By Jang Daul
A scorching heat wave is hitting South Korea right now. The temperature has already risen close to 37 degrees Celsius and most parts of the country have been under an emergency heat wave warning since last weekend.
Extreme weather events are happening all over the world. Hundreds of people died due to the heat dome in western Canada and the northwestern United States. In Europe, severe floods have swept through western Germany and Belgium.
There is no doubt that we are living in an era of global warming and climate crisis. However, what is more frightening is that climate change is irreversible.
Some people still believe we can fix the problem by developing magic bullets, such as geoengineering, small modular reactors (SMRs) and nuclear fusion. However, these are unproven technologies in terms of their performance, safety, economics and public acceptance, and therefore they are false solutions that we cannot rely on.
We do not have much time left in order to prevent the climate crisis from reaching a tipping point; we must limit the global temperature increase to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius. We need solutions that we can apply right now and at least within fewer than 10 years.
Therefore, in this unprecedented challenge that humans have brought on ourselves, it is critical for us, especially leaders, to ask the right questions. However, it seems that many of the leaders in our society are not asking the right questions.
First, a few political leaders have stressed that the nuclear phase-out policy of the Moon Jae-in administration needs to be discarded in order to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.
Whether you support the nuclear phase-out policy or not, if we want to solve the climate crisis, we need to stop emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. The share of fossil fuels ― coal, natural gas and oil ― in power generation was 62 percent in 2020.
That being the case, the right question is not whether we should continue the nuclear phase-out policy or not, but how can we replace this 62 percent of fossil fuels? In other words, how can we reduce our annual greenhouse gas emissions by a minimum of 50 percent by 2030?
Even if we go back to the nuclear policy of the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations in the past ― building six additional reactors ― nuclear energy could additionally contribute only around 10 percent. If that's the case, then we still need to replace more than 50 percent of the fossil fuels currently used in power generation.
The correct answer to the above question is to increase renewable energy production rapidly. Most political leaders in global major economies strongly support the expansion of renewable energy regardless of their political ideologies and stances on nuclear energy.
However, unfortunately, many conservative politicians in our society tend to focus solely on undermining and underestimating the importance of renewable energy in the path to carbon neutrality.
Yet, renewable energy is the proven, faster, cheaper, safer and cleaner option for supplying electricity without exacerbating the climate crisis. These qualities are why the share of renewables in the global capacity expansion in 2020 was 82 percent, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency.
Secondly, many corporate leaders in our society, including the Federation of Korean Industries, tend to focus on slowing down the speed of the industrial transition, due to the short-term negative impact on our economy and jobs.
However, the right question should not be about the negative impact due to stronger climate regulations and the transition to a zero-carbon economy, but rather, about the negative impact on our industrial competitiveness if we do not follow the global trend of stronger climate regulations and the transition to carbon neutrality.
In 2011, the Korea Environment Institute estimated that the total cumulative cost of climate inaction could be 2,800 trillion won ($2.42 trillion). However, if the world puts its ambitious efforts together to reduce carbon emissions, the total cost could be reduced by up to 580 trillion won ($502 billion).
Recently, the European Commission disclosed a package of proposals called "Fit for 55" to curb greenhouse gas emissions by 55 percent by 2030, compared with 1990 levels. The package introduces a globally unprecedented carbon border adjustment tax mechanism as well as bans sales of new fossil-fuel cars after 2035.
The package will become a disaster if Korea's industry does not change quickly by setting an ambitious 100 percent renewable electricity (RE100) target by 2030, and by drastically reducing carbon emissions in business activities.
Several corporations, including SK Telecom, Hyundai Motor and LG Electronics recently announced their participation in the RE100 goal, but still their ambition levels are still far away from the global standard. More proactive and ambitious climate leadership is required for corporate leaders in Korea.
Being late to take off cannot be an excuse for slower climate action in Korea. The question of what the consequences will be if we fail to hold the global average temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius needs to come first.
Jang Daul (daul.jang@greenpeace.org) is a government relations and advocacy specialist at Greenpeace East Asia's Seoul Office.
 |
Extreme weather events are happening all over the world. Hundreds of people died due to the heat dome in western Canada and the northwestern United States. In Europe, severe floods have swept through western Germany and Belgium.
