[The Editors' Verdict] Carbon Neutrality Is Not Free

In Glasgow, UK, the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26) has been underway since the 31st of last month (local time), with delegations from over 200 countries around the world gathered. This conference, which continues until the 12th, is regarded as the most important international climate-related event since COP21 held in Paris in December 2015.

Six years ago, 195 parties gathered in Paris and agreed to gradually reduce greenhouse gas emissions to keep the global average temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The agreement, known as the “Paris Agreement,” was led by former President Barack Obama.

Subsequently, the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement after President Donald Trump took office, but rejoined this year with the inauguration of President Joe Biden. The world is watching closely to see if the US, having regained international leadership under the Biden administration, will once again lead a landmark agreement.

However, the current situation is not entirely optimistic. Ahead of COP26, the G20 leaders gathered in Rome, Italy, issued a joint declaration pledging to strive to limit global temperature rise to within 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Although this is a step forward compared to the Paris Agreement, it was met with disappointment. This is because the declaration used the vague phrase “mid-century” regarding the specific timeline. While governments agreed to stop supporting coal power, they did not commit to phasing out coal power plants.

Disappointment continues at COP26 as well. India, which had previously raised concerns internationally by not announcing its Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), belatedly revealed its carbon neutrality plan, but set the target year as 2070. This timeline is 20 years later than major developed countries and even 10 years later than China and Russia.

Moreover, India has so far placed the responsibility for global warming on developed countries and insisted that developed countries must provide $1 trillion in support for carbon neutrality in developing countries. Ultimately, by demanding a huge financial burden from developed countries for carbon neutrality, India has created another obstacle at COP26.

In the end, responding to climate change is by no means free. This COP26 is taking place amid a global energy crisis following the COVID-19 pandemic. Demand for oil, natural gas, and coal has surged, causing prices to skyrocket. As public dissatisfaction grows, even President Biden, who has been vocal about climate change, paradoxically finds himself urging oil-producing countries to increase oil production.

The proposition that everyone must make efforts to prevent the global catastrophe of global warming cannot be denied. However, questions remain about what pain we must endure for this and whether we are properly prepared. Over the past several centuries of industrialization, fossil fuels have permeated every aspect of our lives in ways we do not fully realize. Meanwhile, renewable energy still has a long way to go and remains expensive.

President Moon Jae-in declared at this COP26 that South Korea will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by up to 40% compared to 2018 levels by 2030 and completely phase out coal power by 2050. To achieve this goal, electricity prices will soar, and the industrial sector will have to bear significant costs. A slowdown in economic growth is inevitable.

The government is deliberately overlooking nuclear power, where South Korea has competitive strength. However, European countries, which recently suffered severely from the natural gas crisis, are once again paying attention to nuclear power. It is time to devise a strategy that responds to the international demand for climate change while not undermining national competitiveness.

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