能源轉型的時間景觀：基隆協和電廠改建爭議的時間政治分析

Timescapes of Energy Transition: Temporal Politics in the Redevelopment of the Hsieh-ho Power Plant

本文以協和電廠改建爭議為例，探討能源轉型的「時景政治」。傳統上，基礎設施爭議多被理解為空間正義問題，如設址衝突或生態破壞，能源轉型政策也呈現出「只在具體開發案討論空間」的結構困局。然而爭議同時也是對未來時間秩序的規劃與抗拒，應以「時間景觀」（timescapes）加以分析。研究方法結合2018-2025年的田野觀察、訪談與文件，以事件關鍵片段歸納出制度、技術與有機三大時景並分析其互動：第一，制度時景——能源政策時程、環評與選舉週期如何將行動者捲入事件，並加強了能源轉型的主導性時間線；第二，技術時景——工程進度表、安全存量與電網邏輯如何被建構為「不可替代」；第三，有機時景——珊瑚繁殖、魚群洄游與居民呼吸感知，如何轉化為另類政治語言。作者主張，這些爭議時景並非自然存在，而是「技藝性時間實作」的過程。無論正反方，不同時景中的行動者，都透過知識、經驗與身體實踐裁剪並使用時間作為行動的基礎，表現出能源轉型中的不平等，並開展對未來的不同想像。研究發現，能源爭議的政治主體是在多重時景的摩擦中逐步成形。作者認為「希望的節奏」有可能作為對抗線性時間政體的可能，並主張能源轉型研究應將「時間的技藝性生產」納入核心視野，以回應環境議題過度空間化的批判。

This article examines the temporal politics of Taiwan’s energy transition through the redevelopment dispute surrounding the Hsieh-ho Power Plant and the proposed Fourth LNG Receiving Terminal. Infrastructure conflicts are commonly framed as issues of spatial justice, such as siting disputes or ecological damage. This study argues that they are also struggles over temporal orders and should be analyzed through the concept of timescapes. Based on fieldwork conducted between 2018 and 2025, including interviews and document analysis, the study analyzes three interrelated timescapes. The institutional timescape is shaped by policy timetables, environmental impact assessments, and electoral cycles that structure a dominant trajectory of transition. The technological timescape centers on construction schedules, safety stock requirements, and power-system logic framed as“indispensable.”In contrast, the organic timescape emerges from coral reproduction, fish migration, and residents’embodied perceptions, which are mobilized as alternative political language. The analysis shows that these timescapes are not naturally given but produced through the skillful making of time. Actors on all sides draw on knowledge, experience, and bodily practice to contest temporalities, revealing inequalities and competing imaginaries of the future. Political subjectivities emerge through the friction among timescapes. The article concludes by proposing a“rhythm of hope”as a counter to linear temporal regimes and argues for placing the skillful making of time at the center of energy research.