Former Intel chief executive Pat Gelsinger warned that if China were to fully cut off Taiwan’s energy supply, the resulting damage to the global economy could exceed that of the Great Depression of the 1930s. Taiwan’s economic authorities answered on July 19 with a rare sharply worded response, saying Taiwan’s supply chain and energy resilience could stand up to scrutiny and describing the claims as either inconsistent with the facts or overly speculative.
Gelsinger raised the scenario in a mid-July podcast interview
Gelsinger made the remarks in a mid-July appearance on the All-In Podcast. He argued that the world is excessively dependent on Taiwan’s chip production and said that if China were to cut off the island’s energy supply and trigger a power crisis, the fallout would surpass the economic collapse seen nearly a century ago.
He cited a Wall Street Journal report published in early July and said Taiwan has “less than three weeks” of energy reserves. In his words, that “should make everybody’s spine chill.”
Gelsinger also said China has held seven military drills around the Taiwan Strait over the past four years, which he characterized as blockade rehearsals. He added that once semiconductor fabs lose power, it takes about 90 days to bring production lines back. If Taiwan were hit by a large-scale blackout, he said, the economic shock would be greater than the Great Depression.
Taiwan officials answered with reserve margin and demand projections
In response, Taiwan’s economic authorities said Taipower’s operating reserve margin did not fall below 6% at any point in 2025. They added that the system logged 342 “green light” days during the year, a category that refers to days when reserve capacity exceeds 10%.
Officials also said their planning already factors in electricity demand from semiconductor fab expansion, data centers, and new AI-related consumption. For the 2026 to 2035 period, they estimate average annual growth in electricity demand at roughly 2.5%.
At the same time, Taipower is accelerating work under its grid resilience construction plan, which is intended to keep the power system functioning during sudden incidents or extreme weather.
The response also pointed to earthquake history and fuel sourcing
On broader systemic risks such as earthquakes and pandemics, the authorities said that from the 1999 Jiji earthquake to the April 3, 2024 Hualien earthquake, Taiwan went through multiple major quakes and typhoons without any semiconductor factory being shut for more than one day. Even when individual production lines were affected, other lines could step in and make up the shortfall through accelerated output.
The statement said that resilience comes from the tight integration of Taiwan’s ICT and semiconductor clusters, with suppliers and manufacturers supporting one another. It also said industry held up even when COVID-19 disrupted global logistics and repeated international energy shocks hit the market.
On fuel imports, the authorities said Taiwan does not rely on a single region or a single supplier for oil and gas. Instead, it uses a mix of medium- and long-term contracts, spot-market scheduling flexibility, and safety stock mechanisms. As tensions tied to the U.S.-Iran conflict affect the Middle East, the energy response team said it is closely tracking developments and has already arranged procurement and backup measures for the winter demand peak.
The original article contrasted the assumptions behind both sides
The source article also said Gelsinger’s framing carries a degree of escalation because it treats “seven drills in four years” as direct blockade rehearsals. It further noted that, as a former Intel chief who has backed U.S. domestic manufacturing, a narrative centered on Taiwan’s vulnerability aligns with his position.
At the same time, the article argued that the figures cited by Taiwan’s economic authorities address different conditions. A 6% reserve margin and 342 green-light days measure generation headroom when fuel continues to arrive normally. The 25-year record on earthquakes and typhoons speaks to natural-disaster disruptions lasting days or weeks. Diversified oil and gas procurement reduces supplier risk, not shipping-lane risk.
That difference matters because Gelsinger’s scenario assumes those underlying conditions no longer hold. The article said that nearly 98% of Taiwan’s energy depends on seaborne imports. If shipping routes were cut off, the issue would not be whether imports stop, but how long the interruption lasts. Under that scenario, even a high reserve margin would remain only a paper figure.
The article closed by saying the severity of Gelsinger’s warning can be debated, but the structural weakness he pointed to is real: Taiwan’s chip strength rests on a maritime lifeline it does not fully control.