Taiwan Today

Taiwan’s economic fortunes are most often measured in terms of foreign exchange reserves, high-tech exports, and gross domestic product. There are also other, less popular measures of the island’s “progress”—toxic gases and dust in the air, and the growing number of illnesses and deaths caused by respiratory disease. It’s not surprising that most people would prefer to focus on the former criteria, but Taiwan’s air pollution problem can no longer be ignored. Environmentalists are calling for greater public awareness about the causes of air pollution, and more commitment from elected officials and businesspeople to help solve the problem. Otherwise, they say, Taiwan may soon choke on this by-product of its economic development.

Air pollution is a costly problem, and nowhere is this more apparent than in the toll it takes on human life and health. A study released in May of this year by the National Taiwan University Hospital found that 12.5 percent of Taipei’s high school students suffer from asthma. Moreover, bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma together now constitute the tenth leading cause of death in Taiwan. Cancer was the number one killer in 1995, lung cancer being the leading form of the dis­ease in women, and the number two form in men.

Medical experts say all these health problems have links to air pollution. “It’s the number one environmental concern for Taiwan residents,” says Jay Fang (方簡), coordinator for the Green Con­sumer Foundation in Taipei. Fang ex­plains that air pollution is a daily nuisance that makes itself felt almost constantly through irritation of the eyes and throat, and coughing.

The sources of air pollution are easy to identify. There are 8.8 million motorcy­cles and 4.8 million cars on Taiwan’s roads, plus 90,000 factories operating is­landwide. If evenly distributed, there would be about 380 vehicles and 2 facto­ries per square kilometer. But they are not spread evenly. Nearly all motor vehicles, factories, and inhabitants are squeezed into the third of the island’s area not taken up by the Central Mountain Range. This re­sults in extremely high concentrations of polluting emissions in the very places where people live and work. So just how bad is Taiwan’s air quality?

On more than 6 percent of the days in 1995, Taiwan registered high—“unhealthy”—air quality readings according to the Pollution Standard Index (PSI), an international standard for measuring lev­els of carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, ozone, and particulate matter (PM—superfine dust). But some researchers warn that the Environmental Protection Administration’s (EPA) island­wide average of unhealthy PSI readings for just twenty-two days last year tells only part of the story. The readings appear bet­ter than for Los Angeles, which registers high PSI readings on an average of thirty days per year, but there is little real cause for comfort.

According to Chan Chang-chuan (詹長權), a professor at the Institute of Occupational Medicine and Industrial Hygiene at the School of Public Health, National Taiwan University (NTU), Tai­wan’s air pollution levels are significantly higher than those recorded by the PSI. Chan names ozone and PM 10 (particulate matter measuring ten microns or less in diameter, and more likely than larger particles to be­come lodged in lung tissue) as the two most important pollutants affecting Tai­wan’s air quality.

Chan’s studies contrast sharply with official PSI data. He has found PM10 con­centrations to be exceptionally high on about 200 days (54.8 percent) a year in Kaohsiung county, and forty days (10.9 percent) a year in Taipei county. Kaohsiung county also has unhealthy ozone levels on an average of eighty days (21.9 percent) a year, while Taipei county does so on thirty days (8.2 percent) a year. Yet according to PSI data from the EPA, air quality in 1995 was rated as unhealthy for only 9.1 percent of the days in Kaohsiung county, and 3.4 percent of the days in Tai­pei county.

One reason for the stark disparity be­tween Chan’s statistics and those of the EPA is that PSI air quality samples are taken at heights of fifteen to twenty-five meters above ground level. The EPA stresses that this follows international practice, because samples collected at lower heights fluctuate so greatly that they cannot be used to measure pollution levels over a wide area. Chan agrees that the readings are taken according to an established sci­entific method, but he adds that heights above fifteen meters are not in the breath­ing zone for people on the street, where commuters come face-to-face with tail­-pipe emissions.

