[Q&A] Yoon Soon-jin: "It is desirable to close coal-fired power plants as soon as possible"

Carbon Neutrality Committee Releases Draft 2050 Carbon Neutrality Scenarios

2050 Net Greenhouse Gas Emissions: '2540t' vs '1870t' vs '0t'
Plan 1 Maintains Coal Power Generation · Plan 2 Halts Coal Power Generation · Plan 3 Stops All Coal and Fuel Power Generation

Stakeholder and General Public Feedback to be Collected Over the Next Two Months

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Sejong=Asia Economy Reporter Ju Sang-don] Yoon Soon-jin, a private member of the Carbon Neutrality Committee, stated on the 5th, "Since coal-fired power plants emit the most carbon dioxide, I personally think it is desirable to shut them down as soon as possible."

On the same day, Chairman Yoon made this remark while announcing the '2050 Carbon Neutrality Scenario Committee (Draft)' at the Government Seoul Office.

The Carbon Neutrality Committee presented a goal to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by up to 100% by 2050. Previously, the government had submitted scenarios to the committee that included reducing net emissions by about 96%, but this time, they went a step further by adding a 'Net Zero' plan that includes shutting down coal power plants and even liquefied natural gas (LNG) power generation.

The committee proposed three total 2050 carbon neutrality scenarios: ▲ Plan 1, which maximizes the use of existing systems and structures while considering technological development and fuel transition ▲ Plan 2, which reduces fossil fuels and further cuts greenhouse gases through lifestyle changes ▲ Plan 3, which drastically reduces fossil fuels and switches all hydrogen supply to green hydrogen for revolutionary reductions.

Below are key excerpts from the Q&A between Chairman Yoon and the press corps.

▲ What is the Carbon Neutrality Committee’s stance on halting thermal power plants by 2050?

= Among the three scenarios we presented, Plan 1 includes coal power. It is realistically difficult to stop projects that are underway through proper legal procedures without the voluntary consent of the project owners. Therefore, early closure of coal power requires social consensus, legal grounds, and compensation measures. Alternatively, stronger policy measures could be used to encourage power producers to voluntarily decide. But all of this must be based on social consensus.

Since the scenarios will be updated further, legal frameworks and business intentions will be reviewed accordingly. That is why coal power is included only in Plan 1, not in all scenarios.

▲ Are there major overseas countries aiming for carbon neutrality by 2050 that include plans to maintain coal power?

= Major countries like the European Union (EU) and Japan, which advocate carbon neutrality, also include plans to maintain some coal power by 2050. For example, the EU includes coal power in its 2050 plans: about 20GW in the 1.5°C Sustainable Lifestyle Scenario and about 38GW in the 1.5°C Technology Scenario.

Japan also plans to maintain ammonia co-fired coal power by 2050. Other countries, such as the UK, still have some undecided coal power plants or have converted coal plants to LNG.

In Alberta, Canada, there is a coal phase-out agreement. The plants targeted for closure started operation in 1989, 1986, 1990, 1994, with the most recent in 2005 and 2011. This means these plants were built in the 2000s, which is quite different from our situation.

In our case, coal plants are currently under construction. Of course, since coal-fired power emits the most CO2, I personally think it is desirable to shut them down as soon as possible. However, since these projects have followed legal procedures, various social consensus discussions are needed to review compensation and business intentions.

▲ Among the three scenarios, only Plan 3 is a net-zero plan. There are criticisms that the others do not align with the goal of 2050 carbon neutrality.

= Plans 1 and 2 are also alternatives toward carbon neutrality. The EU and the UK include residual emissions in their scenarios; they do not only have complete net-zero scenarios.

The three scenarios announced were not led by government ministries. Our Carbon Neutrality Committee prepared them through in-depth and dense reviews by subcommittees and expert committees. The committee has eight subcommittees, and expert committees were formed to discuss issues more deeply. After 54 meetings, thorough discussions were conducted to prepare these scenarios.

▲ Why do Plans 2 and 3 include complete coal power plant shutdowns but do not specify the exact timing?

= The carbon neutrality scenarios are not about processes or pathways; they are not roadmaps. They predict the future state and sectoral targets for 2050, so the timing of coal power shutdowns is not included.

Since scenarios will be updated periodically, legal frameworks, business intentions, and other factors will be reviewed and revised accordingly. If we develop roadmaps or implementation plans, these discussions can be made more concrete.

▲ You mentioned that the 'Carbon Neutrality Citizens' Assembly' launching on the 7th will also collect public opinions on the draft carbon neutrality scenarios. How will this proceed?

= The Citizens' Assembly was formed considering variables such as age, gender, and region to represent the general public. Although officially called the Policy Participation Group by presidential decree, we decided to call it the Carbon Neutrality Citizens' Assembly through subcommittee recommendations and discussions. This assembly is special in that the age range was lowered; previously, it was almost exclusively those aged 19 and above. This time, youth aged 15 and above, who will be most affected, are included to hear the future generation's opinions.

Many citizens are unfamiliar with the concept of carbon neutrality. They often do not fully understand what we must do to realize carbon neutrality, why this climate crisis is occurring, or what actions are necessary. Making informed decisions is very important.

Therefore, the committee aims to hear informed public judgments and operate participatory procedures to identify information gaps among citizens, understand the directions society must change to achieve carbon neutrality, and determine where more attention and policy communication are needed.

The Citizens' Assembly will not directly decide scenarios by making choices. Instead, it will provide learning opportunities to deeply understand the concept of carbon neutrality, causes and current status of climate change, international trends, greenhouse gas reduction policies, and climate change adaptation. It will also provide focused information on climate change issues requiring discussion, facilitating communication and deliberation among participants.

▲ Why was a single industrial sector reduction scenario presented? Does it consider the EU’s carbon border tax and rising international carbon prices?

= The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and changes in trade environments were reflected within a predictable range. Climate crisis is no longer just a weather issue but is connected to economic issues.

Many countries are preparing various policies to respond to the climate crisis and achieve carbon neutrality. These policies apply not only domestically but also to foreign companies. Given our export-dependent economy, we cannot ignore these global economic, trade, and financial order changes. Actively embracing these changes can create opportunities for us, and through these opportunities, we can contribute globally and domestically to mitigating the climate crisis.

Therefore, the industrial sector scenario was presented as a single, most proactive plan aiming for carbon neutrality, considering future technological innovation, industrial structural changes, and potential easing of fuel and raw material constraints. This is related to corporate success and survival, so companies are actively interested and developing their own plans. The scenario reflects industrial responses through consultations with industry during technical working group activities.

Future scenario revisions will comprehensively incorporate stakeholder and public feedback. Economic and technological conditions will be considered, and periodic reviews will be conducted. If further reductions are possible, scenarios may be improved to achieve greater cuts.

▲ What is the revision and supplementation cycle for the carbon neutrality scenarios?

= Currently, about five years is anticipated, as Korea’s energy basic plans and other fundamental plans are reviewed every five years. However, if situations change rapidly, waiting five years is not necessary. The cycle is flexible, but five years is the current expectation. If a basic law on carbon neutrality is enacted, it is expected to include relevant provisions.

▲ There are calls to raise the 2030 greenhouse gas reduction target (NDC) to 50%. What is the committee’s position?

= We have not yet deeply discussed this issue. The National Assembly, representing the people, has been conducting discussions, and we hope they conclude soon. Relevant ministries are preparing drafts to raise the NDC in coordination with the National Assembly discussions. Once the committee receives the draft, we will discuss it more thoroughly and inform the public within the set timeframe.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.