[HN Gopher] Taiwan is heading toward an energy crunch?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Taiwan is heading toward an energy crunch?
        
       Author : vunderba
       Score  : 69 points
       Date   : 2024-10-06 19:08 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.wired.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.wired.com)
        
       | churchill wrote:
       | Nothing annoys me like these foolish headlines. Running out of
       | electricity? Then generate some more! With grid-scale solar and
       | batteries (Chinese production is driving prices down
       | aggressively) you can spin up gigawatt-scale plants almost
       | overnight, until you can cover the shortfall with nuclear or
       | thermal plants.
       | 
       | And, it's not like TSMC is using electricity clandestinely:
       | they're a fantastically profitable business probably buying
       | electricity wholesale. So, stop the stupid handwringing and
       | expand production.
        
         | sampullman wrote:
         | There's not a whole lot of space in Taiwan for huge solar
         | farms. They were close to having nuclear, but there's strong
         | political pushback. Offshore wind seems to be doing well, at
         | least.
        
           | dv_dt wrote:
           | Solar farms don't take a huge amount of space. The roof tops
           | of the chip factories are probably a perfectly fine place to
           | augment the chip factory electric use
        
           | Retric wrote:
           | Solar doesn't need that much space. Nuclear is about 10x as
           | energy dense in the US, so it's better but not as much as
           | generally portrayed.
           | 
           | However unlike nuclear you can toss solar just about anywhere
           | there's a little land or even a lake. Nuclear needs lot
           | contiguous space with access to water for cooling and big
           | reservoirs for safety etc.
        
             | XorNot wrote:
             | A chip fabricator cannot run off intermittent power. It
             | can't shutdown quickly, nor safely.
        
               | Retric wrote:
               | You can get 99.99+% uptime from a system only fed solar
               | power. It's the same cost vs reliability tradeoff made
               | everywhere else.
               | 
               | France recently went weeks with every single nuclear
               | power plant in the country offline, but the system was
               | designed to cope with such downtime.
        
               | bobthepanda wrote:
               | France covered that by importing power from the rest of
               | Europe. Taiwan doesn't have that option as an island
               | whose closest friendly neighbor is hundreds of kilometers
               | away.
        
               | franckl wrote:
               | There are 56 reactors in France, they never went offline
               | at the same time. It happened that half went offline but
               | no more than that
        
               | thatsit wrote:
               | Ever heard of ,,battery storage"?
        
             | Panzer04 wrote:
             | I find people generally underestimate the generation
             | capacity of solar, both per cost and per area.
             | 
             | A rooftop of solar will produce enough energy for multiple
             | households easily. The main constraints is storage.
        
           | silisili wrote:
           | You mentioned offshore wind, is offshore solar not a thing?
           | Seems it'd be rather easy to float a farm of them...easier
           | than floating a giant windmill, at least.
        
             | pvaldes wrote:
             | China would find an excuse to attack anything put in
             | "their" sea.
        
             | huac wrote:
             | shouldn't there be more clouds over ocean, as that is where
             | the clouds tend to form?
        
             | metaphor wrote:
             | > _Seems it 'd be rather easy to float a farm of them_
             | 
             | Geopolitical threats aside, I imagine floating a farm would
             | be the least of challenges[1].
             | 
             | [1] https://journals.ametsoc.org/view/journals/bams/80/1/15
             | 20-04...
        
               | gomerspiles wrote:
               | Geo location aside, putting things off shore is really a
               | way to drive up cost such as maintenance like mad and it
               | makes even less sense when you are working with large
               | surfaces rather than something designed around having
               | height and wind tolerance.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | 100KM2 of panels (10GW) will generate 22,000 GWh, or roughly
           | 10% of Taiwan's current electricity demand. That is, a 10KM *
           | 10KM field (not necessarily all in on place) that takes up
           | just 0.3% of the island is all you need.
           | 
           | Last year, TSMC used 25,000GWh, or 12.5% of Taiwan's
           | electricity, so a 10GW solar project like stated above will
           | take care of it.
           | 
           | If you need dollar figures: Chinese PV prices have dropped to
           | 10 cents/watt while LFP cells are down to $53/kwh. So, $1b
           | will get you 10GW worth of panels, while $4.4b will get you 8
           | hours of storage. So, roughly $10b to completely go off grid.
        
             | wkat4242 wrote:
             | Would they be able to procure that many panels from China
             | when they know they'll end up in Taiwan though?
        
               | churchill wrote:
               | Taiwan's money spends just as good as anyone's money.
               | That's why Europe is still burning Russian gas while in a
               | proxy war that's seen hundreds of thousands killed. It's
               | only in Hollywood movies that you refuse perfectly good
               | money for geopolitics.
        