There is no doubt that we are living in an era of global warming and climate crisis. However, what is more frightening is that climate change is irreversible.
Some people still believe we can fix the problem by developing magic bullets, such as geoengineering, small modular reactors (SMRs) and nuclear fusion. However, these are unproven technologies in terms of their performance, safety, economics and public acceptance, and therefore they are false solutions that we cannot rely on.
We do not have much time left in order to prevent the climate crisis from reaching a tipping point; we must limit the global temperature increase to less than 1.5 degrees Celsius. We need solutions that we can apply right now and at least within fewer than 10 years.
Therefore, in this unprecedented challenge that humans have brought on ourselves, it is critical for us, especially leaders, to ask the right questions. However, it seems that many of the leaders in our society are not asking the right questions.
First, a few political leaders have stressed that the nuclear phase-out policy of the Moon Jae-in administration needs to be discarded in order to achieve the goal of carbon neutrality by 2050.
Whether you support the nuclear phase-out policy or not, if we want to solve the climate crisis, we need to stop emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels. The share of fossil fuels ― coal, natural gas and oil ― in power generation was 62 percent in 2020.
That being the case, the right question is not whether we should continue the nuclear phase-out policy or not, but how can we replace this 62 percent of fossil fuels? In other words, how can we reduce our annual greenhouse gas emissions by a minimum of 50 percent by 2030?
Even if we go back to the nuclear policy of the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye administrations in the past ― building six additional reactors ― nuclear energy could additionally contribute only around 10 percent. If that's the case, then we still need to replace more than 50 percent of the fossil fuels currently used in power generation.
The correct answer to the above question is to increase renewable energy production rapidly. Most political leaders in global major economies strongly support the expansion of renewable energy regardless of their political ideologies and stances on nuclear energy.
However, unfortunately, many conservative politicians in our society tend to focus solely on undermining and underestimating the importance of renewable energy in the path to carbon neutrality.
Yet, renewable energy is the proven, faster, cheaper, safer and cleaner option for supplying electricity without exacerbating the climate crisis. These qualities are why the share of renewables in the global capacity expansion in 2020 was 82 percent, according to the International Renewable Energy Agency.
Secondly, many corporate leaders in our society, including the Federation of Korean Industries, tend to focus on slowing down the speed of the industrial transition, due to the short-term negative impact on our economy and jobs.
However, the right question should not be about the negative impact due to stronger climate regulations and the transition to a zero-carbon economy, but rather, about the negative impact on our industrial competitiveness if we do not follow the global trend of stronger climate regulations and the transition to carbon neutrality.
In 2011, the Korea Environment Institute estimated that the total cumulative cost of climate inaction could be 2,800 trillion won ($2.42 trillion). However, if the world puts its ambitious efforts together to reduce carbon emissions, the total cost could be reduced by up to 580 trillion won ($502 billion).
Recently, the European Commission disclosed a package of proposals called "Fit for 55" to curb greenhouse gas emissions by 55 percent by 2030, compared with 1990 levels. The package introduces a globally unprecedented carbon border adjustment tax mechanism as well as bans sales of new fossil-fuel cars after 2035.
The package will become a disaster if Korea's industry does not change quickly by setting an ambitious 100 percent renewable electricity (RE100) target by 2030, and by drastically reducing carbon emissions in business activities.
Several corporations, including SK Telecom, Hyundai Motor and LG Electronics recently announced their participation in the RE100 goal, but still their ambition levels are still far away from the global standard. More proactive and ambitious climate leadership is required for corporate leaders in Korea.
Being late to take off cannot be an excuse for slower climate action in Korea. The question of what the consequences will be if we fail to hold the global average temperature rise below 1.5 degrees Celsius needs to come first.
Jang Daul (daul.jang@greenpeace.org) is a government relations and advocacy specialist at Greenpeace East Asia's Seoul Office.
![[INTERVIEW] 'Money Heist: Korea' writer feels satisfied to expand series' franchise](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/e264f8d5589442489d72f9494ca3f1c7.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
