Yunlin Baocun Industrial Park EIA Requires Reassessment: Review Necessity of Certain Facilities

By Central News Agency reporter Chang Hsiung-feng, Taipei, April 11

The Ministry of Economic Affairs' Baocun Industrial Park project, aiming to attract food and related industries, underwent environmental impact assessment (EIA) review today but was not approved. Local residents oppose the planned Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) facility within the park, and EIA committee members also questioned its necessity. Additionally, the committee requested further evaluation of measures to address land subsidence. The case will be reconsidered after supplementary revisions.

The Environmental Protection Administration convened a preliminary review meeting today for the 'Draft Environmental Impact Assessment Report for the Baocun Industrial Park Development Project.' The project developer and overseeing authority is the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The development site is located in Baocun Township, Yunlin County, covering approximately 265.25 hectares of land formerly used as the Taiwan Sugar Maguang Farm.

The park plans to attract industries including food and feed manufacturing, beverage production, machinery manufacturing, industrial equipment maintenance and installation, transportation and warehousing, and scientific and technical services. The Ministry estimates the project will generate over 10,000 jobs and achieve an annual output value of approximately NT$20 billion.

The Yunlin County Zero Waste Home Action Association traveled to Taipei today to protest. They pointed out that the proposed site is only 250 meters from the nearest village and lies within a high-risk soil liquefaction zone. They warned that the park's development could exacerbate land subsidence.

The association also opposes the establishment of a Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) processing facility within the park. Given the area's agricultural focus, they argue the region should prioritize a 'zero waste' development model rather than establishing fuel conversion facilities.

Chang Tzu-chien, chairman of the Yunlin County Ecological Conservation Association, stated that the site was originally a sugarcane field owned by Taiwan Sugar and was once a peat swamp. He criticized the EIA report for completely overlooking the area's carbon sink function.

EIA committee members noted that the site is currently agricultural land and lies at a lower elevation than surrounding roads, meaning future tenants will require land filling. However, the source of the fill material has not been specified. Additionally, the existing farmland provides water retention functions, but the current stormwater detention assessment is inadequate. Finally, there are three agricultural irrigation intake points downstream of the park, yet the park lacks corresponding wastewater discharge designs.

Committee members frankly stated that the lack of clarity on these three points proves the site selection is flawed and suggested the project should be withdrawn.

The committee recommended re-evaluating the necessity and rationality of the development and the SRF facility; proposing concrete stormwater and wastewater collection and discharge measures; strengthening specific air quality and odor mitigation measures during construction and operation; and re-examining local ecological surveys and habitat impact assessments. The case will be reconsidered after supplementary revisions. (Edited by Li Hsi-chang)