JAKARTA, Indonesia — The South Korean government is set to cut back its financial support for biomass energy amidst increasing domestic and global scrutiny concerning its association with deforestation. Environmental advocates have generally welcomed these reforms, though they have pointed out several loopholes and the gradual pace of phase-outs for these subsidies.
Hansae Song, a program leader at the South Korean nongovernmental organization Solutions for Our Climate, acknowledged the government’s decision in an email, emphasizing that this move suggests large-scale biomass power should not be part of the renewable energy future.
Globally, biomass energy, primarily produced through wood combustion, is on the rise as nations expedite their shift towards cleaner energy sources. Despite this trend, many scientists and environment-focused groups criticize biomass energy for various ecological issues. In South Korea, it stands as the second-largest renewable energy source.
For over ten years, South Korea has invested millions into biomass energy via its renewable energy certificates program. According to a recent statement from the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, the government allocated around $688 million to support biomass energy plants within a single year.
Given the limited availability of domestic forests, the South Korean biomass industry has focused on importing significant quantities of wood pellets at competitive prices from countries with ample forest resources. In 2023, approximately 82% of the nation’s wood pellet demand was met through imports, positioning South Korea as the third-largest biomass fuel importer globally, following the United Kingdom and Japan. Reports have indicated that biomass sourced from Indonesia is associated with the destruction of natural forests.
The Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy has acknowledged the escalating challenges in the biomass market, including ongoing criticisms related to forest degradation and the carbon emissions resulting from biomass power generation.
Under the newly revised policy, South Korea will cease supporting any new biomass power facilities. The subsidies for six existing state-owned plants that co-fire coal and biomass will be terminated this year, while the value of renewable energy certificates for three dedicated biomass plants will gradually decline by 2027. For private plants, subsidies related to co-fired biomass at six facilities will be phased out over the next decade, while adjustments for twelve dedicated biomass plants will occur over the next fifteen years.
However, environmental groups have highlighted certain shortcomings in the updated policy. For example, support for domestically produced wood pellets and chips will continue at existing levels, including for those that are co-fired with coal, which experts warn could threaten South Korea’s forests. Furthermore, power plants that are already being constructed or in the permitting process are not affected by the new policies and remain subject to the existing phased reduction schedules.
Current state-owned co-firing facilities constitute only 10% of South Korea’s biomass power capacity, and the gradual phase-out of most private co-firing plants will span more than ten years under these new regulations, according to Solutions for Our Climate.
“This extends the operational period of thermal power plants—many of which emit more per energy unit than coal—beyond the established timelines for coal phase-out set by the Paris Agreement,” Song noted.
Requests for comments from South Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Korea Forest Service, and Ministry of Environment have gone unanswered.
Experts believe that South Korea’s shift in policy may inspire other nations to rethink how they approach and integrate biomass into their energy transition strategies. Claire Squire, a research associate at the University of Maryland’s School of Public Policy Center for Global Sustainability, observes a notable shift in discussions around biomass subsidies. “While cutting subsidies isn’t a complete solution, there’s potential for improvement if future policies address relevant issues differently.”
As nations forge ahead with their energy transformations, the demand for biomass is increasing, with the use of bioenergy rising by an average of 3% annually from 2010 to 2022, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). The IEA highlights the necessity for sustainable practices in this context, advocating for the use of waste and crop residues instead of repurposing forested land for bioenergy crop cultivation. Deforestation leading to erosion and damage to biodiversity also amplifies risks for wildlife and human populations reliant on forests, while exacerbating extreme weather events.
Numerous scientists and environmental advocates oppose the concept of biomass altogether, asserting that burning wood-based materials can release more carbon than burning coal, and that logging undermines forests’ capability to absorb atmospheric carbon. Critics further argue that relying on biomass for co-firing delays the transition to clean energy rather than facilitating it.
