The best choice to fulfill the promise of ‘carbon neutrality’ is
The K Issue Platform is a monthly discussion held jointly by the incorporated think tank K Policy Platform (Chairman Jeon Kwang-woo, co-chairs Jeong Tae-yong and Park Jin) and Sejong-ro Round Table (CEO Jeong Gu-hyeon). It was planned with the goal of presenting policy direction through consensus in our society where there is only conflict and no resolution.▲ [K이슈플랫폼]
K Policy Platform experts are debating what Korea’s main energy source should be in 2050 and what the policy tasks should be. From the left, Lee Young-jun, head of policy research at the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (nuclear power plant advocate), Jeong Tae-yong (co-director of the Society and K Policy Platform), a professor at Yonsei University, and Cho Sang-min, head of the Korea Energy Economic Institute’s Renewable Energy Policy Research Department (renewable energy advocate).
Agenda: Will the main energy source in 2050 be renewable energy or nuclear energy?
Renewable energy: Cho Sang-min (Director of Renewable Energy Policy Research, Korea Energy Economics Institute)
Nuclear power: Youngjun Lee (Director of Policy Research, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute)
Moderator: Jeong Tae-yong (K Policy Platform Co-Director, Yonsei University Professor)
Plaintiff: Park Jin (K Policy Platform Co-Director, KDI Graduate School Professor) ▲ 1 1. Raising a problem
Currently, our main energy source is thermal power generation. Accounts for 60% of power generation in 2022. This is followed by nuclear power generation, which accounts for 29.6%. On the other hand, renewable energy accounts for only 9.0%. Having promised the international community to become carbon neutral by 2050, we must drastically reduce our firepower in the future. And the space must be filled with nuclear power plants and new and renewable energy. So, which should be the main energy source in 2050: nuclear power or renewable energy? The Moon Jae-in administration set a target of 30% for new and renewable power generation by 2030 and declared that new and renewable energy is the answer. However, the current government lowered the target to 21.6% (top picture). However, some experts say that even this is unrealistic and that nuclear power plants should be the main focus in 2050. Which is right? The two experts representing both sides agreed in advance that the policy goals to be achieved in the energy source decision are environmental protection including safety, stable supply of power and stabilization of electricity rates, and development of the energy industry.
2. Issue analysis
[사회] First, which energy source is better for safety and the environment?
[신재생] Renewable energy is the most environmentally friendly energy source as it does not require fuel. Wind power is the energy source with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear power plants are an energy source whose safety cannot be assured because there are risks not only in operation but also in managing spent nuclear fuel.
[원자력] The 3rd generation nuclear power plants that are coming out these days have a much lower probability of fatalities due to accidents than any other renewable energy sources. Managing spent nuclear fuel is also not a problem, with the recent emergence of technology to bury it 500 meters underground. Renewable energy is not more environmentally friendly. The greenhouse gas emissions from solar power are actually higher than those from nuclear power. Both wind power and solar power generate waste and disturb the ecosystem, including humans.
[신재생] In the future, the renewable waste problem can be overcome through the development of eco-friendly materials.
[사회] Scientific and technological evaluation of the environmental impacts of the two energy sources must be progressed. The next issue is which energy source is advantageous in terms of stable supply of power and electricity rates?
[원자력] The energy source that can provide stable power all year round at the lowest cost is, by far, nuclear energy. Wind and solar power are inherently dependent on nature, making it difficult to provide a stable source of power. It is even more difficult in our country, which has a small territory. Even now, nuclear power is traded at a lower price than any other renewable energy (bottom right picture).
[신재생] Over the past 12 years, the price of renewable energy has fallen by one-ninth. As a result, renewables are already the cheapest source of power in many countries. Although it is true that the cost of renewable energy is relatively high in Korea, future technological developments in renewable energy will lead to supply stability and lower costs. Moreover, renewable energy is superior in terms of energy security as it does not require the import of raw materials.
[사회] At present, nuclear power plants are advantageous in power supply, but renewable energy will not be disadvantageous in the future. Lastly, which alternative is more advantageous in terms of overseas expansion of the energy industry?
[원자력] The United States, France, and Japan have withdrawn from the nuclear power plant business, making us an unrivaled supplier among developed countries. Currently, demand from developing countries is high, but European countries that have promoted nuclear phase-out in the past are also showing policy changes. Moreover, technological advancements in small modular nuclear power plants (SMRs) are expected to open new markets.
[신재생] More than half of the world’s electricity investment is already focused on new and renewable energy (lower left picture). This trend will strengthen in the future. Our renewable energy supply capacity is also world-class. On the other hand, the problem is that developing countries, which are major markets for nuclear power plants, have difficulty covering the costs of nuclear power plant construction.
[사회] It can be summarized that nuclear power plants are advantageous in terms of supply capacity, and new and renewable energy sources are advantageous in terms of demand.▲ Energy Page 15 3. Agreement stage
[사회] Nuclear power is a mature technology that has reached saturation, while renewable energy is a new industry that is still reducing unit costs. If you look at it that way, in the very long term, say 50 years from now, renewable energy will be the main focus, right? (All agree) Then, what the year 2050 will look like 27 years from now will ultimately depend on the speed of development of new and renewable technologies, right?
[신재생] That’s right. And the prospects are very bright. This is because energy storage and conversion technologies are developing rapidly. Major organizations predict that new and renewable energy will account for the highest proportion when carbon neutrality is achieved in 2050. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that the share of renewable energy generation is currently 29%, but will increase to 43% in 2030 and 65% in 2050. We must also keep pace with this global trend. Although it is difficult to set a 2050 target for renewable energy, it is clear that it must exceed at least 50% and become the main energy source.
[원자력] In the current electric power industry, it is difficult for renewable energy to become the main energy source.
[사회] What changes are needed in the power industry?
[원자력] In the wholesale and retail electricity market, an incentive system, such as regional price discrimination, must be implemented. At the same time, restructuring of the electric power industry is necessary, including introducing competition in power generation and sales. The plan was prepared under the Kim Dae-jung administration, but it became unheard of with the inauguration of the Roh Moo-hyun administration in 2003.
[신재생] Restoring the price function of the electricity market and restructuring the electricity industry are very important for the expansion of new and renewable energy. Only when price signals in the electricity market are clear can various technologies be introduced to increase the efficiency of new and renewable energy and reduce volatility.
[원자력] If the power industry is restructured and the proportion of nuclear energy is maintained at least at the current level, we can agree that new and renewable energy will be the main focus in 2050. However, the 21.6% renewable energy target for 2030 is unrealistic. Changes that are too rapid will result in high burdens such as increased electricity bills. The speed of expansion of new and renewable energy must be determined while considering the downward trend in the price of renewable energy and the speed of entry into new power generation systems such as SMR.
[신재생] I agree that short-term goals need to be reasonably adjusted by carefully considering realistic conditions.
[사회] Then, on the premise of restructuring the electric power industry, we will agree to make new and renewable energy the main energy source in 2050, but to reasonably adjust the 2030 goal taking into account new and renewable supply conditions and electricity market conditions.
[원자력] At the same time, consistency in government policy is also needed. If energy policy changes for each five-year president, discussion about 2050 itself is unnecessary.
[사회] That makes sense. What if we added legislative consent to the energy source decision-making process? If the ruling and opposition parties agree on energy sources for 2050, won’t the agreement be maintained even if the president changes? (All agree) Thank you both for the reasonable discussion.
2023-12-17 15:32:08
#power #generation #systems #price #trends #speed #renewable #energy #expansion #determined.K이슈 #플랫폼
