Nuclear phase-out plan emerging as key issue in upcoming presidential election

Wolsong Nuclear Plant units 1 to 4 in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang Province, are seen in this photo. Korea decided to phase out nuclear energy under the Moon Jae-in administration. Korea Times file

By Kwon Mee-yoo

Korea is one of the world's largest nuclear energy producers. But in 2017, the country chose to phase out nuclear power plants citing concerns of possible accidents. However, the emergence of global pledges to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 casts a cloud over Korea's nuclear phase-out policy and complicates the dynamics of the presidential election scheduled for March 2022.

An anti-nuclear policy was one of the key campaign pledges of President Moon Jae-in. About a month after his inauguration in 2017, Moon announced that Korea would halt plans to build new nuclear power plants and would not extend the lifespans of existing ones. The announcement was made at a ceremony commemorating the permanent closure of the Kori-1 nuclear reactor in Busan, the first nuclear power unit in Korea that had been operating for about four decades.

As the government went ahead with its nuclear phase-out plan, the construction of units 3 and 4 of the Shin Hanul Nuclear Power Plant in Ulsan was shelved right before breaking ground and plans for other new plants have also been scrapped.

Unit 1 of the Wolsong Nuclear Plant, the country's second-oldest unit, was decommissioned in 2019, three years earlier than originally scheduled. The move sparked investigations into the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy and two state-run energy firms over allegations of manipulating feasibility studies that were conducted to justify the early shutdown of the facility in line with the Moon administration's nuclear phase-out policy.

Mounting opposition to the government's nuclear phase-out policy has prompted presidential contenders from the opposition bloc to promise to restore the use of nuclear energy, highlighting the fact that it is the cheapest and cleanest alternative to fossil fuels in Korea, which relies entirely on imports to meet its petroleum needs.

Choe Jae-hyeong, former head of the Board of Audit and Inspection who turned into a presidential contender of the main opposition People Power Party, was the one who led the state audit into the early decommissioning of the Wolsong-1 unit and found that the efficiency of the nuclear reactor was undervalued. The controversy over the shutdown and the audit eventually led Choe to resign from his post and enter politics to vie for the presidency.

Another opposition presidential hopeful, former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl, also expressed his dissent from the Moon administration's anti-nuclear policy, emphasizing that political attacks he suffered after the prosecution looked into the Wolsong-1 nuclear reactor case made him quit the top prosecutor post.

Yoon met Joo Han-gyu, professor of Nuclear Engineering at Seoul National University, earlier this month, and agreed that the Moon government's nuclear phase-out plan was irrational.

Joo has been openly opposed to the Moon administration's nuclear phase-out policy, believing that it should be scrapped right away.

Presidential hopeful Yoon Seok-youl, right, talks with Joo Han-gyu, professor of Nuclear Engineering at Seoul National University, agreeing that it is irrational for the country to phase out nuclear energy in Korea, July 5. Korea Times file

"There are strong fears over nuclear power, but most of them are superstitions. There is only one nuclear accident that led to death ― the Chernobyl accident ― and divided by the amount of electricity produced, 0.5 people could be killed out of 1 trillion kilowatt-hour, equivalent to the amount generated for 100 years from a nuclear plant, so it is much safer than other energy sources," Joo explained.

Joo said the economic viability research on Wolsong-1 was tampered with to shut down the plant prematurely.

"The study lowered the rate of operation of the unit and presumed the cost of electricity lower than the production cost to reduce the economic feasibility of the nuclear plant," Joo said. "Yoon clearly understood that Moon's nuclear phase-out policy defied existing laws and killed off Korea's top-notch technology in nuclear power generation."

Korea has been constructing nuclear reactors for decades, so it has advanced technology and supply chains for making nuclear plants, according to Joo.

"Korea has stable supply chains in all stages of making nuclear plants, from design, construction to operation and has won contracts in overseas markets, including the UAE. Korea's nuclear power technology is recognized internationally, but the phase-out plan dampened its export prospects," Joo said.

Nuclear energy is a major power source for Korea, producing 29 percent of its electricity as of 2020, just after coal, which accounts for 35.6 percent.

"Korea does not have underground energy resources such as oil and coal. Renewable energy is not very efficient in Korea. Wind power is weak and solar power generation is available only during the day and it costs even more to store the amount for night. They cannot compete with nuclear energy in efficiency," Joo said.

Small Modular Reactor (SMR) refers to nuclear reactors with power outputs less than 300 megawatts electric (MWe). Rep. Song Young-gil, chairman of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, proposed installing and exporting SMRs in June. Courtesy of Doosan Heavy Industries & Construction

In June, Rep. Song Young-gil, chairman of the ruling Democratic Party of Korea, proposed installing and exporting small modular reactors (SMR), which goes against the government's nuclear phase-out policy.

"I think it is aimed at coaxing the opposition away from attaching the nuclear phase-out policy. To maintain the industry, it is essential to construct and export more nuclear power plants," Joo said.

Despite aiming for safe and environmentally sound energy use, Moon's anti-nuclear policy has failed to satisfy environmental organizations as well.

"The Moon administration declared the nuclear phase-out plan, but in fact the number of nuclear power plants in Korea did not decrease under the Moon government. What he only did was cancel the planned construction of new nuclear plants," Im Sung-hee, an energy expert with Green Korea United, said.

Im also criticized the incoherent energy policy which flip-flops as the administrations change.

"The government should legally establish its energy policy and come up with realistic plans to transition to green, renewable energy to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050," Im said.

Nuclear power as means to achieve carbon neutrality

Other experts took a more practical approach toward nuclear power generation as it could be Korea's only viable way to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

Jerng Dong-wook, a professor at the School of Energy Systems Engineering at Chung-Ang University, said the nuclear phase-out policy should be reviewed, because achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 was introduced to tackle climate change as a result of the Paris Agreement.

"Carbon neutrality is a trend that cannot be avoided to limit global warming and it has become the top-tier energy policy around the world now. We have to review the nuclear phase-out policy from the perspective of carbon neutrality, and in the case of Korea, nuclear energy is indispensable as a way to achieve net zero," Jerng told The Korea Times in a phone interview.

"It is meaningless to attack the current government for advocating the nuclear phase-out policy. Instead, we should focus on how to restructure Korea's energy mix to reduce carbon emissions."

Jerng emphasized that nuclear energy is a safer alternative to a more urgent threat ― climate change.

"Climate change seriously threatens biodiversity ― a 1.5-degree Celsius rise in average temperature may put some 30 percent of species at risk of extinction. The scale of danger cannot be compared to nuclear accidents. Over 180 countries do not gather together to discuss the danger of nuclear energy, but they do for climate agreement," Jerng said.

"I am not saying no to a nuclear phase-out, but the fight against climate change and carbon neutrality is the bigger subject on the agenda of energy policy. If we can reach net zero without nuclear energy, it would be great. However, it is virtually impossible without an astronomical amount of money."

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, a total of 32 countries are operating nuclear power plants. Among them, several countries such as Germany, Belgium, Switzerland and Korea opted to phase out nuclear power as concerns over its safety heightened.

Jerng pointed out that European countries pursuing nuclear phase-out are in a different situation than Korea.

"There was a report in Germany that achieving net zero without nuclear power would cost more than German reunification. And Germany can purchase electricity from nearby countries," Jerng said.

"Korea also has a plan to import electricity from China and Russia to reach net zero, but unlike peaceful Europe, Korea is in the middle of a complicated political situation in Northeast Asia and importing electricity via North Korea could be fatal for Korea's energy security."