<Anchor> This is a



friendly economic time. As always, I will be with reporter Kim Hye-min. Reporter Kim, we must reduce carbon to prevent global warming. This story is now almost at the level of common sense. In this process, there are a lot of stories about carbon neutrality, carbon credits, and slightly difficult things.



<Reporter> Because of



carbon neutrality, we often hear stories like 'electricity prices may go up' or 'inflation is going up' these days.



We charge carbon to reduce carbon. In addition, carbon costs are permeating the prices of low-income earners as they use renewable energy instead of fossil fuels.



There are times when we think that climate change is serious and that we have to pay for it, but we wonder how it is being used. Simply put, these days, carbon is money, i.e. cost.



It started with the 'carbon credit' trade, and in 1994, the international community announced the UN Convention on Climate Change to curb the emission of greenhouse gases that cause global warming.



And three years later, the 'Kyoto Protocol' was adopted as a concrete implementation plan for this convention. At this time, the carbon emission trading system was born, and this system has been continuously developed to this day.



<Anchor>



So, carbon credit is the right to emit carbon.Yes? The price has gone up a lot lately.



<Reporter> The



carbon emission trading system is generally operated based on the 'cap and trade' principle.



When the government sets the total amount of emission allowed, that is, a 'cap', companies have 'emission rights' that can only emit greenhouse gases within a certain range.



These credits can be traded, or traded, between companies. Until recently, Tesla, famous for producing electric vehicles, made huge profits with carbon credits.



Some states in the United States give carbon credits to manufacturers according to the production of eco-friendly vehicles. But as you know, Tesla only produces electric vehicles, so it does not emit any carbon at all.



They sold it to other companies and made $1.58 billion in revenue last year alone. That's over 1.7 trillion won.



On the other hand, companies that emit a lot of carbon need carbon credits, and as countries competitively raise their greenhouse gas reduction targets, the price of credits continues to rise.



If we take the price of carbon credits in Europe as an example, it has already doubled since this year.



<Anchor> If



you look at the industrial structure of Korea, it is a manufacturing center that has no choice but to emit a lot of carbon. If that happens, it will cost Korean companies a lot to produce.



<Reporter> For



companies with high carbon emissions, this is directly related to cost. steel or oil,This also includes companies with internal combustion engines.



In terms of domestic sales, the top 30 companies spent 430 billion won in purchasing carbon credits last year, a 77% increase from the previous year. Hyundai Steel, a steel company, is said to have spent 150 billion won just to buy emission permits.



There was also an announcement by the Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, and there was also an announcement that the carbon-neutral cost would be at least 400 trillion won by 2050 in just three industries: steel, cement, and petrochemicals.



As mentioned earlier, these costs are eventually returned to consumers in the form of electricity rates or price increases.



<Anchor>



But on top of that, Korea recently expanded and announced the carbon neutral policy, which aims to reduce carbon. From the company's point of view, as you explained earlier, there are voices who are concerned about the side effects because it will inevitably cost more?



<Reporter>



Yes. First, let's talk about carbon neutrality, which is zero net carbon emissions.



It began in earnest through the Paris Climate Agreement adopted in 2015, at which time each country agreed to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050.



Compared to 2018, Korea decided to reduce it to 26.3% by 2030 and achieve net zero in 2050.



However, in this case, the annual reduction rate is higher than that of the United States and the United Kingdom.

In addition, the period of reaching carbon neutrality is 60 years for the European Union and 42 years for the United States, whereas we have 32 years, which is a very rapid process.



The issue of carbon neutrality is also expanding into friction in general, so there is no difference between the public and private sectors that this should be accomplished, but the Korean industry, which is centered on the manufacturing industry, requires a great deal of money, so it is a situation that needs to be addressed.