透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.19.56.45
  • 期刊

從美國法的經驗論我國放射性廢棄物處置的當前困境與未來方向

Learning from the Experience of the U.S. on the Predicament and Solution about Nuclear Waste Disposal of Taiwan

摘要


本文透過美國核廢處理的歷史經驗,藉由引介外國學者之觀察研究,闡述美國突破核廢貯存處置僵局的對策建議,主張「應確保被告知之公眾的信任」與「場址所在地的同意」之觀點,或應是我國未來法制規範調整的核心。而所謂尋求公眾信任與場址所在地之同意的必要條件,可歸納為如下三點:一、於制度上確保計畫安全性並兼顧環境保護;二、獨立的技術與科學監督及審查;及三、公眾參與、資訊取得與決策過程的透明。在核廢貯存處置的先期因應作為上,歐巴馬總統召集成立之「藍帶委員會」所提交的最終報告「Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future」,以及能源部2013年公布之「用過核燃料與高放射性輻射廢棄物管理與處置對策」,應有一定的參考價值。儘管美國核廢料之貯存處置問題,最終是否得以藉此等報告與對策的提出而獲得解決,猶在未定之天。但歸結過去失敗經驗及學者研究所得的原因癥結,或許足以作為我國參考的借鏡。另一方面,本文統整我國近年核廢立法的重要議題,探究我國立法草案可能應有之理論基礎,期以作為國人針對各版草案的內容,進一步進行理性具體討論其優劣與可行性的參考。

並列摘要


This article explored the nuclear waste storage and disposal crisis of American experience. With observation and research proposed by foreign scholar, this article elaborated the possible solutions and suggestions to break through management stalemate of nuclear waste. This article argued that it is essential to secure public trust and host assent in the decision making process of nuclear waste facilities. The threshold perquisites for public trust and host acceptance include institutional assurances of project safety, environmental protection, independent technical and scientific oversight, public participation, access to information, and transparent decision making. In term of early response to the management of nuclear waste, it was noteworthy in the report submitted by Blue Ribbon Commission, "Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future" and the report proposed by DOE, "Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-level Radioactive Waste". Although it was uncertain whether the American nuclear waste deadlock could be solved by these suggestions, it would be helpful for us to analyze and investigate the experience and crucial reasons. On the other hand, this article also concluded those critical issues regarding the nuclear waste legislation of Taiwan. It intended to lay the theoretical foundation for the nuclear waste legislation and provide feasible base for further rational dialogue among all interested parties.

參考文獻


台灣環境保護聯盟(2015),《暗度陳倉,藐視國會! 台電核廢境外再處理招標違反預算法記者會》,http://www.tepu.org.tw/?p=13221(最後瀏覽日:2016/6/28)。
詹順貴(2015),《為核廢料解套或核電廠延役鋪路?》,http://thomas0126.blogspot.tw/2015/05/blog-post.html(最後瀏覽日:2016/6/28)。
端傳媒(2016),《台灣反核大遊行: 核廠除役後, 核廢料如何處置?》,https://theinitium.com/article/20160313-dailynews-taiwananti-nuclear-energy/(最後瀏覽日:2016/6/27)。
蔡英文(2016),〈從少數到多數,非核家園,一直是民進黨堅持的理念〉,《蔡英文Facebook》,https://www.facebook.com/tsaiingwen/posts/10153224994871065(最後瀏覽日:2016/6/27)。
自由時報綜合報導(2015),〈《非核家園》草案初審通過 核電廠不延役、新增〉,《自由時報電子報》,http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/breakingnews/1280776( 最後瀏覽日:2016/6/28)。

延伸閱讀