Who needs to take more responsibilities for climate emergency?

High temperatures scorched the Earth in June, including in North America, Europe, Russia, India and China. We, people in South Korea, also had the highest-ever daily minimum temperature recorded in June since 1997.

It is very clear that climate change is causing the increase in the frequency and severity of extreme weather events. No one on Earth is immune from the impact of global climate change. This is the reason why all the countries in the world need to work together.

However, at the same time, the impact of climate change does not fall equally on everyone. Ironically, those who bear less responsibility for climate change are the ones who will suffer more, which is mostly true not only at the global, but also at the national level.

Many of the low-income countries in South America, Africa, Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific Islands are being hit harder by global climate change. Also, within a society, the vulnerable, including the poor, people with disabilities, children, women, the elderly, outdoor workers and farmers, suffer more from global heating and extreme weather events.

Then, who needs to reduce carbon emissions first and take more roles and responsibilities?

First of all, following the “polluter pays” principle, at the global level, those countries that emitted more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere should reduce their emissions more. The G20, comprising the world’s 19 largest economies and the EU, includes the top two largest emitters, the U.S. and China.

The G20 accounts for 85 percent of all cumulative carbon dioxide emissions since the Industrial Revolution began in the middle of the 18th century. Therefore, climate change mitigation is a major task for the G20.

By current income level, high-income and upper-middle-income countries emit 80 percent of the global CO2 emissions. Consequently, the lower-middle-income and low-income countries — housing half of the world’s population — have relatively less responsibility for climate mitigation that the rich countries do.

Within the same countries, industry should bear more responsibility for climate action. In South Korea the top 10 private corporate groups together with the Korean Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) account for more than 60 percent of the country’s total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Therefore, the roles and responsibilities of these 11 corporate groups are critical to achieving Korea’s 2030 climate target: a 40 percent reduction of emissions by 2030 compared to 2018 levels.

When it comes to leadership in industrial carbon reduction, some industries need to reduce their emissions faster and greater than others. In Korea, the top three GHG-emitting industries are steel, petrochemical and cement. However, the share of electricity consumption by these three industries is much smaller than that of other major GHG-emitting industries, such as semiconductors, displays and electronics, where the share of electricity consumption is close to 90 percent of the total.

Therefore, while the steel, petrochemical and cement industries are developing alternative materials, new processes and technologies to reduce their GHG emissions, the semiconductor, display and electronics industries — especially leading companies like Samsung Electronics, LG Display, SK Hynix and Samsung Display — need to show faster and greater efforts in GHG emissions reduction by procuring renewable electricity.

These latter companies are also not only major electricity consumers and therefore GHG emitters, but also, they have increased their fossil-fuel-based power consumption and carbon emissions in recent years.

The International Energy Agency (IEA) suggested that to achieve the goal of 2050 carbon neutrality, we need to make overall net zero emissions in the power sector in the advanced economies — including Korea — by not 2050 but 2035. Furthermore, the same net zero achievement needs to be made for the entire global power sector by 2040, including all developing nations.

These IEA milestones in the power sector show how fast and challenging the energy transition is scientifically required for humanity to avoid climate disaster, and how high the expectations are for a country like Korea and its leading corporations.

The latest U.N. report on climate change mitigation analyzed various mitigation options and their estimated ranges of costs and potential in 2030. It clearly shows what we need to focus on first.

In the energy sector, but also overall, solar and wind energies could provide the greatest contribution to the net carbon emissions reduction in 2030 with the least cost. Nuclear power generation is not considered one of the priority options due to relatively smaller mitigation potential with higher cost.

In the building sector, avoiding demand for energy services and efficient lighting, appliances and equipment are the priority ones to get greater mitigation outcomes with less cost.

In the transport sector, higher fuel efficiency for light-duty vehicles, the shift to public transportation and the shift from fossil fuels to electric vehicles are the priority options to have less carbon emissions at lower costs.

Therefore, the new Yoon administration should rethink its already weak target for the share of renewables in power generation by 2030 and instead double its ambition if it wants greater climate change mitigation with relatively lower costs. Also, as promised by Yoon during the election campaign, bans on new sales of gasoline and diesel engine vehicles need to be introduced by 2030.