Chinese Taipei Chinese Taipei

Chinese Taipei falls one spots and ranks 58th  in this year’s CCPI. With an overall very low rating, it remains in the bottom 10.

Unimproved, the country receives very low ratings in the GHG Emissions, Renewable Energy, and Energy Use categories. In Climate Policy, it receives a low.

Chinese Taipei’s government has announced a net zero goal for 2050, but this is not yet legally binding. To date, the country has passed the Greenhouse Gas Reduction and Management Law, in 2015. The long-term target described in this act is to, by 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 50% compared with 2005. The new net zero goal will likely be included to the abovementioned Law this year, as well as a new renewable energy goal to achieve 50% renewable energies by 2050. The CCPI climate experts welcome the climate ambition, but criticise the lack of strategies and monitoring mechanisms that should accompany the carbon reduction targets. There are policies in place to support renewable energies (namely, the Renewable Energy Development Act and Electricity Act). The experts, however, note that the development of renewable energy should be more ambitious and that the expansion should not cause ecological damage (e.g., destruction of algae reefs, forests, and wetlands through natural gas).

Overall, the experts demand a fossil fuel phase-out, announcement of Chinese Taipei’s emissions peak, and long-term strategies for renewable energy and emissions targets.

Disclaimer: We use the name Chinese Taipei, which is internationally agreed upon by both the Republic of China (ROC, also known as Taiwan) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). The CCPI team has no further position related to geopolitical contexts.

The following national experts agreed to be mentioned as contributors for this year’s CCPI: Gloria K.-J. HSU (Mom Loves Taiwan Association), Robin Winkler (Wild at Heart Legal Defense Association), Dr. Ying-Shih Hsieh (Environmental Quality Protection Foundation).

3rd of December 2021: After finding a calculation error in the population number used for Taiwan, we have revised our data and the ranking for CCPI 2022.  This effects Chinese Taipei’s ranking slightly (+2). We apologize for this mistake.

Technical note: how to read the target comparison graph

The graph above shows the development of a country over the past years compared with its Paris compatible pathway and 2030 target. For all three quantitative categories of the CCPI, this visualisation gives an overview of where a country is right now, where it would need to be to fulfil the Paris Agreement promises and where it aims to be in 2030.

For GHG emissions per capita, the data includes LULUCF, as used for the emissions per capita indicator. This leads to the vast changes in emissions of some countries with high forest coverage.
The calculation of individual country target pathways is based on the common but differentiated convergence approach (CDC). It is based on the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” laid forth in the Framework Convention on Climate Change. All Annex I countries therefore have a decreasing pathway from 1990 onwards, starting at that year’s emissions. 60 years later, in 2050, these countries are expected to reach net zero emissions. All other countries, which did not reach the level of global average emissions in 1990, are allowed to increase emissions until the average is reached. But by latest 2015 these countries, too, have decreasing pathways and 60 years to reach net zero. These pathways start from the global average.

The Renewable Energy data is given in per cent of Total Primary Energy Supply (TPES) and includes hydro energy, consistent with the respective CCPI indicator. As global distribution of Renewables (especially solar and wind) only started in the 2000s, the pathways in this category start in 2010. All countries have an equal goal: 100% Renewables in 2050, each starting from its 2010 value.

For Energy Use the Primary Energy Supply per capita is shown. All pathways for this category start at country’s 1990 values and meet at global average of 80 gigajoules per capita in TPES.
For 2°C and 1.5°C scenarios, a decrease in emissions by reducing the (growth in) energy use is as crucial as deploying renewable (or other low-carbon) technologies. The IPCC carried out a scenario comparison using a large number of integrated assessment models. From the scenarios available, we observe that the total amount of global energy use in 2050 has to be roughly the same level or a bit higher than it is today, with a margin of uncertainty. At the same time population will grow slightly between today and 2050. We therefore pragmatically chose the well-below-2° compatible benchmark to be “same energy use per capita in 2050 as the current global average”, which is 80 gigajoules per capita in TPES.