Nantou Plans to Build Waste Incinerator; Environmental Groups Protest Procedural Disputes
The Nantou County Government held a second-stage environmental impact assessment scoping meeting for a waste treatment center, but residents and environmental groups protested, citing procedural irregularities. Environmental groups pointed out the lack of cross-domain professional review representation due to few attending committee members and experts. During the meeting, chaos erupted with residents throwing paper money and jumping on tables. The Nantou County Environmental Protection Bureau explained that the scoping meeting is not a formal review meeting, so there are no restrictions on the number of attendees.
📋 Article Processing Timeline
- 📰 Published: April 15, 2026 at 16:22
- 🔍 Collected: April 15, 2026 at 16:31 (8 min after Published)
- 🤖 AI Analyzed: April 15, 2026 at 18:11 (1h 39m after Collected)
Central News Agency
(Central News Agency, Nantou, April 15, reporter Hsiao Po-yang) The Nantou County Government held a second-stage environmental impact assessment scoping meeting for a waste treatment center. Residents threw paper money and jumped on tables in protest. Environmental groups said that the number of attending committee members and experts was sparse, lacking cross-domain professional review representation, and that the forced progression of the agenda ignored procedural disputes.
Nantou County does not have a waste incinerator and must rely on other counties and cities for assistance in waste treatment. The county government plans to build the Nantou County Waste Treatment and Renewable Energy Center in Xinmin Village, Mingjian Township. A conflict occurred during a previous second-stage environmental impact assessment scoping meeting. The county government held follow-up meetings yesterday and today. The Mingjian Township Anti-Incinerator Self-Help Association, environmental groups, and residents attended to express their opposition.
Environmental groups first held a press conference outside the venue, stating that Nantou County Magistrate Hsu Shu-hua's claim of 80% public support for the incinerator was a false poll. They also believed that only one environmental assessment committee member attended yesterday's meeting, which was less than half and constituted a procedural issue. At the beginning of the meeting, environmental groups again named the attendees listed in the meeting notice and argued that the meeting was invalid due to insufficient numbers. During the process, some residents threw paper money and jumped on tables, creating a chaotic scene.
Mingjian Township Mayor Chen Han-li said that the Nantou County Government's scoping meeting was a mess. The meeting was intended to propose alternative solutions for waste treatment and site selection, but everything was not in accordance with normal procedures. The county government held multiple meetings in just a few days, using administrative violence to exhaust residents, and to build an undesirable facility in Mingjian Township, yet the meeting location was not even in Mingjian Township.
Chen Rong-xian, a member of the Nantou Living Vision Studio, said that Hsu Shu-hua claimed 87% support for the incinerator, but among the 1500 samples, only about 900 were from Nantou residents. Moreover, the poll was conducted in October 2024, before any explanatory meetings were held. Could residents truly understand that the so-called waste treatment and renewable energy center was an incinerator? A questionnaire conducted when the policy was still unclear was meant to convince the county government itself or to fool the villagers.
Hsu Hsin-hsin, executive director of the Supervision Administration Alliance, said that only one environmental assessment committee member attended yesterday's scoping meeting, and the other six were all absent. Of the six invited experts and scholars, five attended in the morning, and only two remained in the afternoon, with a total of only three present. With as many as 10 people absent, citizens demanded to stop the meeting, believing that a complete discussion was impossible. However, the Nantou County Government Environmental Protection Bureau and the chairman of the meeting did not address the procedural issue of insufficient expert committee members and insisted on holding the meeting.
Li Yi-shu, director of the Nantou County Environmental Protection Bureau, said that the scoping meeting is not a formal review meeting, so there are no restrictions on the number of attendees. The environmental assessment committee provided written opinions beforehand, which the Environmental Protection Bureau adopted and explained. The purpose of the scoping meeting is also to listen to public opinions and for the development unit to decide whether to include them in subsequent evaluations and simulations. Adopting the opinions of experts, scholars, and the public has no definite relationship with the number of attending committee members. (Editor: Lin Shu-hui) 1150415
Choose to stand with the facts, every sponsorship you make is the power to protect press freedom.
