Unrealistic “RE100” vs. “CF100,” Which Revives Businesses and Regions

Today, as carbon neutrality has become a global challenge, many companies are joining the “RE100 (100% transition to renewable energy)” campaign and declaring their commitment to ESG (environmental, social, and governance) management.

At first glance, a 100% shift to renewable energy centered on solar and wind power appears desirable, since it draws energy from natural sources such as sunlight and wind.

However, the reality is not so simple. In practice, RE100 alone makes it difficult to achieve carbon neutrality in a scientific manner because of unstable supply, high costs, and technological limitations.

South Korea in particular has limited renewable energy potential due to its small land area, high population density, and insufficient sunlight.

Not only are the costs of renewable energy generation and procurement higher than in major countries, but there are also structural limitations such as an isolated power grid.

According to Bloomberg, an energy market research firm, the levelized cost of solar power generation per MWh is $117 in South Korea and $44 in the United States, meaning South Korea’s cost is 2.7 times higher.

Moreover, the method of offsetting electricity use through annual “renewable energy purchases” is closer to accounting neutrality than to an actual reduction in carbon emissions.

As an alternative, CF100 (100% transition to carbon-free energy) is drawing attention.

This refers to using carbon-free electricity 24 hours a day through an energy mix that includes not only renewable energy, but also all carbon-free energy sources such as nuclear power, green hydrogen, and fuel cells.

In other words, rather than relying on formal offsets, it is a more scientific and precise approach aimed at achieving absolute zero carbon by “actually consuming carbon-free electricity every hour.”

The European Union (EU) already recognized the substantive contribution of carbon-free energy to achieving global carbon neutrality by including nuclear power and natural gas in its Green Taxonomy beginning in 2022.

The United States, Japan, and South Korea are all making small modular reactors (SMRs) a core part of their future energy strategies, while global companies such as Google and Microsoft, together with UN Energy, have already joined the “24/7 CFE (carbon-free energy) Compact.”

In April 2023, the government launched the CFE Forum and began discussions on expanding the use of carbon-free energy, introducing a certification system, and developing strategies for international diffusion.

Participating are major domestic clean energy demand companies and energy producers, including Samsung Electronics, LG Energy Solution, SK Hynix, POSCO, GS Energy, and Doosan Enerbility, as well as numerous experts.

Global carbon neutrality must be approached with scientific and practical solutions. More important than idealistic slogans is a strategy that can advance both realistic technological capabilities and industrial competitiveness.

If RE100 is a symbol of environmental activism, CF100 is an industrial policy solution that expands the market.

The path we should take is not simply 100% renewable energy, but a zero-carbon strategy that harmonizes energy realities with climate responsibility.

As part of the new administration’s climate and economic policy, I propose designating CF100-specialized free economic zones centered on areas surrounding nuclear power plants such as Hanbit, Hanul, Wolsong, Saeul, and Kori, and establishing regional CFE national industrial complexes to support advanced strategic industries such as AI (artificial intelligence), semiconductors, bio, and secondary batteries.

Along with attracting global RE100 companies, now is the time to pursue a phased plan for building Korea’s carbon-free energy cluster and a private-sector-led vision for advanced industrial cities, including the development of marine tourism hubs, residential cities, and university campuses focused on education and research linked to advanced strategic industries.

We must create a virtuous cycle in which companies are attracted by affordable, high-quality carbon-free electricity, companies create jobs, and local regions are revitalized.

CF100 must become the central pillar of an energy strategy that opens the future of both our country’s global companies and regional economies.

Gwang yong Go

Policy Director, Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

---

Original title: 비현실적 ‘RE100’ vs 기업·지역 살리는 ‘CF100’

Author: Gwang yong Go

Date: 2025-05-27

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=press&idx=27758