日重啟核電非台灣借鏡
核電也是一著「壞棋」，不下為妙！
作者：王銘琬（旅日圍棋棋士）
矽品精密董事長林文伯先生是不折不扣的圍棋高手，我從小就承蒙林先生指導多次，近年林先生推廣圍棋不遺餘力，不論公私都受到很多啟發，對我來說是一位永遠的「高棋」，也是我欽佩的對象。林先生一直表達不反對核能的立場，我試以同為圍棋人觀點來思考台灣到底適不適合核電。
評估一件事情該不該做，一般是將風險與利益相比，圍棋基本也是如此。
日本政府從現在的零核電，打算重啟數座反應爐，雖還有半數以上日本人反對，但也有贊同的聲音，表示有部份日本人認為「目前日本使用核電，是利益高於風險」同樣的，認為台灣需要核電，應該也是同樣的評估。
但是基於從圍棋的觀點，日本與台灣完全是兩個不同的局面，要得到同樣的結論是不可能的。
首先，風險的程度完全不同。日本的國土是台灣的10倍，核災發生時，有逃命的空間。另一方面台灣的核電30公里圈住了六百萬人，又是日本核電廠附近人口的10倍以上；此外日本核電廠、反應爐的耐震性與維修的品質高過台灣，是難以否認的事實。
這幾個壞條件加起來，怎麼保守評估，也必然得出台灣的風險是日本的好幾倍。
其次，核電對台灣有那麼大的利益嗎？情況正好相反。
台 灣對核電的依賴率只有日本的一半，而且日本核能產業可以出口，加上對部份日本人很重要的，日本必須運轉核電，才能有維持燃料再處理工廠的理由，擁有准核武 國地位，這些重要因素都是台灣所沒有的。幾個因素合起來，再怎麼保守推算，台灣從核電能得到的利益──雖然本質上根本不算是利益，只有日本的幾分之一。
台灣核電風險是日本數倍，利益又只有幾分之一，這是台日客觀比較的結果。
現在日本，主張從此廢核與主張重啟的聲音抗爭三年，顯示日本人整體對核電的風險與利益哪一邊比較大還沒定論；圍棋也常有這種情形出現，兩個高手在同樣的局面，對次一手常會有不同的見解，這是因為兩者價值相近，不容易判斷兩者之間的優劣。
日 本與台灣的核電風險與利益迥然不同，卻有同樣的爭執是不可思議的；以圍棋來比喻的話，日本要是在討論一著價值10目的棋該不該下，那手棋在台灣的價值就應 該有100目！只此一手別無他途；從風險與利益的比較來說，要是日本的爭執是有道理的，那風險相對極大的台灣當然只好廢核。
圍棋棋士從小都在一些小數字裡打滾長大，林先生一定最能理解。可是日本核災讓我體會到，很多事情是用數字無法解決的，核電問題有很多層面不能用數字去評估；就算用很單純的數字來看，核電也是一著「壞棋」，不下為妙！
矽品精密董事長林文伯先生是不折不扣的圍棋高手，我從小就承蒙林先生指導多次，近年林先生推廣圍棋不遺餘力，不論公私都受到很多啟發，對我來說是一位永遠的「高棋」，也是我欽佩的對象。林先生一直表達不反對核能的立場，我試以同為圍棋人觀點來思考台灣到底適不適合核電。
評估一件事情該不該做，一般是將風險與利益相比，圍棋基本也是如此。
日本政府從現在的零核電，打算重啟數座反應爐，雖還有半數以上日本人反對，但也有贊同的聲音，表示有部份日本人認為「目前日本使用核電，是利益高於風險」同樣的，認為台灣需要核電，應該也是同樣的評估。
但是基於從圍棋的觀點，日本與台灣完全是兩個不同的局面，要得到同樣的結論是不可能的。
首先，風險的程度完全不同。日本的國土是台灣的10倍，核災發生時，有逃命的空間。另一方面台灣的核電30公里圈住了六百萬人，又是日本核電廠附近人口的10倍以上；此外日本核電廠、反應爐的耐震性與維修的品質高過台灣，是難以否認的事實。
這幾個壞條件加起來，怎麼保守評估，也必然得出台灣的風險是日本的好幾倍。
其次，核電對台灣有那麼大的利益嗎？情況正好相反。
台 灣對核電的依賴率只有日本的一半，而且日本核能產業可以出口，加上對部份日本人很重要的，日本必須運轉核電，才能有維持燃料再處理工廠的理由，擁有准核武 國地位，這些重要因素都是台灣所沒有的。幾個因素合起來，再怎麼保守推算，台灣從核電能得到的利益──雖然本質上根本不算是利益，只有日本的幾分之一。
