經驗、競爭性有待觀察。相形之下，核能發電的燃料成本低，技術成熟，對環境的影響亦較火力發電為少。經濟部長陳履安曾說「放棄核能發電將是一項不切實際的想法」，他對能源政策的考量，可能是官方說法中最接近現實的觀點，可惜聽得進去的立委和民眾似乎並不多。這種現象不能責怪民眾無知，只能說核能事故頻傳，使人喪失信心。

賓州三浬島事件，一般認為是核能工業由盛而衰的轉捩點，蘇俄車諾比電廠只是雪上加霜。其實美國核能工業早在一九七九年事故發生以前就開始衰退。喪失吸引力的原因，表相是建廠成本太高，骨裡卻是反應器的安全性受到質疑。輕水式反應器過份依賴外在的強制冷卻系統與工廠操作員的防護，而操作員與電機元件卻無法百分之百信賴。設計者只好以多種或重疊的支援系統來維護安全需求。這些非核系統如果不能發揮預期功能，理論上便會造成爐心的損害，所以不得不以嚴格的法規來約束，如此一來不但建廠成本大幅提高，電廠架構也越趨複雜。不幸的是，花錢仍不得消災，反應器熔毀事件接踵而至，也難怪電廠附近居民談核色變，誓死抵制。國人對核能的恐懼心理，除了設計上的顧慮以外，還有一樣大家寧可懷疑，卻不願公開談論的話題，那就是電廠的施工品質。

基於安全理由，以核能電廠及核燃料再處理廠為對象，一九七五年修訂的聯邦法規第十篇第五十款附錄B便明訂十八條準則，要求業主(如台電)負責品質保證方案的建立與執行，其中對於安全功能有影響的作業，例如設計、採購、製造、裝卸、運輸、儲存、清洗、組立、安裝、檢查、試驗、運轉、維護、修理、燃料填放與設備修改等均屬受限範圍。至於申請建廠許可所需的初期安全分析報告(PSAR)和完工後申請運轉執照的終期安全分析報告(FSAR)都必須詳述相關品質保證方案。換句話說，核能電廠是以「制度」來保證品質，一般製造業採用的統計品管在核能工業根本無法適用。情況如此，從業人員的素質與操守便成了品質良窳的關鍵所在。

核能電廠從設計到施工，大約七到十年。這段漫長的歲月裡，建廠人員面臨的不只是技術更新和法規適應性的問題。經手上千億元預算，最大的挑戰，恐怕還是來自紅色的誘惑和黑色的壓力。基於核能的敏感特性，建廠過程如果發生弊端，外界很難知悉。但是完工後如果動輒停機或是意外頻傳，難免讓人懷疑工程品質有了問題。其它因素如購煤疑案至今仍未澄清，要民眾坦然接受由台電前總經理朱書麟背書的核能品質保證，未免過於樂觀。

如果只能以限電來緩和能源短缺，電力事業不妨開放民營

專家指出核子反應器目前最大的困境並非不夠安全。任何不安全因素都可藉著變更設計和系統改善來加以克服。許多技術評估指出反應器對公眾健康和安全危害遠比想像為少。造成困境的原因乃是因為這些評估的理論基礎不夠嚴謹而且正確性也值得懷疑。

核子反應器目前正朝著規模縮小，設計簡化，意外事故發生時容易控制等方向加以改進。新一代反應器在概念上特別強調它的強制安全特性，這樣做的目的有幾個好處，第一、如果冷卻系統失效，核心因分裂產生的熱能會經由自然對流或熱輻射逸散。這種強制冷卻系統足以避免爐心損壞。第二、核能與非核能系統不再相互糾纏，有助於降低成本。第三、強制安全設計使安全評估變得單純而且比較正確。

核能工業的未來，寄望於降低成本和科技突破。重要的關鍵則在如何拆除現有的藩籬。以公權力壓制群眾抗爭並非善策。改善當前政治環境，落實民主憲政，絕對有助於疏解反核情緒。

電力在台灣是獨占事業，成本壓力微乎其微。在這種得天獨厚的條件下，台電所能做的當不只是以更坦誠，更開放的態度面對公眾而已。如果只能以限電來緩和能源短缺，電力事業不妨開放民營。