An even more important shortcoming of any PSI reading, Chan says, is that it does not measure one of the most hazardous types of air pollution—a group of chemi­cals known as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Chan found that Taipei commuters are exposed to VOC concentrations three to eight times greater than commuters in Los Angeles. Among these VOCs, the presence of benzene is the greatest cause for concern, because it has been linked to leukemia. “Taipei has registered the highest recorded benzene concentration of any city in the world,” Chan says.

Researchers have attributed this phe­nomenon to the relatively high proportion of VOCs and other toxic chemicals present in Taiwan’s gasoline, which is supplied exclusively by the state-owned China Petroleum Corporation. The relatively low percentage of cars equipped with catalytic converters, which reduce toxic emissions in automobile exhaust, is another cause of high VOC levels. “VOCs are very dangerous air pollutants,” says You Yii-der (游以德), a professor at NTU’s Graduate School of En­vironmental Engineering, and secretary­ general of the Environmental Protection Foundation. “But there are no international standards, laws, or regulations concerning them, only medical suggestions and warn­ings.” Because of this, researchers and environmentalists in Taiwan say they have been unable to convince the government to limit VOC levels in gasoline, or to require the installation of catalytic converters in all automobiles.

The other key factor in Taiwan’s air pollution equation is heavy industry. Although the islandwide percentage of air pollution caused by factory emissions has fallen from 60 percent in the late 1980s to 45 percent today, partly because pollution from vehicular traffic has increased, indus­trial air pollution is often more hazardous. This is why the city of Kaohsiung, where the ratio of industrial to vehicular air pollution is 60:40, experiences unhealthy PSI levels much more often than does Taipei, where the ratio is 10:90.

Many industries have long operated with virtually no controls on air pollution emissions. However, Chen Hsiung-wen (陳雄文), director-general of the EPA’s Bureau of Air Quality Protection and Noise Control, emphasizes that air pollu­tion control regulations for industry have been strengthened three times since 1975, putting them on a par with most industrialized nations. “The next time these laws are amended, we will match the strictest standards in the world,” he says.

Indentifying sources of air pollution is easy, finding ways to reduce harmful emissions is not. On paper, Tai­wan’s air pollution laws are strict enough to satisfy most environmentalists. Under the Air Pollution Control Act of 1975, amended most recently in 1992, Tai­wan’s regulations concerning motor vehi­cle emissions have come a long way, as the EPA’s Chen Hsiung-wen explains. “Before the EPA was established [in 1987], we didn’t even have emission standards for vehicles,” he says. “Now our emissions standards for automobiles and motorcycles are consistent with the most stringent in the world.”

But if the laws are so good, why is the air so bad? Observers say that it is partly because these regulations have not been in force long enough to have substantial impact on emissions levels. More impor­tantly, according to environmentalists, it is not the laws that are the problem, but their enforcement.

With the exception of motorcycles, inspecting motor vehicle emissions is the job of departments of transportation (DOT) in local governments around the island. New vehicles are given a three-year grace period from inspection, those three to five years old must be inspected annually, and vehicles over five years old must be inspected twice a year. If a vehicle fails inspection, the owner has one month to correct its deficiencies and return for a second inspection.

But only cars purchased after 1990 are required to be equipped with catalytic converters and meet correspondingly lower emissions levels. Environmental­ists and others also complain that the fines levied for failing to submit to auto inspec­tions are too low, ranging from US$11 to $22 only, and that emissions laws are not enforced rigidly enough. As a result, they say, many owners simply ignore the regu­lations.

The EPA, rather than the DOT, handles all inspections and emissions checks for motorcycles, which have to be inspected annually. Due to the number of motorcy­cles operating in Taiwan, and limitations on available manpower, the EPA has turned to private companies to help with implementation of the inspection program. If a motorcycle fails to pass its emissions in­spection, the owner has one chance, and one month, to bring it up to standard. Failure to pass re-inspection may result in a US$185 fine.