台灣核電風險是日本數倍，利益又只有幾分之一，這是台日客觀比較的結果。
現在日本，主張從此廢核與主張重啟的聲音抗爭三年，顯示日本人整體對核電的風險與利益哪一邊比較大還沒定論；圍棋也常有這種情形出現，兩個高手在同樣的局面，對次一手常會有不同的見解，這是因為兩者價值相近，不容易判斷兩者之間的優劣。
日 本與台灣的核電風險與利益迥然不同，卻有同樣的爭執是不可思議的；以圍棋來比喻的話，日本要是在討論一著價值10目的棋該不該下，那手棋在台灣的價值就應 該有100目！只此一手別無他途；從風險與利益的比較來說，要是日本的爭執是有道理的，那風險相對極大的台灣當然只好廢核。
圍棋棋士從小都在一些小數字裡打滾長大，林先生一定最能理解。可是日本核災讓我體會到，很多事情是用數字無法解決的，核電問題有很多層面不能用數字去評估；就算用很單純的數字來看，核電也是一著「壞棋」，不下為妙！
蘋果日報這篇，過份簡略。 Costs keep mounting for idled reactors 這篇有更詳細的說明，譬如說，新安撿下，許多座核電場已判定不合格，無法啟動。
311後 日本重啟核電
反核無效
儘管福島核災引發民眾反核聲浪，日本政府目前已轉而尋求盡早重啟核電廠。資料照片
【國際中心╱綜合外電報導】日本在2011年的三一一大地震後，因為福島第一核電廠發生嚴重核災，全日本核能反應爐至今仍全面停爐。日本政府雖一度想推動「非核政策」，趁勢廢止使用核能，卻在換黨執政後停止推動，已轉而想盡快重啟核電廠。
換政黨廢核喊卡
福
島核災後，民主黨籍的日本前首相菅直人在2011年7月宣示，日本應「逐步減少，最終停止依賴核能」。他的繼任者，也是民主黨籍的野田佳彥在隔年9月提出
「革新能源及環境戰略」，目標是在2030年完成「零核電」。他希望能在2030年前節能19%，把再生能源的發電量提高到3000億千瓦，可以提供總電
量的30%，藉此廢止核能。
自民黨籍的現任首相安倍晉三，抨擊民主黨政府的廢核政策「不切實際、不負責任」。他在2012年的大選勝出，年底上台時就宣布，不會延續民主黨政府「零核電」的能源政策。
自民黨籍的現任首相安倍晉三，抨擊民主黨政府的廢核政策「不切實際、不負責任」。他在2012年的大選勝出，年底上台時就宣布，不會延續民主黨政府「零核電」的能源政策。
核災重創
日本311大地震造成福島第一核電廠發生嚴重核災，促使日本檢討核電政策。資料照片
半數日人表支持
安倍去年2月在國會發表施政演說時，宣示「減核不廢核」政策，強調將從節能和最大限度使用再生能源著手，盡可能減低對核能的依賴，並在確認安全無虞的前提下，重啟核電廠。日本《讀賣新聞》當時所作民調顯示，對於政府要重新調整核能政策，51%表示肯定，35%不支持。安倍政府現正積極推動重啟核電廠，希望在今年夏季用電高峰前能先啟用九州的川內核電廠2座反應爐。
NATIONAL
Costs keep mounting for idled reactors
Consequences of turn from nuclear begin to hit home
BY AARON SHELDRICK AND OSAMU TSUKIMORI
REUTERS
Since March 2011, the government has focused on the cost of cleaning up after Fukushima, the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. Now, the bill is coming due for another unbudgeted consequence of that calamity — shutting down the nation’s 48 remaining nuclear reactors for costly safety reviews that could see many of them mothballed.