               | generic92034 wrote:
               | > It's only in Hollywood movies that you refuse perfectly
               | good money for geopolitics.
               | 
               | So why did Russia stop delivering gas via Nord Stream 1
               | from 09/2022 on (before the sabotage)?
        
               | diogocp wrote:
               | Because they weren't getting paid in "perfectly good
               | money" (they were getting paid into frozen EU bank
               | accounts).
        
               | ArnoVW wrote:
               | Am I wrong to say that north stream 1 & 2 were put out of
               | commission and Europe procures it's gaz now via LNG that
               | flows via the huge terminals that were built after 2022?
               | 
               | The Russians are managing to bypass restrictions to some
               | degree using their "dark fleet" but that's oil, and
               | hardly a case of Europe continuing as if nothing were.
        
               | ceejayoz wrote:
               | There are other routes.
               | 
               | One of them, still active until this December when the
               | contract ends, is through Ukraine. https://en.wikipedia.o
               | rg/wiki/2022%E2%80%932023_Russia%E2%80...
        
               | CorrectHorseBat wrote:
               | No, but we still buy Russian LNG
        
               | gomerspiles wrote:
               | China seems happy to export solar panels to anyone..
               | Taiwan would probably not like to be a big importer of
               | something it can't procure from other trade partners at
               | similar prices though. I think Taiwan wants tariff wars
               | with China to reduce economic ties.
        
               | electronbeam wrote:
               | China and Tawain do trade despite the situation
        
             | lm28469 wrote:
             | Something must be wrong in your estimates, the biggest
             | solar farm is ~60sqkm and only 2.2gw, it's in India and
             | definitely get much more sun than taiwan
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhadla_Solar_Park
             | 
             | https://globalsolaratlas.info/map
             | 
             | Edit: nvm it's not the biggest anymore, but still you need
             | at least 2x to 3x the area to get to 10gw and that's with
             | much better settings that's what Taiwan offers
        
         | lugu wrote:
         | Gaz would be perfect if there wasn't a risk of Chinese
         | blockade. Renewable would be great if there was land and no
         | typhoon. Nuclear would be great if quakes were not a thing. The
         | problem isn't to price electricity. It is to find a viable long
         | term strategy for an open society having to mitigate multiple
         | risks.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | All these issues you just raised are not unique to Taiwan -
           | everyone in the region has them yet they're expanding energy
           | production. I mean China, specifically. If you want a zero-
           | risk energy source, you can live in the dark, stumbling
           | around with candles. And it's more environmentally friendly
           | :)
        
             | lm28469 wrote:
             | You might want to check a map if you don't see the
             | difference between China and Taiwan. It's an island, it's
             | small as fuck and half of it is a mountain range
        
         | cladopa wrote:
         | The population density of Taiwan is 649 people per square
         | kilometre. In the US it is 38.
         | 
         | So that means in the US you can use renovables and the same
         | space needs to satisfy the demand of 17 times less people than
         | in Taiwan. In other words: it doesn't make any sense in Taiwan.
         | 
         | Also It doesn't make any sense to close your nuclear plants,
         | specially when China could invade you any day of the week and
         | destroy anything you have offshore in hours.
         | 
         | if the US abandons Ukraine support after two years, it would
         | mean that it will abandon Taiwan too. Nuclear deterrent is
         | real.
        
           | churchill wrote:
           | Unless Taiwan is crammed so full that people can't move, they
           | can easily source 200 KM2 to increase their electricity
           | capacity by 10% (i.e., roughly 20TWh). if they realise it's a
           | national security/economic competitiveness issue, they will
           | solve it.
           | 
           | Otherwise, what do you suggest they do? Nothing? Or keep
           | hand-wringing with articles like this?
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _they can easily source 200 KM2 to increase their
             | electricity capacity by 10%_
             | 
             | Solar panels are by definition easy to see and thus knock
             | out remotely.
             | 
             | > _what do you suggest they do_
             | 
             | Nukes. We've seen from Ukraine that they're given special
             | status even in war.
        
               | Panzer04 wrote:
               | What's that even supposed to mean? Renewable generation
               | would be much more secure than comparable centralised
               | generation because you'd need so many more resources to
               | knock it out.
               | 
               | If i were an adversary I'd much rather my enemy source
               | everything from a single NPP than hundreds of square km
               | of solar.
        
           | kiba wrote:
           | Population density is unevenly concentrated.
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _Population density is unevenly concentrated_
             | 
             | So are PLAN landing sites. (They're all in the south.)
        