A total of 187 motorcycle inspection stations have been set up in eight cities and counties around the island, and the program is expected to be in effect islandwide by 1999. But because the initial phase of the program has only been in operation for just over six months, and in only a few areas, it has yet to have a real impact on reducing motorcycle emissions. Thus far, according to the EPA, over 600,000 motor­cycles have been inspected under the pro­gram, and although numerous warnings have been issued to motorcycle owners, no one has yet been fined.

Government regulations and EPA programs to control industrial sources of air pollution, on the other hand, seem to be making tangible progress. The EPA launched an industrial performance permit system in 1993, again with the assistance of inspectors from contracted private com­panies, under which factories must submit to detailed inspections of their emissions to ensure that they are within government guidelines. Those that pass will be certified as meeting national emissions standards, while those that fail will be required to bring their operations into line, or face fines, or legal action. No certifications have yet been issued, but over three thousand factories across the island are currently undergoing inspection. They are all industries with high potential for pollution, such as power generation, steel, cement, and chemicals.

Suppliers of pollution control equip­ment can attest to the impact of stronger regulations. Yi Dai (戴逸權), former technical engineering manager for the Taipei offices of BHA Group, a Missouri-based supplier of air pollution control equip­ment, has noticed a significant change in the attitudes of both public and industry in the past five years. “A lot of people, espe­cially those who live in industrial areas, are putting more and more pressure on the government to address this situation,” he says. “And because Taiwan has become more democratic, the government has lit­tle choice but to start pressuring industries to clean up their act. In response, many companies are installing the necessary equipment to comply with the regula­tions.”

The EPA’s Chen Hsiung-wen also reports that use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) has now been banned in Taiwan, as it has in many countries of the world. “Even though Taiwan is not a member of the United Nations, we began complying with the Montreal Protocol [a UN-led environmental protection initiative] beginning January 1, 1996,” he says. Production and importation of CFCs are now illegal, and Formosa Plastics, for­merly one of Taiwan’s largest CFC users and manufacturers, closed its CFC plant this year.

Government air pollution control initiative are moving in the right direction, but many environmentalists complain that the measures are not going far or fast enough. You Yii-der of the Environmen­tal Protection Foundation and Jay Fang of the Green Consumer Foundation say that drastic action must be taken before the problem becomes overwhelming. For example, both believe that all motorcycles powered by two-stroke engines should be banned, because they constitute the big­gest single source of pollution caused by motor vehicles. This, however, would mean banning most motorcycles currently operating in Taiwan, which in turn would involve convincing the majority of the is­land’s adult population to give up their primary means of transport.

Motorcycles have become extremely popular in Taiwan because they represent an affordable alternative to cars. Given the severe traffic congestion in urban areas, they are far more convenient, allowing drivers to weave through rush hour gridlock. Reducing public reliance on motorcycles, therefore, will require upgrading mass transit systems. City governments in Tai­pei and Kaohsiung are trying to do exactly that, but many projects have been plagued by mismanagement and delays.

Taipei’s mass transit rail system, for example, may one day relieve the city’s traffic and air pollution woes considerably. But at present only a single 10.6 kilometer line of its planned 88-kilometer, five-line network is operational, after more than eight years of construction. Public trans­port therefore continues to consist of buses and a limited selection of train routes. During rush hour, either option promises a very crowded and uncomfortable ride. For most commuters, motorcycles remain the most convenient and cost-effective way of getting around.

The EPA recognized that Taiwan resi­dents were unlikely to part with their motorcycles and cars, so in 1996 it began subsidizing purchases of low-polluting vehicles. The idea behind the program is simply that, if people cannot forgo the convenience of having their own motor vehicles, they should at least drive cleaner ones. Individuals can now receive a US$185 rebate when buying an electric motorcycle, or US$1,850 for an automo­bile converted to run on LPG (liquefied petroleum gas, a much cleaner alternative to gasoline-powered cars). Transport companies can receive as much as US$ 18,000 for each low-emission bus they buy, depend­ing on how cleanly it runs. According to the EPA, purchases of 500 buses, 1,000 LPG­-powered cars, and 100 electric motorcy­cles have been subsidized under the program.

