The rapid development of AI data centers and the semiconductor industry will indeed increase Taiwan's power demand, making power supply reliability an important test. However, from "needing more electricity" to directly infer that nuclear power plants should be postponed, restarted, or even restarted, there are still several policy questions that cannot be skipped.
The AI data center and the power demand of the semiconductor industry have deduced that nuclear power plants should be postponed, restarted, or even restarted. There are still several policy questions that cannot be skipped. The picture shows the fourth nuclear power plant. (File photo) KMT New Taipei mayor candidate Li Sichuan recently said that as long as safety is ensured, he supports the extension of nuclear power plants or the restarting of Nuclear IV. He also advocates that nuclear power supply is stable and relatively cheap, and uses France’s experience in reprocessing used nuclear fuel to show that nuclear waste is not unsolvable. These propositions can be discussed; however, public policy cannot only present favorable facts, but must also explain the implementation conditions, complete costs, and ultimate responsibilities. AI needs electricity, which is a demand judgment; nuclear power should be restarted, which is a policy judgment. The two cannot be directly equated.
Calculate your needs first, then compare power supply options
How much electricity consumption may be increased by AI data centers, semiconductor manufacturing and high-performance computing must be based on industry expansion schedule, location, peak load, equipment efficiency and other conditions to establish a complete supply and demand model. Then one should compare how much reliable power gas, nuclear power, renewable energy, energy storage, hydropower, grid and demand management can provide over different time periods and how much investment is required.
If the restart of nuclear power still requires completion of engineering updates and safety reviews, the actual power supply time must be included in the comparison. The urgency of AI power consumption cannot be used to support restarting without calculating when nuclear power will be able to provide power. Energy governance is not about selecting an energy source first and then requiring other conditions to match; it is about first confirming the demand and then finding a combination that can reliably provide power within the required time period.
Li Sichuan, the New Taipei City mayoral candidate of the Kuomintang, believes that for the development of AI, while ensuring safety, he actually agrees with whether nuclear power plants must be postponed or restarted. (File photo) Whether nuclear power is cheap requires a complete accounting. Nuclear power may be cost-competitive during normal operation, but the daily power generation cost of existing units is not equal to the total cost of re-operation after shutdown; nuclear power cannot be directly compared with already operating units. The equipment status, engineering requirements and licensing procedures of Nuclear 2, Nuclear 3 and Nuclear 4 are different. The update cost, estimated timetable, possible power generation, fuel, nuclear waste management and decommissioning responsibilities should be disclosed respectively, and then compared with other power supply options on the same basis.
Renewable energy cannot only calculate the cost of equipment and ignore the power grid, energy storage and land use. All energy sources should be tested against consistent standards, rather than adopting looser algorithms for the solutions they support.
Core 2, Core 3 and Core 4 cannot be generalized
The extension of service, restarting after shutdown and re-operation of nuclear power units are different policy and safety issues. Although the re-operation plan for Nuclear 3 has completed the Nuclear Safety Commission review on September 24, 2026, Taipower still must implement the approved plan, submit an implementation results report, and complete follow-up reviews and related safety inspections; the review process for Nuclear 2 is still ongoing. Nuclear Four has never entered commercial operation and cannot be reduced to a problem of restoring the operation of existing units.
This does not mean that restarting is necessarily unfeasible, but it does mean that undetermined power cannot be regarded as a confirmed source of power supply until the necessary engineering, inspections and legal procedures are completed.
Just because France can reprocess nuclear fuel does not mean the nuclear waste problem has been solved
France does have technical and practical experience in nuclear fuel reprocessing and can recover some reusable materials; however, reprocessing will not eliminate all radioactive waste. International experience compiled by the Nuclear Safety Council also points out that even if foreign used nuclear fuel is sent to France for reprocessing, the relevant waste must still be transported back to the country of origin in accordance with regulations.
The re-operation plan of Nuclear 3 has been completed by the Nuclear Safety Commission on September 24, 2026. (File photo) If Taiwan wants to incorporate reprocessing into its nuclear waste policy, it must account for international cooperation and legal arrangements, complete costs, management of recycled materials, and final disposal plans for remaining high-level radioactive waste. Just because a certain technology exists, we cannot claim that the entire problem has been solved.
"As long as it's safe" is the threshold, not the policy answer
Those who support nuclear power can ask the government to seriously evaluate restarting, and society has reason to ask about nuclear safety, costs and nuclear waste responsibility. Safety is not a conclusion that politicians can declare in advance, but a condition that the competent authorities must confirm item by item based on regulations, technical data and on-site inspections. Even if safety is confirmed, policy must still answer questions about whether costs are reasonable, whether power schedules meet demand, and whether there are enforceable arrangements for decommissioning and nuclear waste responsibilities.
Nuclear power can be discussed, decommissioning can be evaluated, and Nuclear Power IV can also be reviewed with evidence-based support; but any claim must explain: when power can be supplied, how much power can be provided, how much it will cost, what risks must be borne, and who will be responsible if something goes wrong.
In the AI era, what Taiwan really cannot lack is not just electricity, but also an energy governance system that allows power supply commitments to be tested, costs and risks made public, and decision-makers to bear the consequences. Energy policy cannot just say "as long as it is safe", but must prove safety, account for costs, explain the timeline, and take responsibility.
Nuclear energy safety is something that the competent authorities must confirm one by one based on regulations, technical data and on-site verification. (File photo) (The author is the founder of the Taiwan Sustainable Governance Forum and an associate professor at the Cultural University)
