1 of 19

The Korean government’s energy policy,

problems of climate finance and public alternatives

17 May 2023, Johannesburg

SungHee Oh

Director of International Affairs

Korean Public Service and Transport Workers’ Union

2 of 19

Power industry privatisation in Korea

Continuation of energy privatisation and liberalisation policies

3 of 19

Private capital investor

Public power generation company

Long-term fixed contract

Special Purpose Company

(SPC)

Investing in stocks

Project company

Operating company

Loan/

Financial investment

Public power generation

company

KEPCO

sales

sales

  • Investment of several trillion won is needed
  • Reasons for financial capital and foreign capital to enter
  • Same structure with the existing private capital investment project
  • Stable revenue source with 20 year-contract with KEPCO/power generation companies
  • Entering foreign capitals such as Macquarie, BlackRock, Orsted, Equinor, Shell and Total into offshore wind power generation

Foreign capital’s entry into offshore wind power

<Structure of private capital investment project in offshore wind power generation>

Investing in stocks

Privately-led renewable energy

Power industry privatisation in Korea

4 of 19

Korea Gas Corporation�(public)

Direct imports from big private companies

2013

39,326

96.5%

1,414

3.5%

2014

36,332

96.4%

1,368

3.6%

2015

31,410

94.4%

1,878

5.6%

2016

31,846

93.7%

2,155

6.3%

2017

33,063

87.7%

4,645

12.3%

2018

38,170

86.1%

6,173

13.9%

2019

33,734

82.2%

7,280

17.8%

2020

30,798

77.6%

9,202

22.4%

Unit: 1,000 tons

SK affiliates

GS affiliates

POSCO affiliates

S-Oil

Korea Midland Power (Public)

Total

Volume

314

265

177

91

82

920

Share

34.1%

27.8%

19.3%

9.9%

8.9%

100%

Unit: 10,000 tons

Increase in the volume of direct imports by private companies

Power industry privatisation in Korea

5 of 19

Share of IPPs in generation capacity

Public

Private

35.2%

(2.5times )

Power industry privatisation in Korea

6 of 19

  • Electricity price hike
  • Allowing private renewable energy operators to sell electricity directly
  • 88.9% of renewable is privately-owned

Power industry privatisation in Korea

Further privatisation of the power industry

7 of 19

KEPCO’s overseas projects

8 of 19

KEPCO’s overseas projects

9 of 19

The rise of the market fundamentalism based climate organisations

10 of 19

The National Pension Fund’s declaration to limit investing in coal projects

11 of 19

Separation generation sector from KEPCO

Consolidation of divided public power companies

Trade union response

IPPs account for

35% of generation

Privately-led

Renewable energy

Democratic

governance

Abolition of

direct

Import of

natural gas

Municipalisation of IPPs

Sharing of profits from private projects

12 of 19

Trade union response

13 of 19

Green Climate Fund

14 of 19

Green Climate Fund

15 of 19

1) Funding concentrated through International Access Entities

-Entities, not developing countries’ governments(or regions), drive GCF projects. Violation of the GCF principle for country ownership.

Green Climate Fund

16 of 19

2) Is the GCF being properly utilised for adaptation projects?

-Insufficient support for SIDS(Small Island Developing States) and LDCs(Least Developed Countries)

- More funding allocated to mitigation than adaptation

Green Climate Fund

17 of 19

3) Inequalities in funding and allocation

-Other means such as loans and equity are being used more than aid

-The GCF also highlights the need to attract private capital, touting the benefits of blended finance

Green Climate Fund

18 of 19

Public goods approach to International Climate Finance

1)International climate finance and the Green Climate Fund should embrace universal quality public service provision as a key principle and introduce safeguards against privatisation or corporatisation of essential services;

2)Developed countries should actively embrace historical justice and provide their fair share of international climate finance to meet the needs of developing countries estimated at $ 4-6 trillion per year. These commitments must be new contributions, additional to Official Development Assistance, public, grant based, and predictable for use in relation to adaptation, mitigation and loss and damage caused by the climate crisis;

3)The Green Climate Fund needs to strengthen its position on climate finance as a public good and abandon its continued emphasis on the role of private capital, which cannot deliver the services communities need;

4)The Green Climate Fund must engage public sector workers and service users as key parties to review the impact of climate finance projects in their jurisdictions and inform future strategy;

5)The global tax system should be reformed to ensure that multinational corporations and the super-rich pay their fair share of taxes. This can provide important revenue to fund climate finance as a public good.

19 of 19

The Public is Green