Energy and Climate Policy Institute

작성일 : 11-05-23 16:42
Enerzine No 10 The Korea National Assembly on Motions of Emission Trading System and Social Discord
 글쓴이 : 에정센…
조회 : 4,963  
   Enerzine No 10. The Korea National Assembly on Motions of Emission Trading System and Social Discord.pdf (140.9K) [12] DATE : 2011-05-23 16:42:03
1. Issues

The Korea National Assembly on Motions of Emission Trading System and Social Discord

 The Korea government hands in a legislative bill on the carbon market, which includes emission trading to the national assembly. With this, Korea seems to be able to start its emission trading system in 2015. However, the Climate Justice Network Korea, which was mainly organized by the Trade Union, farmer’s organizations, CSO, ENGO, ECPI and others, are strongly against the emission trading system.

The Climate Justice Network believes that the emission trading system cannot solve climate change but serves only as a policy for companies. Moreover, the carbon market bill suggested by the Korea government stepped way back compared with its original draft. It actual lost its original function to reduce greenhouse gas. Followed by the main points of this bill, more than 95% of emission credits are allocated for free and allowed to be brought forward. Moreover, many tax benefits were raised and penalty was reduced to companies. An interest thing is that companies such as The Korean Chamber of Commerce and Industry and The Federation of Korean Industries also oppose this emission trading scheme. Of cause, these companies’ disagreement means that they cannot even reduce greenhouse gas with many support and pro-company policies. Ironically, however, they have the same position with regards to a progressive civil society as a final outcome on “opposition emission trading system”.

 Because of this consequence, conservative environmental groups that agree with the emission trading system criticize the fact that a progressive civil society helps companies. However, the progressive civil society, which includes ECPI, had begun suggesting alternatives that are more socially righteous and more highly effective in reducing GHG than the emission trading system. Today, the possibility of pushing through with the emission trading system is much higher. We believe, however, that the fight between climate justice action and climate injustice policy is just beginning.
Written by Jin-woo, Lee (Researcher:

2. Opinions
Opportunity to Choose in India
After the Fukushima nuclear disaster, developed countries, mainly the United States and members of the EU, started reconsider the safety of nuclear power and other energy for a sustainable future. Countries that made a stand at the most difficult crossroad are developing counties, especially a number of countries that have already planned to invest and construct a nuclear power plant for rapid economic growth based on relatively cheap electricity using nuclear power. Their plans are now in a dilemma.
One the countries that recently planned to make a huge investment nuclear power is India. India also has a conflict between its government and its people. The government is pushing hard to construct a nuclear power plant using a great amount of money, while the people are seriously worried about their land and safety. The conflict is getting very intense.
Currently, India gets about only 3 percent of its electricity from the 20 relatively small nuclear reactors in the country. The Indian government, however, says it will increase nuclear power up to 60 GW by 2030 and a quarter of the nation’s electricity should come from nuclear reactors by 2050. Through this, India will solve the chronic energy shortage and also respond to climate change. It means they will generate energy, conserve the environment and improve national economy all at the same time. The opposing camp, however, got more support after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and the conflict is getting violent. Already, one person died and 20 people got injured during a protest against the Jaitapur nuclear power project in Jaitapur, India

The Jaitapur Nuclear Power Project is the largest single location nuclear power project in the world as a 9900Mw power project Nuclear Power Corporation of India (NPCIL). It is based on six nuclear power plants imported from AREVA at the Madban Village of Ratnagiri District in Maharashtra.

On December 6, 2010, an agreement was signed for the construction of the first set of two third-generation European Pressurized Reactors/Evolutionary Power Reactors (EPR) and the supply of nuclear fuel for 25 years. The agreement was signed in the presence of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. As a first step, 1650KW level two plants are to be built between 2012 and 2017.
 The first conflict was started by the government when it forcibly acquired 2,300 acres to build six nuclear reactors. This move angered the local people, farmers and now not only the residents but also many scientists, and former government officials, who were empowered after the Fukushima accident. This area was hit by 95 earthquakes from 1985 to 2005 and that is a major concern for the people, although Indian officials counter that most earthquakes were minor. Still, AREVA’s European Pressurized Reactors has many technical problems. But the most difficult thing for local communities to accept is that they stood to lose mango orchards, cashew trees and rice fields, which they have leaned on for their survival, and that they should leave and go somewhere else. Even though there are many social problems and environmental effect expected, the Indian government ignores these and officially announced that there was no problem.

Now, activists, academicians, and politicians against this project are followed by local people. Many people were arrested, and now it is banned for five people to gather near this area. Even local communities have refused compensation as the government pushes harder than before with force. What can India get from this huge nuclear power project? At first it would seem a blessing with cheep energy and economic growth, but there are also many problems that would come such as conflict on the disposal of nuclear wastes, continuous supply of uranium, fear of earthquake, unexpected environmental impact, side effect of undemocratic development, and so on. If an accident should occur, it could possibly be the worst nuclear disaster ever in this earth, at least 10 times than Chernobyl. Scientists said the cost of electricity from nuclear power is not cheap as we think. It would double if we add costs of disposal and managing of nuclear wastes. Then, if we consider the huge money for construction, social conflicts and high cost of electricity due to the disposal, it would be better to use this money for renewable energy and safe future.

This is the time to choose in India. One choice is to gamble for rapid economic growth with nuclear power but using the environment and the future as a collateral security; the other is investing for a safe and healthy future while turning the energy policy to renewable energy with democratic process and little longer time.

Written by Bo-young, Cho (Researcher:

3. Act on.

 1. Researching program
  : Case study on renewable energy system in local area and governance.
  : A study on how to improve climate change response and advance related laws and administration system in the Republic of Korea through an analysis of energy laws and regulations in the UK.
 2. Action
    : ‘Climate Justice Group in Korea’ will launch on May 25th
- We basically adopt the main contents of the Cochabamba people’s statement , as follows.
* Discard wrong solutions to climate change.
*Carbon trading is not the answer.
*Developed countries should take on their climate debts.
*There is hope for the establishment of food sovereignty
*Warnings of scientists are prerequisites rather than selectable conditions.
*We should get over Cancun’s failed agreement.
*We must remember the lesson of Cochabamba that the only answer is climate justice.


     Energy and Climate Policy Institute
    [04207] 2nd FL, 14-15, Mapo-daero 14ga-gil, Mapo-gu, Seoul, Korea
    Tel. 82-2-6404-8440 _ Fax. 82-2-6402-8439 _ E-mail. _ Website.