Download the Central News Agency "First-hand News" APP to keep abreast of the latest news.
The text, pictures, and audio-visual content of this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast, or publicly transmitted and used without authorization.
(Central News Agency, Nantou, April 15, reporter Hsiao Po-yang) The Nantou County Government held a second-stage environmental impact assessment scoping meeting for a waste treatment center. Residents threw paper money and jumped on tables in protest. Environmental groups said that the number of attending committee members and experts was sparse, lacking cross-domain professional review representation, and that the forced progression of the agenda ignored procedural disputes.
Nantou County does not have a waste incinerator and must rely on other counties and cities for assistance in waste treatment. The county government plans to build the Nantou County Waste Treatment and Renewable Energy Center in Xinmin Village, Mingjian Township. A conflict occurred during a previous second-stage environmental impact assessment scoping meeting. The county government held follow-up meetings yesterday and today. The Mingjian Township Anti-Incinerator Self-Help Association, environmental groups, and residents attended to express their opposition.
Environmental groups first held a press conference outside the venue, stating that Nantou County Magistrate Hsu Shu-hua's claim of 80% public support for the incinerator was a false poll. They also believed that only one environmental assessment committee member attended yesterday's meeting, which was less than half and constituted a procedural issue. At the beginning of the meeting, environmental groups again named the attendees listed in the meeting notice and argued that the meeting was invalid due to insufficient numbers. During the process, some residents threw paper money and jumped on tables, creating a chaotic scene.
Mingjian Township Mayor Chen Han-li said that the Nantou County Government's scoping meeting was a mess. The meeting was intended to propose alternative solutions for waste treatment and site selection, but everything was not in accordance with normal procedures. The county government held multiple meetings in just a few days, using administrative violence to exhaust residents, and to build an undesirable facility in Mingjian Township, yet the meeting location was not even in Mingjian Township.
Chen Rong-xian, a member of the Nantou Living Vision Studio, said that Hsu Shu-hua claimed 87% support for the incinerator, but among the 1500 samples, only about 900 were from Nantou residents. Moreover, the poll was conducted in October 2024, before any explanatory meetings were held. Could residents truly understand that the so-called waste treatment and renewable energy center was an incinerator? A questionnaire conducted when the policy was still unclear was meant to convince the county government itself or to fool the villagers.
Hsu Hsin-hsin, executive director of the Supervision Administration Alliance, said that only one environmental assessment committee member attended yesterday's scoping meeting, and the other six were all absent. Of the six invited experts and scholars, five attended in the morning, and only two remained in the afternoon, with a total of only three present. With as many as 10 people absent, citizens demanded to stop the meeting, believing that a complete discussion was impossible. However, the Nantou County Government Environmental Protection Bureau and the chairman of the meeting did not address the procedural issue of insufficient expert committee members and insisted on holding the meeting.
Li Yi-shu, director of the Nantou County Environmental Protection Bureau, said that the scoping meeting is not a formal review meeting, so there are no restrictions on the number of attendees. The environmental assessment committee provided written opinions beforehand, which the Environmental Protection Bureau adopted and explained. The purpose of the scoping meeting is also to listen to public opinions and for the development unit to decide whether to include them in subsequent evaluations and simulations. Adopting the opinions of experts, scholars, and the public has no definite relationship with the number of attending committee members. (Editor: Lin Shu-hui) 1150415
Choose to stand with the facts, every sponsorship you make is the power to protect press freedom.
Download the Central News Agency "First-hand News" APP to keep abreast of the latest news.
The text, pictures, and audio-visual content of this website may not be reproduced, publicly broadcast, or publicly transmitted and used without authorization.
FAQ
What facility is Nantou County planning to build?
Nantou County is planning to build a waste treatment and renewable energy center.
What is the main reason for the environmental groups' protest?
Environmental groups are protesting mainly due to the low number of attending committee members and experts at the environmental impact assessment meeting, citing procedural issues.