By Jang Daul
In 2016, Climate Home, a climate change online news outlet, named South Korea a world "climate villain" together with Saudi Arabia, Australia and New Zealand. The report was based on the analysis from Climate Action Tracker (CAT), an independent scientific research organization.
The major reasons why Korea received the unpleasant title were the sharp increase of its per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, its public financial support for overseas coal-fired power investment and its abandonment of the 2020 GHG reduction target.
When the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was signed in 1992, South Korea was not included in Annex I Parties comprising the industrialized countries and those with economies in transition.
Even though both the annual and per capita CO2 emissions of South Korea in 1992 were already larger than some of the Annex I countries, the cumulative emission was much smaller because of Korea's relatively late and quick economic development. For example, the cumulative CO2 emission of Korea from 1751 to 1992 was only half that of Spain.
Not being included in the Annex I, Korea was not given a binding target under the Kyoto Protocol while most of the early industrialized countries were obliged to reduce GHG emissions by 2012.
As a result, the annual GHG emissions of Korea greatly increased by 149 percent in 2018 compared to the 1990 level, from 292 to 728 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, becoming one of the top 10 global largest CO2 emitters.
Korea's ranking of the cumulative CO2 emissions also remarkably went up to 17th in 2018 from 26th in 1992. Consequently, its cumulative emissions in 2018 surpassed Spain by 12 percent. In addition, the per capita CO2 emissions in 2018 were larger than those of Germany and Japan and even twice those of Spain, the United Kingdom, and France.
Now, it is a scientific consensus that without drastic reduction of anthropogenic GHG emissions, we, as a global community, are going to face an unprecedented global climate disaster and the planet will become uninhabitable. In this context, based on the principle of common and differentiated responsibilities, the roles and responsibilities of major emitters including South Korea cannot be overemphasized.
At the recent Leaders Summit on Climate in April, the largest cumulative emitter, the United States set an ambitious target of a 50-52 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2030 followed by other significantly increased targets of many major emitters, including Japan (46-50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030), Canada (40-45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030), and the United Kingdom (78 percent below 1990 levels by 2035).
President Moon Jae-in also made two pledges at the April climate summit. One was to end all new financing for overseas coal projects and the other one was to strengthen its current 2030 GHG emission reduction target ― 24.4 percent reduction below 2017 levels by 2030 ― "within this year" to be consistent with its 2050 net zero goal.
The former could have been more welcomed if it had also included the cancellation of 3,200 megawatt (MW) coal projects in Indonesia and Vietnam, approved in 2020. The latter was a simple repetition of what is already obvious after the 2050 carbon neutrality commitment in 2020, and, therefore, caused disappointment among those who expected Korea's leadership.
At the recent summit with U.S. President Joe Biden, President Moon promised to release its provisional enhanced 2030 target early in October and finalize it by COP 26 in November. Again, it was another pointless repetition, only hastening the announcement by one month.
To shift from being a climate villain to a climate leader, Korea is required at least to double its current target, close to 50 percent reduction by 2030 from 2017 level. Without such an ambition, its pledge to align with efforts to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius and with the global 2050 carbon neutrality goal is a mere empty promise.
Now, at the National Assembly, the framework act on climate crisis is being discussed. The new target needs to be clearly stipulated in the act to further secure its fulfillment. We do not have time left to fail again as we shamefully did for the 2020 one.
Lastly, a strengthened target alone cannot be effective enough to guarantee the planned reduction. Effective policies need to be set in place. Above all, three policies must be considered with priorities, following a new target.
Firstly, the Korea Emission Trading Scheme needs to be strengthened by decreasing both the total amount of allowances and the share of free allocation to make it work.
Secondly, a more ambitious plan and support is required to deploy renewable power as much and as fast as possible. Electrification with renewables with increased energy efficiency is the proven most effective and efficient way toward carbon neutrality.
Thirdly, cost for energy transition needs to be clearly identified, communicated, and shared with society, especially by the industrial sector. There is no free lunch, and you get what you pay for.
