China Times Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC)
A Translation
June 1, 2016
Executive Summary: Summer has arrived early on Taiwan. Electricity use has skyrocketed. On May 30 peak power transfer capacity was only 920,000 kW. The reserve transfer capacity rate was only 2.7%, the third lowest in history. Taiwan was one step away from a red alert and power rationing. Tsai Ing-wen promised “No power shortages” before and after the election. So did Minister of Economic Affairs Roy S. Lee. The new government's energy policy must be more pragmatic and less reckless.
Full Text Below:
Summer has arrived early on Taiwan. Electricity use has skyrocketed. On May 30 peak power transfer capacity was only 920,000 kW. The reserve transfer capacity rate was only 2.7%, the third lowest in history. Taiwan was one step away from a red alert and power rationing. Tsai Ing-wen promised “No power shortages” before and after the election. So did Minister of Economic Affairs Roy S. Lee. The new government's energy policy must be more pragmatic and less reckless.
Historically speaking, reserve transfer capacity rates below 7% usually require power rationing. The reserve capacity rate may suggest that the situation is not that pessimistic. The early arrival of summer caused electricity consumption to soar. That was unexpected. According to Taipower, generators are undergoing maintenance. Work should be completed by July. If the First Nuclear Power Plant's Unit I and the Second Nuclear Power Plant's Unit II begin operation on schedule, "This year's power supply will not be a problem".
Please note this means the First Nuclear Power Plant and the Second Nuclear Power Plant must operate in unison. Only then will power supply not be a problem. But the First Nuclear Power Plant's Unit I and the Second Nuclear Power Plant's Unit II can probably improve transfer rates only 2% to 3%. If they fail to operate normally, power output will be further limited. This pertains to only two units in two nuclear power plants. An even more important question remains. DPP energy policy will eliminate nuclear power plants altogether. The power supply will be reduced 16 to 18 percent. How is that supposed to work out?
The new government's energy policy would replace nuclear energy with renewable energy. The percentage of energy provided by renewable energy sources is expected to increase to 20% by 2025. Renewable energy would completely replace nuclear energy. Therefore according to the new government, eliminating nuclear energy is a no-brainer that will not compromise the power supply. But anyone who knows anything about the realities of power generation, knows the uncertainties and risks involved. Renewable energy is subject to climatic factors. It cannot be used as a base load power source. Over the past decade the increase in renewable energy has been limited. Timely conversion to renewable energy is unlikely. All renewable energy sources, large and small, must be connected to the grid before they can contribute. The construction of such grids in the short-term is impossible.
The new government is painting a pretty picture of a renewable energy future. Can this pretty picture be realized? That remains to be seen. In any event, it cannot alleviate the problem in the short-term. It is certain to result in power shortages. Also, lest we forget, increasing the percentage of renewable energy to 30% will require an investment of 1.5 trillion dollars. The government simply does not have the money. Any investment by private entrepreneurs must be profitable. The cost of renewable energy generation is exorbitant. Electricity rate hikes will be unavoidable. That runs counter to the new government's commitment to "No hikes in electricity rates”.
Minister of Economic Affairs Roy S. Lee, in his first press conference upon taking office, said, "All nuclear power plants will be shut down by 2025. There is no room for discussion. As long as we work together, we will not need power rationing". For a minister to have clear policy objectives and firm beliefs is admirable. But a government energy policy for the next decade based not on practical and feasible plans, but on the blind faith of political parties and ministers is a terrifying prospect.
Any national energy policy planning and implementation requires a long time scale to be effective. A new power plant, from planning to completion and operation, often requires 10 years or more. Look back at some of the presidents who have completed power plants in office. During its eight years in office, the Chen government increased generating capacity by 9.02 million kW. During its term in office, the Ma government increased generating capacity by 2.73 million kW. These were not the result of Chen government initiatives to increase power capacity, but rather its willingness to complete Lee Teng-hui era plans. New generating capacity during the Ma government era was almost entirely the result of earlier plans from the Lee Teng-hui era. The Chen government contributed almost nothing. Over the next three to four years, the Tsai government is expected to undertake Ma government era plans to build eight units that will provide 6.67 million kW of electricity.
The Tsai government intends to shut down all nuclear power plants. But what if renewable energy fails to replace lost capacity as swiftly as expected? When reserve capacity rates plummet to 10% to 7%, into the danger zone or even lower, Taiwan will suffer blackouts or power rationing. The next president, or President Tsai during a second term, will no longer enjoy an energy surplus bequeathed by previous planners. Given the time required between planning and operation, Taiwan will suffer through many years of power shortages.
Just before his appointment as the new government's Atomic Energy Commissioner, Hsieh Hsiao-hsin warned that the development of renewable energy and a nuclear-free homeland, will require "the public to expect power shortages and be resigned to electricity rate hikes". He warned that "if we cannot tolerate blackouts and rate hikes, the goal will be difficult to achieve". The new government has been in office less than two weeks. Yet reserve transfer capacity has already fallen below 3%. This constitutes a warning. It tells the new government that its energy policy must be pragmatic.
