Engineering, not politics, holds the key

Kim Young-oh

The author is an engineering school professor at Seoul National University and honorary president of the National Coalition for the Realization of a Right Science and Technology Society.

Seoul National University (SNU) and the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) recently held a joint carbon-neutral innovative technology talent development forum. The presidents of the two universities, alongside ministerial and vice-ministerial-level government officials, participated in the discussion to support the forum. But above all, I welcome the serious presentations by world-class scientists and engineers on the same keyword. It was a place to confirm that science and technology were the only solutions to the problem of climate change and the realization of a carbon-neutral society.

In October 2020, then President Moon Jae-in declared the 2050 carbon neutrality policy to the international community, making it official. Few would oppose the justification of the carbon neutrality declaration to save the planet. The problem lies in how the plan will be executed. Countless ideas — such as renewable power generation, hydrogen reduction steelmaking, eco-friendly cars, and carbon dioxide capture and storage — were presented, but they are not possible without a scientific and technological feasibility review.

However, fewer than 20 science and technology experts were included among the 100 members of the past administration’s presidential Carbon Neutrality Commission. As a result, the commission has been constantly criticized for its lack of scientific and technological analysis. The number of science and technology experts in the commission decreased by more than half from the preceding 2050 Low Carbon Society Vision Forum.

Let’s look at an example of the Carbon Neutrality Commission’s action plan lacking science and technology. A civic group named the National Coalition for the Realization of a Right Science and Technology Society released the results of a survey on the commission’s action plan in an issue paper titled, “Voices of 33 Scientists and Engineers: Feasibility of 2050 Carbon Neutrality Action Plan.” Even with sufficient funds, the feasibility of the action plan was an average of 60 percent. Skeptics argued that the massive costs of power grids and others were excluded; up to thousands of trillion won would be needed; and that if pushed excessively, the phased industrial transition could collapse.

President Yoon Suk Yeol said he would realize 2050 carbon neutrality, but there are also concerns about the new administration’s Carbon Neutrality & Green Growth Commission. In short, all the debates were focused on nuclear power plants and carbon neutrality did not get much attention over the past year. The issue of nuclear energy should be discussed within the large frame of carbon neutrality, but the talks about the safety and other aspects of nuclear reactors evolved over political ideology. After President Yoon said that carbon neutrality must not burden our industries, the Ministry of Environment lost its presence.

The science and technology community should play its role regardless of the vadministrations’s ups and downs, but carbon neutrality regrettably is swayed by administration changes. At this juncture, the staging of the SNU-KAIST forum looked like a declaration that the private sector — especially universities — will take the lead when government officials are influenced by politicians.

At the joint forum, some of the latest technologies related to mitigation — including carbon dioxide conversion technology, the hydrogen chemical industry, electric vehicles, solar cells, carbon removal, collection and storage technologies — were introduced. In the future, the government should expand and continue research and investment around the ambitiously selected “Top 100 Carbon-Neutral Technologies” while encouraging creative technologies to be promoted in various ways. I especially hope that the academia-industry cooperation is reinforced, as the spread and demonstration of leading mitigation technologies being developed by universities are important.

The impact of greenhouse gas reduction technology will not immediately lower the warming of the Korean Peninsula because the effect of greenhouse gas emitted and accumulated by the world for more than 100 years will last for several decades. This means that consistent and long-term investment and interest are very important.

Along with reduction, adaptation is another axis in responding to climate change. In the decades leading up to carbon neutrality in 2050, the current generation could be impacted by some major climate disasters. Unlike reduction, adaptive technology is more urgent, as it needs to take effect immediately. Efforts to develop new vaccines, proactively replace cultivated crops, and cope with heat waves and floods pertain to the areas of adaptation

The issue of adaptation actively seeking opportunities for a new normal beyond passive adaptation also should be addressed by science and technology. Climate change and carbon neutrality are issues of human survival. I hope that the voices of scientists and engineers of SNU and KAIST will create a bigger echo beyond political ideology.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.