While their reactors have been idled, nuclear plant operators have had to spend around $87 billion to burn replacement fossil fuels. This, in part, explains the utilities’ estimated combined losses of around $47 billion as of March, and the $60 billion wiped off their market value.
That pain is beginning to tell.
In early April, Kyushu Electric Power Co. was confirmed to be seeking an almost $1 billion bailout in the form of equity financing from the government-affiliated Development Bank of Japan because of the cost of idling its reactors. Hokkaido Electric Power Co. has also asked the bank for financial backing.
Even as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government has hammered out the final terms of a delayed energy policy, the bill for a reduced role for nuclear power in the world’s third-largest economy is becoming clearer. One way or another, taxpayers are going to be saddled with the cost of throttling back on nuclear power through taxes and higher electricity bills, analysts say, just as the government has had to provide funding for those who lost their homes and livelihoods due to the Fukushima disaster.
The government took a controlling stake in Fukushima No. 1 operator Tokyo Electric Power Co. in 2012 to keep it from insolvency, and Tepco, as it is known, still relies on government credits to pay compensation to those affected by the disaster, which forced 160,000 people from their homes.
The expanded government role in helping utilities pivot from nuclear power — from providing around 30 percent of Japan’s electricity to less than 10 percent — has echoes of the public bank bailouts from the 1990s, said Tom O’Sullivan, founder of energy consultancy Mathyos Japan and a former investment banker. “The banks were forced to consolidate after those losses, so the outcome might be similar in this case,” he said.
Regional power companies also face the prospect of tougher competition under planned electricity reforms that may ultimately see them broken into transmission and generation companies by around 2020.
All of the nation’s 48 nuclear reactors have been shut down since last year, forcing utilities to import extra fossil fuels, driving their costs higher. To ease the strain, the companies have raised electricity charges, but the industry minister has warned that further increases must be avoided.
The nine publicly traded nuclear plant operators together have lost the equivalent of about $31 billion in the two business years since Fukushima, and five of them also expect to be loss-making in the year that ended in March. Those results are due early next month. Japanese banking practices make it difficult for private lenders to extend credit, including the refinancing of existing loans, to companies that post three straight years of losses.
Many creditors face the possibility of a double whammy in if any of the utilities collapse because they also hold shares. A unit of Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group is the biggest shareholder of Hokkaido Electric, and at least one of the big three banks is listed in the top 10 shareholders of all the utilities except one, Shikoku Electric Power Co.
Hokkaido Electric’s equity ratio — a measure of how much of its assets are financed by shareholders rather than creditors — has dropped to 8.9 percent from 24.2 percent before March 2011. Kyushu Electric’s ratio has more than halved to 11.5 percent. The average ratio of Japan’s top companies is 43 percent, Finance Ministry data show.
Hokkaido Electric, Kyushu Electric, Kansai Electric Power Co. — the second-biggest utility after Tepco — and Shikoku were the most reliant on nuclear power before the Fukushima disaster.
All of them forecast a third year of losses for the 12 months to March 31.
The two reactors at Kyushu Electric’s Sendai nuclear plant are on the fast track for restarting, and are likely to be the first to come back online.
The utilities are also likely to have large, but still uncertain, decommissioning costs as many idled reactors are unlikely to pass strict new standards, a Reuters analysis has shown. Of the 48 reactors, 17 are unlikely to be restarted, and as many as 34 may have to be mothballed.
Utilities are required to set aside reserves for future decommissioning costs, but have an industrywide shortfall of about $11 billion if all the reactors remain offline, according to trade ministry estimates.
“Given Japan’s government finances are mainly paid for by debt, bailing out the utilities means they’re passing on the cost to future generations, which are declining in numbers,” said Gerhard Fasol, the founder of Eurotechnology Japan, a Tokyo-based consultancy on energy and technology issues.
“Speeding up the pace of liberalization might help by reducing costs. But this is unlikely to happen, given the pace of change in the electricity industry is generally slow.”
沒有留言:
張貼留言