By Yiler Huang
Everyone know that there will be a referendum in this week, and one topic we need to vote for is things about building nature gas station near the Algae Reefs. My thought is: we can build the station somewhere else. The reason is that it will only take 5 years more to plan and build the station somewhere (if the political people are right, they still might be lying for people to trust them, but we don't think about it now), and I know because I did some researches on internet. So, you can vote against in this topic. If we did, we can still get the natural gas from the other country, and we can also make sure that the algae reef and the animals there are all fine.
Some people might say that five years are too long to wait for the station. But, the answer is: not really. First, we need to know that how long we are gonna use the station. If the station is built, it will work for us in the next half century from it's built. So this short five years doesn't matter, because we need to see things happens further. Not just focus on what will happen in next five years, we should more focus on things will happen in next half century.
The second point is: our goal is to reach zero CO2 producing in next half century to next century. There is still a long time till that happens, so it really not affect Taiwan a lot if we look at this world from a greater scale.
The last point is: There is actually no big differences between build it in the original place or the other spots. I mean, the efficient we get will be the same. Because the distance between Taipei and Tauyuan is not so long. So it is fine to move the station to Taipei.
Because of the three points, I suggest you to vote against in this topic. Because we won't waste too much if we move the station to Taipei. We need to plan more further of future, so we need to vote for our future. Vote seriously for your self and the future generations.
2021年12月的公投結束了，我覺得這次公投的結果出乎了我的意料，因為最後四個項目的結果都是否決。這讓我覺得公投運作的機制比一般的投票來得複雜許多，也讓我重新思考公投的目的。
首先是第一個項目：重啟核四。這個項目是四個項目中同意和不同意票差距最大的，不同意票比同意票多出了40多萬票，但最後的結果還是沒有超過預定公投通過門檻。我覺得最後造成這個結果的原因非常複雜，因為每當有重大的投票時，總會有非常多政治人物或者是民間團體為他們的想法發聲，但我原以為這個項目的結果會是不同意票通過門檻並且遭到否決。
第二個項目是反來豬進口。這個項目也讓我很困惑，因為在之前媒體幾乎是一面倒的反對台灣進口萊豬，或報導一些關於萊豬的缺點。我平常在超市，也會看到業者在商品上加上註明，表示自己的商品不含有萊克多巴胺。但是這是公投的結果是反對票依然沒有通過門檻而且票數也和同意票不相上下，只差了大約20萬票。這讓我更覺得公投的機制非常複雜而且社會上每個人的想法也跟我想的很不一樣。
第三個項目是公投綁大選。一樣是因為沒有通過門檻而被否決。但我覺得這一個項目是四個公投中最不必要的項目，因為我並不覺得這個項目通過或不通過有什麼重大的影響，所以我想直接說明這學期我們最關注的項目：三接遷離大潭藻礁。這個項目是我們整個學期一直以來一直在關注的項目而這項目的結果也和其他三個項目一樣，因為沒有通過門檻而遭到否決，這代表如果沒有意外發生的話，天然氣接收站應該會是蓋在原本預定的地方的。而結合這個項目和其他三個項目我總結出了一個公投結果的原因和公投主要的用途。
我覺得這次四個項目都沒有通過門檻的原因是公投和一般大選的用途不同，而不一樣的地方就是公投需要更謹慎更為每一個人著想。比如，總統大選是為了要選出最讓人民信任的領導人，但公投不一樣，公投的目的是為了要盡可能的滿足每一個人，所以必須要有一個夠高的門檻。不然今天如果公投比較的項目只是票數高低的話，可能10,001人投反對10000人投同意，這樣就會導致無法滿足最大數量的人民。所以我覺得這次公投的結果再仔細想想後好像還蠻合理的。但最後我覺得在投票的過程中還是有很多關於政治立場等複雜的因素，導致公投結果和我預期的不一樣。