如果人類和潘朵拉一樣好奇？

六零年代和七零年代的登月計劃確屬當代創舉。目睹這項過程的人，當能體會從太空中回首地球的一剎那帶給人類的震憾絕不遜於阿姆斯壯在荒涼的月表踏出那一大步。看到微小，藍白相間，美麗卻顯得無助的地球在太空中飄浮，很少人不受感動。地球只是宇宙滄海中的一粟，這樣的認知，促使人類特別珍惜這塊土地。十八年來對自己賴以生存的環境充滿無限關愛。從當初夢想征服宇宙，到如今致力生態保護，這種過程的轉變，頗富意義。

諾貝爾經濟學獎得主，人工智慧研究者，赫伯‧賽門(Herbert A. Simon)認為科技是人類的知識，就像普羅米修斯從眾神盜取的火種，基本上是人所必需的。如果人類和潘朵拉一樣，忍受不了好奇心的誘惑，箱子打開，蓋不回去，災難和罪惡全跑出來，即使還有希望，後果仍舊不堪設想。當我們開發新的科技，不應把它視為征服自然或宇宙的武器而急著去應用。換句話說，即使知道某些東西的製造方法，最好還是稍安勿躁，至少應先了解該不該製造，能否收放自如。

核能科技使人類瀕於兩難，魚與熊掌能否兼得？核四用地一旦收回，無異宣告核能已死，放棄核能動力，對國人和後代子孫而言，是否明智之舉？普羅米修斯和潘朵拉的神話，或可帶給我們若干啟示。

Prometheus and Pandora - Reflections on Nuclear Technology

By Tony Chang

Long ago, there were only men in the world without women. Prometheus cared for humans meticulously; he not only taught them to build shelters but also stole fire from the heavens to bestow upon them. He devised cunning plans, allowing humans to claim the choice portions of sacrifices while the gods only got to devour the fat and bones. The gods, unwilling to be deceived, devised a plan for revenge by sending the young and beautiful Pandora to accompany men. When Pandora descended to earth, the gods presented her with a gift, among which was a box filled with calamities. It was specially emphasized that the box should not be opened.

Men, captivated by her beauty, disregarded Prometheus's warning and welcomed Pandora into their homes, reveling in her company. While men went out hunting, Pandora had idle time and amused herself by guessing the contents of the box. One day, unable to resist temptation any longer, she lifted the lid to peek inside. Instantly, suspicion, sorrow, disease, and other disasters surged out. In a moment of panic, Pandora closed the lid, but it was too late; only "hope" remained.

Presenting this myth is not intended to offend female readers. It is merely used to elucidate the Western world's view on energy technology; Prometheus stole heavenly fire, granting humans vigor and vitality, thus offending the gods and being chained to the Caucasus Mountains, where an eagle would peck at his liver every day. However, new flesh would immediately grow, and due to his eternal life, he endured the torment of the eagle's pecking day after day. Pandora's story illustrates humanity's curiosity for knowledge, which sometimes brings not blessings but disasters. Nuclear technology is a typical example.

In the event of loss of water in the reactor or failure of the reactor's cooling function

The difference between nuclear power generation and thermal power generation lies in the former's use of nuclear reactors instead of traditional boilers and the use of heat generated by nuclear fission of atomic nuclei instead of heat generated by oil or coal. Currently, in most countries around the world, except for the Soviet Union and France, which construct breeding reactors, the vast majority use light water reactors. These reactors use ordinary water as a moderator to reduce the speed of fast neutrons produced by nuclear fission, turning them into slow neutrons, and use ordinary water as a coolant to maintain the nuclear fuel at a certain temperature for reaction. Light water reactors are divided into two types: boiling water reactors, with lower pressure, where water boils inside the reactor, such as the No. 1 reactor in Jinshan and the No. 2 reactor in Guosheng; and pressurized water reactors, with very high pressure inside the reactor, where water does not boil, such as the No. 3 reactor in Nanwan. Less common types in power plants include gas-cooled reactors, using carbon dioxide or helium as a coolant and graphite as a moderator, and heavy water reactors, using a compound of heavy hydrogen and oxygen, commonly known as heavy water, as both a coolant and a moderator.

