Written by: Karim Hammam
Public power generation companies in South Korea are facing difficult legal challenges, as these companies justify their limited responsibility for climate change in court, noting that the phenomenon has led to the expansion of agricultural zones rather than being purely environmental damage.
Legal dispute over agricultural damage
The case began when a group of farmers and environmental organizations filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for agricultural losses caused by the climate crisis. The lawsuit targets the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) and its five power generation subsidiaries, which topped the list of domestic greenhouse gas emitters.
Energy companies' arguments before the court
KEPCO and its subsidiaries submitted legal briefs to the Gwangju District Court, arguing that climate change cannot be considered environmental pollution or damage. The companies explained that rising temperatures have caused subtropical crop growing areas to move northward and expand into regions that were previously unsuitable for them, which they considered a positive aspect of ecosystem change.
The companies also argued that greenhouse gas emissions are the result of human and natural activities that have accumulated over hundreds of years, and that the amount of emissions produced by these companies cannot be considered sufficient to cause global warming on its own, but rather falls within the earth's self-purification capacity.
Volume of emissions and legal responsibility
Data indicates that the cumulative emissions of KEPCO and its five subsidiaries reached approximately 2.56 billion tons of greenhouse gases between 2011 and 2023, which represents 27% of the total national emissions that reached 9.4 billion tons during the same period.
In an attempt to deny direct responsibility, the companies pointed out that the decision-making authority regarding the operation of coal-fired power plants rests with the government, and that the companies only comply with legal directives issued by energy authorities.
Parliamentary criticism of the companies' official stance
MP Kim Tae-sun, a member of the National Assembly's Climate, Energy, Environment, and Labor Committee, expressed his dissatisfaction with the position of the public companies, describing it as inappropriate. He emphasized that the companies that should lead the energy transition and respond to the climate crisis are trying to evade responsibility and blame the government and farmers.
Kim called on the companies to present responsible plans to reduce emissions and provide practical measures to compensate affected farmers, especially since these companies had previously announced in their sustainability reports their leading role in the energy transition process and achieving carbon neutrality.
