Solar players in South Korea have filed an unprecedented legal challenge against the government for its support of biomass generation. As the European Commission prepares to reopen its own Renewable Energy Directive, Joojin Kim, from Seoul-based NGO Solutions for Our Climate explains the background to the South Korean case
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of FORESIGHT Climate & Energy
Subsidies for biomass burning are jeopardising South Korean renewables. It is time to speak up against this polluting and climate-damaging fuel.
Burning wood as a “renewable” fuel in power plants emits more greenhouse gas compared to fossil fuels and can degrade the forests that are harvested for fuel. Nonetheless, similar to what happened in the European Union, the South Korean government has promoted forest biomass as an emissions-free renewable energy with generous subsidies, leading to a surge in new wood-burning plants and old power plants co-firing wood pellets with coal.
In recent years, South Korea has become the third largest importer of wood pellets in the world, spending $460 million on importing 3.4 million metric tons in 2018 alone from Vietnam, Indonesia, and as far afield as the United States and Canada, where wood pellets are increasingly being sourced from forests that are hundreds to thousands of years old.
Furthermore, data from the South Korean biomass industry shows that wood burning releases as much, or even more, harmful air pollution as coal per megawatt-hour, in a country that last year saw emergency powers passed to curb the “social disaster” of air pollution and the temporary closure of a quarter of the coal fleet.
But the damage goes even further. As in Europe, subsidised biomass burning in South Korea is not just encouraging environmental degradation, it is competing for funding and grabbing market share from genuinely clean renewables like wind and solar. Between 2014 and 2017, bioenergy projects received nearly 40% of all Renewable Energy Certificates issued by the government—more than any other type of “renewable” power.
With these generous subsidies, use of biomass for energy increased more than sixty-fold during the same period, with more than two-thirds being co-fired with coal, thereby extending the life of these polluting plants which we so desperately need to phase out. The situation is now so acute that South Korean solar operators have taken the unprecedented step of challenging biomass subsidies in the courts.
South Korea’s government followed the European Union’s lead in promoting biomass as a “zero emission” renewable energy. But now, as the destructive consequences of that choice emerge, the EU story and Korea story share common features. Wood use for energy is hollowing out forests and increasing greenhouse gas emissions. And the financial costs are also heavy, with EU member states allocating over €6 billion a year to subsidise biomass burning; subsidies that could instead be allocated to truly zero-emissions renewable energy.
As the European Commission considers reforming the Renewable Energy Directive to take account of a higher 2030 target for renewable energy, much is being made of attempts to restrict the harvesting of wood for energy to by-products from other industrial and forestry activities, such from sawmills.
But this policy simply has not worked in South Korea and appears to have led to the quadrupling of so-called ‘unused biomass’ production in the first half of 2019, compared to the second half of 2018 when these amendments were brought in.
There are many other examples globally of this kind of practice with the essential problem being that governments keep expanding the definition of what constitutes ‘unused biomass’ due to a strong industry lobby, leading to large volumes of whole wood being harvested for electricity generation.
As the European Commission increases the ambition of its renewable energy and emissions reduction targets under the European Green Deal, lawmakers would do well to set a good example for South Korea and others to follow. Truly clean energy like wind and solar will only flourish and deliver its benefits to our climate only when countries end their dependence on polluting wood biomass for renewable energy.
Do you have a thoughtful response to the opinion expressed here? Do you have an opinion regarding an aspect of the global energy transition you would like to share with other FORESIGHT readers? If so, please send a short pitch of 200 words and a sentence explaining why you are the right person to deliver this opinion to firstname.lastname@example.org.
A decade of rapid growth has positioned South Korea to take full advantage of the clean transition under President Moon Jae-in’s Green New Deal. But a hangover from previous administrations and an elusive emissions reduction target put its efficacy in doubt
The European Commission’s plan to increase the emissions reduction target to 55% lacks ambition and would miss out on additional benefits that a higher goal would present, argues WWF’s Imke Lübbeke
Hydrogen brings a lot to the table for the EU's energy transition. But to be truly beneficial, we need to design its contribution with a global perspective, argues Thomas Boermans, head of innovation trends and strategy at E.ON.
As policy makers grapple with the problem of how to decarbonise the transport sector, biofuels remain mired in controversy
With the world facing an energy and a biodiversity emergency, realisation is growing that solutions need to be made compatible with sustainability in both areas
Natural gas has not yet reached its peak in the US, but the summit is in view
Over stimulation of biomass-fired combined heat and power and insufficient control of the sustainability of the raw material is leading Denmark in the wrong direction on clean energy, warns the country’s council on climate change
Leave a Reply