The reactor is the heart of a nuclear power plant and the main location for nuclear fuel fission. Due to the highly radioactive nature of nuclear fuel, multiple layers of protection must be added to prevent radiation from entering the surrounding environment. Taking light water nuclear power plants as an example, fuel pellets made of uranium dioxide are first confined by ceramic bodies and then placed into zirconium alloy cladding. The cladding is welded with 8-10-inch alloy steel plates to form the reactor body and piping system. The fourth layer is a 7-10-foot concrete shield wall, and the outermost layer is a container enclosing the entire reactor.

Static fuel under multiple protections has little possibility of releasing radiation, but once the reactor loses water or its core cooling function fails during operation, the massive decay heat generated by radioactive fission products cannot be removed, leading to core meltdown, resulting in an inevitable nuclear disaster.

Nuclear power plants are associated with nuclear bombs simply because the spent fuel from nuclear power plants can be used to manufacture nuclear bombs.

The disasters caused by radiation, whether to humans or the environment, have long been established. Besides nuclear weapons, reactors are the main source of large-scale radiation. Due to energy shortages, Taiwan began planning nuclear power plants as early as the late 1960s. After the severance of diplomatic ties between Taiwan and the United States, procuring military equipment became increasingly difficult. Although there were conflicting opinions on whether to manufacture nuclear weapons, the consensus gradually formed around the possession of nuclear weapons technology.

Nuclear power plants and nuclear bombs, in terms of their essence and technological level, are quite different. They are associated solely because the spent fuel from nuclear power plants can be used to manufacture nuclear bombs. The destructive power of nuclear bombs is evident, but their manufacturing principles are not difficult to grasp. College physics students can understand them with a little effort in the library. Strictly speaking, the manufacturing technology is no longer highly classified, but the limited membership of the nuclear club is mainly due to the difficulty of obtaining raw materials. In Taiwan, if one wants to manufacture nuclear weapons, there is no other way than through nuclear waste from nuclear power plants. Examples of countries possessing nuclear weapons through reprocessing of nuclear fuel and the technology of breeding plutonium from uranium-238 are not uncommon internationally. Breeder reactors can convert unsuitable uranium-238 into plutonium-239, thus accelerating nuclear weapon proliferation, which is an undeniable fact.

The No. 3 Nuclear Power Plant and the Jia-shan Project started around the same time, but few people paid attention to them. Even though some media intentionally sensationalized the Zhang Xianyi incident, Taiwanese people were not particularly concerned about whether they should possess nuclear weapons. At least nuclear weapons did not attract as much attention from anti-nuclear activists as nuclear power plants did. If a public opinion poll were conducted now, the result might be opposition to building nuclear power plants but support for possessing nuclear weapons. Generally speaking, there is little resistance to developing nuclear weapons for military purposes, while nuclear power plants intended for peaceful use are highly controversial, as is the case worldwide. Although this peculiar phenomenon is not necessarily attributed to human belligerence, it is worth observing and understanding.

Anti-nuclear efforts are not resolved through advocacy or neighborly relations.

Anti-nuclear forces have a strong voice, accusing Taiwan Power Company of monopolizing nuclear knowledge, abusing expert authority, and even intending to deceive the public. This rhetoric not only puts Taiwan Power Company in a difficult position but sometimes also misleads the public, creating an impression of controlling nuclear technology. In terms of knowledge, with the advancement of modern communication technology, anyone interested in understanding nuclear technology can educate themselves or acquire relevant knowledge through research institutions and various information networks worldwide.

Technically, a nuclear power plant is a complex and massive industrial complex. Its fragmented structure is difficult to master even for the American nuclear industry, let alone with constantly changing regulations and advancing technology that require adaptation. Typically, nuclear reactor builders (such as Westinghouse) are responsible for the reactor and other nuclear systems and components. Several engineering contractors (such as GE, ITT) are responsible for the remaining structures. Construction contractors (such as China Engineering, Tang Rong and other local engineering contractors) carry out on-site construction. Cooperation and coordination depend on Taiwan Power Company and engineering design consulting companies (such as EBASCO for Nuclear Plant No. 1 and Bechtel for Nuclear Plants No. 2 and No. 3).