Jang Daul (daul.jang@greenpeace.org) is a government relations and advocacy specialist at Greenpeace East Asia Seoul Office.
 |
The major reasons why Korea received the unpleasant title were the sharp increase of its per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, its public financial support for overseas coal-fired power investment and its abandonment of the 2020 GHG reduction target.
When the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was signed in 1992, South Korea was not included in Annex I Parties comprising the industrialized countries and those with economies in transition.
Even though both the annual and per capita CO2 emissions of South Korea in 1992 were already larger than some of the Annex I countries, the cumulative emission was much smaller because of Korea's relatively late and quick economic development. For example, the cumulative CO2 emission of Korea from 1751 to 1992 was only half that of Spain.
Not being included in the Annex I, Korea was not given a binding target under the Kyoto Protocol while most of the early industrialized countries were obliged to reduce GHG emissions by 2012.
As a result, the annual GHG emissions of Korea greatly increased by 149 percent in 2018 compared to the 1990 level, from 292 to 728 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, becoming one of the top 10 global largest CO2 emitters.
Korea's ranking of the cumulative CO2 emissions also remarkably went up to 17th in 2018 from 26th in 1992. Consequently, its cumulative emissions in 2018 surpassed Spain by 12 percent. In addition, the per capita CO2 emissions in 2018 were larger than those of Germany and Japan and even twice those of Spain, the United Kingdom, and France.
Now, it is a scientific consensus that without drastic reduction of anthropogenic GHG emissions, we, as a global community, are going to face an unprecedented global climate disaster and the planet will become uninhabitable. In this context, based on the principle of common and differentiated responsibilities, the roles and responsibilities of major emitters including South Korea cannot be overemphasized.
At the recent Leaders Summit on Climate in April, the largest cumulative emitter, the United States set an ambitious target of a 50-52 percent reduction below 2005 levels by 2030 followed by other significantly increased targets of many major emitters, including Japan (46-50 percent below 2013 levels by 2030), Canada (40-45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030), and the United Kingdom (78 percent below 1990 levels by 2035).
President Moon Jae-in also made two pledges at the April climate summit. One was to end all new financing for overseas coal projects and the other one was to strengthen its current 2030 GHG emission reduction target ― 24.4 percent reduction below 2017 levels by 2030 ― "within this year" to be consistent with its 2050 net zero goal.
The former could have been more welcomed if it had also included the cancellation of 3,200 megawatt (MW) coal projects in Indonesia and Vietnam, approved in 2020. The latter was a simple repetition of what is already obvious after the 2050 carbon neutrality commitment in 2020, and, therefore, caused disappointment among those who expected Korea's leadership.
At the recent summit with U.S. President Joe Biden, President Moon promised to release its provisional enhanced 2030 target early in October and finalize it by COP 26 in November. Again, it was another pointless repetition, only hastening the announcement by one month.
To shift from being a climate villain to a climate leader, Korea is required at least to double its current target, close to 50 percent reduction by 2030 from 2017 level. Without such an ambition, its pledge to align with efforts to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius and with the global 2050 carbon neutrality goal is a mere empty promise.
Now, at the National Assembly, the framework act on climate crisis is being discussed. The new target needs to be clearly stipulated in the act to further secure its fulfillment. We do not have time left to fail again as we shamefully did for the 2020 one.
Lastly, a strengthened target alone cannot be effective enough to guarantee the planned reduction. Effective policies need to be set in place. Above all, three policies must be considered with priorities, following a new target.
Firstly, the Korea Emission Trading Scheme needs to be strengthened by decreasing both the total amount of allowances and the share of free allocation to make it work.
Secondly, a more ambitious plan and support is required to deploy renewable power as much and as fast as possible. Electrification with renewables with increased energy efficiency is the proven most effective and efficient way toward carbon neutrality.
Thirdly, cost for energy transition needs to be clearly identified, communicated, and shared with society, especially by the industrial sector. There is no free lunch, and you get what you pay for.
Jang Daul (daul.jang@greenpeace.org) is a government relations and advocacy specialist at Greenpeace East Asia Seoul Office.
![[INTERVIEW] Virtual K-pop group MAVE: is more than just pretty pixels](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/bcc387606cf7451c94f51a5978960c9f.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