This year is an anti-El Nino year. A long, hot summer is inevitable. Power shortages are indeed worrisome. Only recently Roy S. Lee thumped his chest and promised “No power shortages”. But the day before yesterday he changed his tune. He said "Work is not 100% complete", and “We must go all out to deal with it". His is clearly afraid to issue any more boasts. A nuclear-free homeland and increased reliance on renewable energy sources may be a laudable ideal. But even if one is determined to promote them, one must also be pragmatic. One must not allow domestic power shortages. One must implement such a policy gradually. One must not be reckless. Once power is rationed, the livelihood of the people will be at risk, and the people will be in pain. Can the new government really afford to be this careless?
瀕臨跳票的不缺電承諾
2016年06月01日 中國時報
台灣提早進入炎夏，用電量大增，5月30日電力尖峰備轉容量僅92萬瓩，備轉容量率為2.7%，是史上第三低，逼近紅燈的限電警戒一步之遙。總統蔡英文選前、選後，加上經濟部長李世光信誓旦旦「不缺電」的承諾危矣！新政府電力政策應該更務實，切勿冒進。
從歷史經驗看，備轉容量率降到7%以下，缺電進而要限電的機率就大幅提高。雖然以備用容量率來看，情況或許不是如此悲觀，因為這次炎夏提早到達，讓用電量早早飆上尖峰，算是意料之外。根據台電的估算，目前發電機組有些仍在檢修，預計7月後會陸續完成，如果核一的一號機組跟核二的二號機組可在預定時間內加入運轉，「今年的供電情況沒有問題」。
但請注意，這是在核一、二機組加入運轉的情況下，供電才沒有問題。而核一的一號機及核二的二號機大概影響備轉率各約2%、3%，如果未正常運轉，限電機率就會增加。這只是核電廠的兩組機組而已，那麼，更該問的是，依照民進黨能源政策的全面廢核，供電少了16到18%，那又會是怎麼一個景況呢？
新政府的能源政策是要以再生能源替代核電，預計2025年再生能源比例能提高到20%。看起來再生能源完全取代核電，廢核理所當然亦毫不影響供電。但稍微了解實務者就知道，其中潛藏極大的不確定性與風險。再生能源供電量受天候影響，無法作為基載電力；過去十多年再生能源增加比例有限，未來要快速拉升恐難達成；所有大小再生能源廠必須與電網聯結後才能發揮效益，但電網建構不是短期可完成。
因此新政府等於是擘畫了未來美麗的再生能源美景，這個美景成功與否尚未可知，但肯定難以紓緩短期就要碰上的缺電危機。更何況，別忘了把再生能源比例拉到30%，需要投資的金額約1.5兆元，政府肯定沒這筆錢，如果由民間投資，投資人一定是將本求利，再生能源發電成本亦高，電價上漲顯然是難避免，這又違背新政府承諾的「電價不漲」了。
經濟部長李世光在上任後的首次記者會上，堅定地表示，「2025年就是要廢核，沒有討論餘地；而只要一起努力，就有機會做到不會限電。」坦白說，一名部長有堅定的政策目標與信仰，誠然值得佩服；但國家未來十年的能源政策，不建立在實務可行的計畫上，而是建立在政黨與部長的信仰上，也是相當嚇人的。
任何國家的電力政策規畫與建設，都需要長期始能完成見效，一座電廠從提出規畫到最後完工加入營運，動輒耗時10年以上。回頭看幾任總統任內完成的電力設施，扁政府8年共有902萬瓩新機組完工，馬政府時代總共增加273萬瓩新機組；此一結果不是扁政府更努力於電力開發，而是扁政府時代承接李登輝時代的電力開發計畫，數量豐富；馬政府新增供電則幾乎全是更早的李登輝時代的計畫，扁政府幾乎毫無建樹。未來3到4年，蔡政府亦有望承接馬政府時代推動8部機組完工所帶來的667萬瓩電力。
但如果蔡政府全面廢核、再生能源推動速度不如預期，一旦電力備用容量降到10%到7%的限電危險區，或甚至更低時，台灣就難逃缺電、限電的命運。下任執政者、或是蔡政府的第二任任期，再無前人規畫的「供電紅利」可享受；以電廠規畫到營運所需時間來看，台灣至少會有數年陷入缺電陰影中。
新政府原能會主委謝曉星上任前就說，非核家園及發展再生能源，「民眾也要有缺電的心理準備，未來如果遇到漲電費，心中要甘之如飴」，「如果不能承受缺電、漲電費兩個問題，會很難達成。」在新政府上台不到兩周，就出現備轉容量降到3%以下的低檔，也無異於是一項警訊，告訴新政府：能源政策必須務實以對。
今年是反聖嬰年，今夏恐怕酷熱難免，電力供應確實讓人憂心；日前才拍胸脯保證不缺電的李世光，前天馬上改口說「工程沒有百分之百」、「要全力以赴處理」，顯然大話再也不敢講了。非核家園、再生能源比重提高，或許是值得讚許的理想，但縱然要推動也必須務實推動，以讓國內不缺電為最高原則，逐步落實、萬勿冒進，一旦限電開始，將置台灣民生與經濟於痛苦和風險之中，豈可不慎？
No comments:
Post a Comment