Since nuclear power plants vary greatly and cannot be mass-produced, even building several plants may not necessarily leverage past experience. Although Taiwan Power Company is the owner and has overseen the construction of three plants, it has at best gained some construction and operation experience, but it is far from planning, designing, and manufacturing technology. Even if Taiwan Power Company intends to carry out technology transfer, it is difficult to make breakthroughs with the mindset of zero tolerance among the people. The controversy over the spillway at Nuclear Plant No. 3 is a glimpse of this. It is an exaggeration to claim that Taiwan Power Company monopolizes nuclear technology.

In recent years, the efforts of the ruling authorities to communicate with the public have not yielded the expected results. Public doubts still exist, showing that anti-nuclear resistance is not resolved through nuclear advocacy, power plant neighborliness, or other means. The main population of the anti-nuclear movement consists of residents near the power plants, enthusiastic environmentalists, dissenters, and some members of opposition parties. Some reports indicate that environmental protest movements often involve familiar faces, and the anti-nuclear movement has become a political tool or bargaining chip. While this view highlights the political factors in the anti-nuclear movement, it overlooks the reasons for its existence.

Similarly, anti-nuclear movements in the United States and Japan appear to be more rational and less politically charged. From another perspective, it is not difficult to understand the dissatisfaction and helplessness of the local people with the current political environment, leading to a focus on non-political appeals as the focal point of their resistance. The transference of emotions and emotional backlash have their own significance and cannot be explained solely by the term "politicalization". This kind of coercion combines the roles of both the coerced and the coercer, as brilliantly depicted by Shakespeare in "The Merchant of Venice". Here, it is not a matter of using "The Merchant of Venice" as an analogy for the results of the anti-nuclear movement, but if anti-nuclear sentiment continues to rise, ultimately, it will be all citizens who pay the price.

Many Taiwanese people's fear of nuclear energy partly stems from the construction quality of power plants.

In terms of energy choices, hydropower depends on the weather. Natural gas is expensive and scarce, making it an unreasonable energy source. Coal is difficult to burn completely, and controlling acid rain and the aftermath of burning coal require high costs. Petroleum reserves are limited, and the carbon dioxide produced has a serious impact on the climate. Solar and ocean thermal power generation are still in the experimental stage, and their experience and competitiveness need to be observed. In comparison, nuclear energy has low fuel costs, mature technology, and less environmental impact than thermal power generation. Minister of Economic Affairs Chen Lu-an once said that "giving up nuclear power generation would be an unrealistic idea." His consideration of energy policy may be the most realistic viewpoint in official statements, but unfortunately, few legislators and people seem to agree. This phenomenon cannot be blamed on the ignorance of the public; it can only be said that frequent nuclear accidents have eroded people's confidence.

The Three Mile Island incident in Pennsylvania is generally considered a turning point in the decline of the nuclear power industry, and the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the Soviet Union only added to the troubles. In fact, the American nuclear power industry had already begun to decline before the accident in 1979. The apparent reason for the loss of attractiveness is that the construction cost of the plants is too high, but the real reason lies in the safety of the reactors being questioned. Light-water reactors rely too much on external forced cooling systems and the protection of plant operators, while operators and electrical components cannot be completely trusted. Designers have no choice but to maintain safety requirements with multiple or overlapping support systems. If these non-nuclear systems fail to function as expected, theoretically, it will cause damage to the core, so strict regulations must be imposed, resulting in a significant increase in construction costs and the complexity of power plant structures. Unfortunately, spending money does not prevent disasters. Reactor meltdown incidents have followed one after another, so it is not surprising that residents near power plants are terrified and determined to resist. Apart from design considerations, Taiwanese people's fear of nuclear energy also stems from another topic that everyone prefers to doubt but is reluctant to discuss openly, and that is the construction quality of power plants.

