Second Referendum Presentation Starts with "Cherish the Algal Reef" 第2場公投意見發表 珍愛藻礁案率先登場

The second referendum presentation was held with "Cherish the Algal Reef." The pro side and the opposition representative continue to attack and defend.
 

The 20th referendum "Cherish the Algal Reef" appeared first in the second referendum presentation. The pro side is represented by Tsai Ya-ying, a lawyer from Taiwan Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association. She pointed out the dangerous sea conditions around Datan algal reef and questioned the safety of the natural gas receiving station. Opposition representative Chao Chia-wei, the chairperson of the Taiwan Environment and Planning Association, also came prepared.

Tsai Ya-ying, Pro Representative: “CNPC once concluded in their study the sea conditions here are adverse. The tidal range is too large and safe operational days are too short. They chose to develop elsewhere. And scholars have also analyzed Datan and concluded it's the most insecure receiving station site in northern Taiwan.”

Chao Chia-wei, Opposition Representative: “In fact, most of the (data) are quoted from Chung Hsing University Professor Tsuang Ben-Jei's analysis. Professor Tsuang has now accepted the plan's modifications. He has new estimates on the number of operational days available and is willing to come out and support the modifications.”

Tsai has repeatedly emphasized that the algal reef referendum has never been anti-natural gas. But rather, it's about the rational selection of a proper site. She also pointed out that natural gas power generation is a transitional plan for the government to develop green energy. It is hoped that the government will not only focus on short-term goals but also question the arguments put forward by the opposition representatives.

Tsai Ya-ying, Pro Representative: “Indeed my data is quoted from Dr. Chao Chia-wei's data. He told us we need to start cutting natural gas around 2030. What we want to ask is, if we know that natural gas is just transitional energy, why do we have to connect here at Datan?”

Chao Chia-wei, Opposition Representative: “Even if we expand Yongan and Taichung receiving stations as scheduled by 2025, the amount of gas they can provide in 2025 is about 20.5 million tons. This is a big gap to the 24.9 million tons we need.”

Chao emphasized that natural gas must be used to reduce coal usage and nuclear power. Coal usage will inevitably arise if the receiving stations are not built. The pro side proposed an alternative site of Taipei Port, which the opposition side claimed isn't feasible. Both sides have their arguments for economic and ecological trade-offs.
 

第二場公投意見發表會，由第20案「珍愛藻礁」打頭陣登場，正方由台灣蠻野心足生態協會律師蔡雅瀅代表。蔡雅瀅以大潭藻礁海域的海象太差為切入點，說明三接是不安全的天然氣接收站場址；而擔任反方代表的台灣環境規劃協會理事長趙家緯，也有備而來。

第20案公投正方代表蔡雅瀅指出:「中油評估大潭海域的海象太差、潮差過大，安全操作天數太短，因此選擇到其他地方開發，學者也曾分析大潭是台灣北部最不安全的接收站場址。」

第20案公投反方代表趙家緯則表示:「其實很多是引用中興大學莊秉潔老師的分析，而莊秉潔老師目前都已接受這個再外推方案，他在可利用天數上面新的估算，也願意出來支持再外推方案。」

正方代表蔡雅瀅多次強調，藻礁公投從來就不是反天然氣，而是要求天然氣合理選址。蔡雅瀅也指出，天然氣發電是政府發展綠能的過渡方案，希望政府別只重視短期目標，對反方代表曾提出的論點她也多有質疑。

蔡雅瀅表示:「確實我這份資料是引用趙家緯博士的資料，他告訴我們天然氣大概到2030年時候就需要開始削減，我們想要問的是，既然知道這些天然氣只是一個過渡的設施，為什麼非要在三接這裡、大潭這裡不可？」

趙家緯則說明，即使永安接收站跟台中接收站皆如期在2050年擴建完成，「他們在2050年時候能夠提供的供氣量，大概也是2050萬噸左右，這跟我們要達到的、我們當年所需求的2490萬噸來講的話，有一個很大的落差。」

趙家緯強調，非核減煤就一定要用天然氣，若是沒有三接，就會讓燃煤增加，勢必會延誤減碳進程。趙家緯也提及，正方建議的台北港替代方案並不可行，經濟與生態如何取捨，雙方各有攻防。