The terminology of ‘energy transition’ is frequently used in energy policy area in recent months. This is understood as a terminology that refers to process of change in the energy mix, evolving from it one step further.
While the energy mix refers to composition of energies used by a certain country in a certain period, say, energies consist of 40% of oil, 30% of coal and 15% of gas, the energy transition is a more advanced concept that includes policy goal of changing the energy mix.
After the accident at the nuclear power plant in Fukushima, major advanced countries are formulating energy transition policies that are suitable for their energy situation.
Germany is rapidly pursuing the energy transition policy ahead of other countries with the goal of removing nuclear power plants, but it is too early to evaluate success of the policy.
France is currently conducting nationwide indaba on the policy of partially relieving the existing nuclear power generation-oriented composition of power sources, and France plans to devise a long-term energy mix policy during this year by reflecting results of the indaba.
The United Kingdom takes the position of maintaining the existing policy of expanding nuclear power generation, but it is devising a measure of supplementing stability of power supply as closure of obsolete fossil fuel-based power plants is imminent. But, impetus of the policy is slowed down due to financial problem caused by the European economic crisis and collapse of carbon price in Europe.
Whereas European countries are seeking energy transition policies, the situation in the United States across the Atlantic Ocean seems to be somewhat different.
The United States is concentrating efforts on relying on its own energy by adopting the omnidirectional strategy of mobilizing all available means. It intends to avoid reliance on other countries for energy, instead of seeking energy mix itself. Perhaps, the United States is encouraged by increased production of non-conventional resources, such as shale oil and shale gas.
What about Japan that triggered changes in energy policies of these countries? After the regime was changed to the Liberal Democratic Party, the Japanese government is devising a master plan for energy that revises the previous policy of removing nuclear power generation.
In summary, it is common among major advanced countries that they are carrying forward energy transition policies for reducing reliance on fossil fuels and nuclear power by increasing percentage of renewable energy-based power generation. But they show differences in pace and method of pushing forward such policies.
Then, what policy does Korea need? The Korean government is expected to present a solution for this issue in the near future since it plans to announce the second master plan for energy during this year.
Above all, it is important to understand differences between major advanced countries mentioned above and Korea. In case of these advanced countries, excluding Japan, demand for energy is stagnated or decreasing, and they can trade electric power between themselves as energy transport networks are connected in the region. And they have better conditions for developing and distributing renewable energies than Korea.
In contrast, demand for energy in Korea is on the rising trend and electric power systems are not connected with neighboring countries. Conditions and potentiality of renewable energies, such as limited land area, are inferior to them.
Therefore, it is desirable for Korea to move toward the same policy direction as major advanced countries in long-term direction, but it needs to seek a way suitable for Korea in pace of pushing forward the policy. As pointed above, it is difficult for Korea to rapidly change the energy mix in light of economic situation and energy demand and supply conditions, and it needs to change energy mix relatively on phased basis.
The decision of this policy direction requires the so-called social consensus. It is very important to form a social consensus on long-term direction of the energy mix policy in order to settle numerous issues, including recent shortage in power supply, problems of safety at nuclear power plants and opposition to installing power transmission towers in Milyang.
To draw a social consensus on adjusting pace of the energy mix policy, transparency of policy should be improved, and it is required to make meticulous preparation for working out processes of communicating with the people and discussing in public.
Source : todayenergy