IEA backs South Korea’s CFE after legal setback

The IEA today expressed support for South Korea's carbon-free energy (CFE) initiative, days after the country's constitutional court ruled that its carbon neutrality law does not conform to the constitution.

The CFE initiative aims to expand all forms of energy sources that do not emit greenhouse gases (GHGs), which notably includes nuclear power, as well as hydrogen and carbon capture, utilisation and storage.

The IEA and South Korea also plan to further work together on the initiative to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. The IEA and South Korea earlier in March also started a research project to analyse the viability of deploying a range of carbon-free energy sources.

But the endorsement for the South Korean-led CFE initiative comes after the country's constitutional court on 29 August ruled that its carbon neutrality law fails to "effectively guarantee gradual and continuous reductions up to 2050, the target year for carbon neutrality". This was because the law does not provide quantitative goals for GHG reduction targets over 2031-49, with the constitutional court adding that the GHG reduction targets are governed in a way that "shifts an excessive burden to the future".

Part of the legislation of the Framework Act on Carbon Neutrality and Green Growth for Coping with Climate Crisis states that the government shall set "a national mid- and long-term greenhouse gas reduction target" to reduce national GHG emissions by at least 35pc from the 2018 level by 2030. South Korea is aiming to cut emissions by 40pc from 2018 levels by 2030 and carbon neutrality by 2050.

The regulation lacks "the required minimum characteristic as a protective measure that corresponds with the risk situation of the climate crisis and thereby violated the principle of prohibition of insufficient protection" with regards to the governance of reduction targets over 2031-49, according to the constitutional court.

Not prescribing any approximate quantitative reduction targets for 2031-49 and having the government decide on the matter every five years also "violated the principle of statutory reservation which includes the principle of parliamentary reservation", the constitutional court added. It is the duty of the state to "address the climate crisis by taking measures to mitigate such risks through reducing the causes of climate change and to adapt to its consequences".

The court did not declare a simple unconstitutional decision, as this would mean the law losing its effect in its entirely, including the quantitative intermediate target. This would result in a "more unconstitutional situation" where the institutional mechanism for GHG mechanism regresses. The law will instead stay in force until it is amended, with a deadline of 28 February 2026.

By Tng Yong Li