             | numpad0 wrote:
             | Yes. That means cities that aren't going to go solar are
             | skewing the statistics, and the real density disparity is
             | more than 17 times.
        
         | chollida1 wrote:
         | > With grid-scale solar and batteries (Chinese production is
         | driving prices down aggressively) you can spin up gigawatt-
         | scale plants almost overnight, until you can cover the
         | shortfall with nuclear or thermal plants.
         | 
         | Can you show an existence proof of someone spinning up
         | gigawatts of energy overnight?
         | 
         | And solar doesn't help with night time and batteries haven't
         | hit giagawatt scale yet, you might be a bit over your skiis
         | with your claim here.
        
           | mgiampapa wrote:
           | Well technically, every time the sun comes up those panels
           | start producing all over the world. FYI, it happens because
           | the earth is spinning.
        
           | Ringz wrote:
           | ,,China is installing the wind and solar equivalent of five
           | large nuclear power stations per week,,
           | 
           | https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2024-07-16/chinas-
           | renewa...
           | 
           | The report is here: https://climateenergyfinance.org/wp-
           | content/uploads/2024/07/...
        
         | simonw wrote:
         | "With grid-scale solar and batteries..."
         | 
         | From the article:
         | 
         | > "The problem with solar in Taiwan is that we don't have a big
         | area. We have the same population as Australia and use the same
         | amount of electricity, but we are only half the size of
         | Tasmania, and 79 percent of Taiwan is mountainous, so land
         | acquisition is difficult." Rooftop solar is expensive, and roof
         | space is sometimes needed for other things, such as helicopter
         | pads, public utilities, or water tanks.
        
           | thatsit wrote:
           | helicopter pads... are you serious? so the whole freaking
           | country is a helicopter pad? Maybe a warm welcome for the
           | CCP? It's not that hard putting some solar panels on
           | buildings. Helicopter pads as a general excuse is the dumbest
           | i have ever heard.
        
       | wordofx wrote:
       | lol it's not running out of electricity.
       | 
       | Edit: I'm downvoted but this isn't even a topic in Taiwan. They
       | don't have power issues. This is just a rubbish article.
        
         | bagels wrote:
         | Which of the facts of the article are incorrect? Does the
         | conclusion not follow from the facts? What's wrong with the
         | article?
        
           | jncfhnb wrote:
           | The article doesn't actually make the claim that they are
           | running out of electricity.
        
         | wtallis wrote:
         | Comments that consist of just "lol, no" are bad comments.
         | You've been doing that a lot in various discussions. HN has
         | higher standards. Please try to make your comments substantive.
        
       | samus wrote:
       | Taiwan is sitting on the Pacific Ring of Fire. Surely there are
       | resources of geothermal energy that could be tapped?
        
       | giardini wrote:
       | Taiwan has 4 nuclear plants that IIRC they've chosen to not run
       | *purely for political reasons*. The (imo crazy and crooked-as-
       | hell) "green party" is currently in power).
       | 
       | Once another party takes over, the nukes will likely be fired up.
       | Taiwan can make all the power it needs.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Taiwan
        
         | adw wrote:
         | Blue and Green in Taiwan do not relate to environmentalism,
         | they relate to the position of the party with respect to the
         | mainland.
        
           | topspin wrote:
           | Setting aside the "blue green" matter, the question remains:
           | what exactly are the "political reasons" at play here. That
           | phrase raises my suspicions. Which party, what is their
           | alignment and what is their problem with nuclear power?
        
             | kenhwang wrote:
             | Green is the independent Taiwan/nationalist party. Blue is
             | the anti-war/friendliness with China party.
             | 
             | The anti-nuclear sentiment is more due to the age/state of
             | the reactors and concerns over earthquake safety after the
             | Fukushima nuclear accident and the inability for the island
             | to store/handle/dispose of waste.
             | 
             | I don't think the state of nuclear power will change much
             | even if the blues gain power. Taiwanese politics has a way
             | of making the minority party always be against the status
             | quo for some issues just to be a pain for the majority
             | party, and their stance on nuclear power tends to flip flop
             | depending on who's in power.
        
               | tsudounym wrote:
               | It really makes sense for the DPP (Green) to be anti-
               | nuclear. Mainland China is using Westinghouse AP1000
               | designs from the US for their nuke plants. Taiwan is
               | friendlier with the US and can get a nice discount to
               | license the same AP1000..
        