If government programs have thus far failed to adequately address Taiwan’s air pollution problem, the EPA is quick to blame its shortage of manpower and resources, which in turn are caused by a lack of funding. In its nine-year history, it has consistently received among the smallest budget allocations of any central government agency. In 1995, the total amount spent on environmental protec­tion, including funding for projects from agencies other than the EPA, constituted just 1.2 percent of the total central govern­ment budget. And the EPA’s slice of the budgetary pie has been cut each year for the past four years, from US$418 million in fiscal year 1994 to $133 million for fis­cal year 1997. In 1997, the Bureau of Air Quality Protection and Noise Control will receive only $2 million.

In July 1995, the EPA found a solution to its financial woes. After a two-year debate among legislators, the agency was given permission to begin collecting an Air Pollution Fee on every liter of diesel, unleaded, and leaded fuel bought by consumer, as well as on every ton of coal and kiloliter of industrial fuel oil purchased by factories and power plants. The funds col­lected—US$250 million in the program’s first year of operation—were to be used to help pay for the EPA’s air pollution control activities.

But the fee faced growing opposition in the legislature, where lawmakers criti­cized it for violating existing air pollution laws by targeting fuel consumption instead of pollution emissions. The agency’s allo­cation of nearly one-third of the funds for construction of “eco-parks” also came under fire for doing too little to improve air quality, and too much to benefit select communities near the parks. The Air Pol­lution Fee was nearly scrapped, but a com­promise was reached.

The new agreement exempted pur­chases of unleaded gasoline from the fee in order to encourage consumers to choose more environmentally friendly fuels, and the budget for eco-parks was slashed by 60 percent. In response, the EPA has increased its budget for subsidizing purchases of low-polluting vehicles and for conducting vehicular and industrial emissions inspec­tion and enforcement programs with local governments. For their part, environmen­talists have criticized the compromise, saying that the EPA’s failure to deal with Taiwan’s air pollution problem has not been the result of the lack of funding, but mismanagement of the funding it has.

Taiwan’s cities are not alone in suffer­ing from pollution brought on by rapid economic development, as evidenced by conditions in Bangkok, Jakarta, and Shanghai. Throughout Asia, environmen­talists are struggling with this growing problem. Solutions may not be out of reach, but environmentalists in Taiwan remain pessimistic.

Jay Fang of the Green Consumers’ Foundation argues that better and faster results could be achieved by levying the EPA’s Air Pollution Fee on fuel suppliers, and auto makers and importers, thereby making businesses, not just consumers, re­sponsible for cleaning up Taiwan’s air. “It makes sense to encourage industries to operate more cleanly, and to produce more environmentally friendly products,” he says. “Consumers can’t avoid using pollut­ing products if they’re all that’s available.”

Even if the government does not encourage manufacturers to become more environmentally friendly, it seems that market forces will. Wang Jung-der (王榮德), director of the Center for Re­search of Environmental and Occupational Diseases at NTU, says that consumer pur­chasing patterns show an increased sensi­tivity to environmental issues. “There is a growing shift to green products in the global marketplace,” he says. “Companies that don’t adapt will lose customers, and products that pollute won’t sell.”

Environmentalists and some business groups add that businesses and industries should not regard public awareness and activism toward environmental issues as a threat, but as an opportunity. For example, NTU’s Chan Chang-chuan believes that in­viting foreign firms that specialize in pol­lution control to train local professionals could spur the growth of a domestic pol­lution control industry. Such expertise could then be exported to other countries in the region that will soon be in need of it, including Mainland China. But he also recongized that the obstacles to such an initia­tive lie not just in finding investors, but also in a lack of government support.“In developed countries, environmental protection is seen as a business opportunity, something good for the economy," he says.“But public officials in Taiwan still think of it as social welfare. If that contin­ues, not only will our environment be ru­ined, but our economy as well."