For safety reasons, with nuclear power plants and nuclear fuel reprocessing plants as the objects, the eighteenth appendix of Federal Regulations, revised in 1975, stipulates eighteen criteria, requiring owners (such as Taiwan Power Company) to establish and implement quality assurance plans, including operations affecting safety functions, such as design, procurement, manufacturing, loading and unloading, transportation, storage, cleaning, assembly, installation, inspection, testing, operation, maintenance, repair, fuel loading, and equipment modification. As for the initial safety analysis report (PSAR) required for applying for construction permits and the final safety analysis report (FSAR) required for applying for operation licenses after completion, they must detail relevant quality assurance plans. In other words, nuclear power plants rely on "systems" to ensure quality, and statistical quality control commonly used in general manufacturing is fundamentally inadequate for the nuclear power industry. In such a situation, the quality and integrity of practitioners become the key to good or bad quality.

From design to construction, nuclear power plants take approximately seven to ten years. During this lengthy period, the challenges faced by construction personnel extend beyond technical updates and regulatory compliance. Handling budgets of billions of dollars, the greatest challenge likely comes from both overt and covert pressures. Due to the sensitive nature of nuclear energy, if flaws occur during the construction process, it's difficult for outsiders to discern. However, frequent shutdowns or unexpected incidents after completion inevitably raise doubts about the quality of engineering. Other factors, such as unresolved coal purchase scandals, make it overly optimistic for the public to accept nuclear quality assurances endorsed by former Taiwan Power Company President Chu Shulin.

If only through power rationing can energy shortages be alleviated, perhaps it's time to consider privatizing the electricity industry.

Experts point out that the biggest challenge facing nuclear reactors is not safety. Any unsafe factors can be overcome through design changes and system improvements. Many technical assessments indicate that the hazards posed by reactors to public health and safety are far fewer than imagined. The reason for the dilemma lies in the insufficient rigor and questionable accuracy of these assessments' theoretical foundations.

Currently, nuclear reactors are being improved in the direction of smaller scale, simplified design, and easier control in case of accidents. The new generation of reactors particularly emphasizes their inherent safety features, which brings several benefits. Firstly, in the event of a cooling system failure, the heat generated by nuclear fission will dissipate naturally through convection or thermal radiation, thus preventing core damage. Secondly, nuclear and non-nuclear systems are no longer intertwined, which helps reduce costs. Thirdly, the mandatory safety design simplifies and makes safety assessments more accurate.

The future of the nuclear industry relies on cost reduction and technological breakthroughs. The key lies in dismantling existing barriers. Suppressing public protests with state power is not a wise strategy. Improving the current political environment and implementing democratic constitutionalism will undoubtedly help alleviate anti-nuclear sentiments.

Electricity is a monopoly in Taiwan, and cost pressures are minimal. In such favorable conditions, Taiwan Power Company should not only adopt a more open and honest approach towards the public but also consider privatizing the electricity industry if power rationing is the only solution to alleviate energy shortages.

If humans are as curious as Pandora?

The moon landing programs of the 1960s and 1970s were indeed groundbreaking achievements of the time. Those who witnessed this process could surely understand the awe that the sight of the Earth from space brought to humanity, no less than Armstrong's giant leap onto the desolate lunar surface. Seeing the tiny, blue and white, beautiful yet seemingly helpless Earth floating in space, few remained untouched. Earth is just a speck in the vast universe, which prompts humans to cherish this land especially. Over the past eighteen years, there has been an infinite love for the environment on which human survival depends. From the initial dream of conquering the universe to the current dedication to ecological conservation, this transformation is meaningful.

Herbert A. Simon, Nobel laureate in economics and artificial intelligence researcher, believes that technology is human knowledge, much like the fire Prometheus stole from the gods, which is fundamentally necessary for humans. If humans, like Pandora, cannot resist the temptation of curiosity, open the box, and cannot close it again, disasters and evils will all come out. Even if there is still hope, the consequences are still unimaginable. When we develop new technologies, we should not rush to apply them as weapons to conquer nature or the universe. In other words, even if we know how to manufacture certain things, it is best to be cautious and at least understand whether they should be manufactured and whether they can be controlled.

Nuclear technology puts humanity in a dilemma. Can we have both fish and bear's paw? Once the land for the Fourth Nuclear Power Plant is reclaimed, it is tantamount to declaring the death of nuclear energy. Is it a wise decision to abandon nuclear power for the sake of the people and future generations? The myths of Prometheus and Pandora may provide us with some insights.

[ 正進行計畫 | 回主畫面 | 參考資料 ]