The Monopoly Maze: How State Control Stifles Renewable Growth

At the core of South Korea’s climate transition struggles lies a deeply entrenched state-controlled energy model. Korea Electric Power Corporation (Kepco) and its subsidiaries maintain a near-monopoly over electricity transmission, distribution, and generation. This structure creates significant hurdles for independent renewable energy developers, who must navigate a complex web of regulations and approvals. For instance, wind farm developers previously faced a daunting 28-permit process, leading to years of delays and increased costs, making many projects financially unviable. While a new bill passed in early 2025 aims to streamline these approvals, its full effect won’t be felt until 2026.

Grid connection is another major bottleneck. Despite a nearly doubling of electricity demand over the past two decades, the transmission network has expanded by a mere 26%. Attempts to expand this crucial infrastructure have frequently met with fierce local opposition, as seen in Miryang, were a six-year standoff over transmission tower construction resulted in significant community conflict. civic groups caution that even recent legislative efforts, like the Power Grid Special Act passed in February 2025, may reinforce existing top-down advancement models, potentially sidelining public consultation and environmental reviews.

Political whims and Economic Realities

South Korea’s energy policy also suffers from political volatility.Frequent shifts in government direction, such as the reversal of a nuclear phase-out plan, undermine long-term renewable energy planning. This instability, coupled with the economic pressure to keep electricity prices artificially low, has led to considerable financial strain on Kepco. The company’s debt reached a staggering 205 trillion won (£111 billion) by 2024, partly due to increased LNG power costs following the geopolitical events of 2022.

South Korea's energy mix comparison.
A visual representation of South Korea’s energy sources.

Carbon-Intensive Industries and Global Footprint

The nation’s economic development has historically been powered by energy-intensive industries such as steel, petrochemicals, shipbuilding, and semiconductors. This deep-rooted dependency makes the energy transition particularly challenging, as these sectors require substantial and stable electricity supplies. Powerful conglomerates, known as chaebols, wield significant influence over national policy, frequently enough favoring an electricity market geared towards industrial stability over climate mitigation.

Furthermore, South Korea’s global economic activities contribute to its carbon footprint. Its shipbuilding industry leads the world in constructing LNG carriers, and its public financial institutions actively finance overseas fossil fuel projects. The recently approved Coral Norte gas project in Mozambique, for example, is projected to emit nearly half a billion tonnes of CO2 over its lifecycle. Concurrently, South korea has become a major importer of Russian fossil fuels, a stance that critics argue directly contradicts its climate pledges and undermines international agreements like the Paris Agreement.

The Rising Tide of Youth Activism

As the impacts of climate change become more evident, with recent extreme weather events including devastating floods, wildfires, and heatwaves causing significant loss of life and displacement, a new generation of South Koreans is stepping forward.Young activists and citizens are challenging the status quo through legal action and public protests.

An 11-year-old plaintiff, Yoohyun Kim, is part of a landmark lawsuit aiming to block a plan to reline an old coal-fired blast furnace, which woudl extend its operational life and emit millions of tonnes of CO2. this case, the first globally to target conventional blast furnace production, follows a constitutional court ruling that found the government’s climate policies violated the rights of future generations. Another lawsuit has been filed against the government’s approval of a massive semiconductor cluster in Yongin, citing its significant electricity demand and reliance on new LNG plants, which critics argue conflict with climate regulations.

Did You Know?

South Korea’s emissions trading scheme (K-ETS), intended to price carbon, has reportedly allowed the country’s top 10 polluters to earn over 475 billion won (£258 billion) by selling unused carbon credits between 2015 and 2022, creating what some call a “perverse incentive.”

A Call for Deeper Change

Activists like Kim Jeongduk express a desire for a future where economic survival is not pitted against a healthy surroundings.”I don’t want my child to grow up with that same false choice between a healthy environment and economic survival,” she stated, recalling her own childhood experiences with industrial pollution.

While the government maintains its commitment to reducing coal power and phasing out aging facilities, with plans for carbon capture and clean fuel conversion for plants operating beyond 2050, independent analyses suggest these measures might potentially be insufficient. Experts note a lack of specific, actionable plans for renewable energy expansion within the national energy strategy, contrasting sharply with detailed nuclear roadmaps. Research indicates that current plans might fall short of the 2030 emissions targets by 6-7%, with more ambitious policies, such as a rapid offshore wind expansion and a coal phase-out by 2035, potentially achieving an 82% reduction in power sector emissions by that year.

How can South Korea balance its industrial might with its environmental aspirations to achieve genuine climate action?

What role should public and private financial institutions play in supporting a global transition to clean energy?

Protestors advocating for climate action in South Korea.
Young activists and citizens are increasingly demanding stronger climate policies.