               | alephnerd wrote:
               | The DPP isn't anti-nuclear for strategic reasons - it's
               | anti-nuclear for ideological reasons.
               | 
               | The nuclear program in Taiwan was heavily tied to the
               | KMT's ambitions, and as a result Taiwan's anti-nuclear
               | movement is heavily tied to Taiwan's pro-democracy
               | movement which became the DPP, along with the MASSIVE
               | beating nuclear power took all over Asia after the
               | Fukushima disaster (which imo was overhyped in Chinese
               | language media).
               | 
               | Politically speaking, Taiwan under authoritarian KMT rule
               | was in a fairly similar spot to China today, and most of
               | the significant gains that Taiwan saw happened after
               | Taiwan democratized.
               | 
               | That said, anti-nuclear sentiment is equally strong in
               | Mainland China as well, and aside from flashy tech
               | demonstrations, the PRC prefers to use a mix of more
               | politically palatable coal and renewables.
               | 
               | Finally, it is the 1980s-90s generation that is currently
               | in power in Taiwan, and has been for a decade now. Anti-
               | nuclear sentiment will remain for the foreseeable future
               | [0]
               | 
               | [0] - https://www.cw.com.tw/article/5123009
        
               | jncfhnb wrote:
               | "Anti war/friendliness with China" is a very nice way of
               | saying it's the "let China seize control of the country"
               | party.
        
         | unglaublich wrote:
         | It's the same in Europe. Oil lobbyists infiltrated the gullible
         | greens and convinced them that gas and oil are better than
         | nuclear.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _Oil lobbyists infiltrated the gullible greens and
           | convinced them that gas and oil are better than nuclear_
           | 
           | It's actually the gas lobbyists. They push an all renewables-
           | no-nukes agenda. Which works in theory. But in practice,
           | there aren't enough panels and batteries being produced. So
           | the gap is filled with gas.
           | 
           | The promise is that infrastructure will be phased out. But
           | Europe has already invested over EUR1.5tn into new gas
           | infrastructure. Those are 1.5tn reasons not to decommission
           | it. We had a choice between nukes and gas, and the gas lobby
           | convinced us it was a fight between coal (already on its
           | deathbed) and solar panels.
        
           | seper8 wrote:
           | Actually exactly the opposite.
           | 
           | Green parties convinced people wind and solar would suffice.
           | Now the net can't deal with the peaks and throughs. Here in
           | the NL already one of our biggest tech companies is not
           | opening a new datacenter because of lack of electricity
           | available. We used to laugh at countries not having enough
           | power...
        
         | lepus wrote:
         | One of those "purely political reasons" being the obvious and
         | real risks involved with having nuclear power plants in an area
         | known for large earthquakes which was made especially real in
         | people's minds after Fukushima ( further down in the same page
         | you linked:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Taiwan#Post-F...
         | )
        
           | derlvative wrote:
           | Are there any risks that are real and not just in people's
           | minds?
        
             | alephnerd wrote:
             | A significant portion of Taiwan grew up during
             | authoritarian rule, and the anti-nuclear movement was
             | heavily tied to the democracy movement of the 1980s-90s -
             | especially because CKS tied his own ambitions to nuclear
             | capacity - both for energy and potentially weapons.
             | 
             | It's very difficult to separate the two given that the
             | 80s-90s generation is in power in Taiwan.
        
       | baxtr wrote:
       | I love how everyone on this thread is giving energy advice to the
       | country that "makes the world's computer chips". Surely they have
       | a couple of smart people on that island...
        
         | htk wrote:
         | Doesn't mean they're making the decisions.
        
         | Dylan16807 wrote:
         | Countries don't always act very rationally.
        
         | cranky908canuck wrote:
         | I reckon that solar chips are approaching potato chips in terms
         | of (relative to CPU) techological sophistication ... IOW, TSMC
         | has better things to do than panels.
        
         | night862 wrote:
         | I agree, this seems an extremely emotional issue.
         | 
         | There's a lot to care about wrt Taiwan, I will say.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | Yeah but can they create a web based and ad infested CRUD app
         | with javascript?!
         | 
         | The ego on display in the programming world is just
         | astonishing.
        
       | gtvwill wrote:
       | I really wish australia would get into silicon foundry and
       | semiconductor manufacturing businesses. We have the space, we
       | have the geo stability ( lots of our space is really old and very
       | stable from a geological standpoint...it finished moving yonks
       | ago), we produce most of the precursor compinents in their raw
       | forms in absolute masses or have the capacity and resources to do
       | so and we also have the political stability.
       | 
       | But alas, our politicians are short sited, our companies lack the
       | willingness to make it happen. It feels like a massively missed
       | opportunity.
        
         | qntmfred wrote:
         | Any chance you've seen this, or have a personal take to add?
         | https://youtu.be/QByN_XJIn8s
        
       | jppope wrote:
       | Wired with the click bait.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-06 23:00 UTC)