Imagine standing in a field, watching your livelihood slowly diminish due to forces beyond your control. This is the harsh reality facing South Korean farmers, who are now taking a stand against climate change and its devastating impact on their crops. Farmers are suing the state power utility, alleging that its reliance on fossil fuels is directly contributing to their losses. But is it really that simple? Let's dive in.
Hwang Seong-yeol, a farmer with three decades of experience, describes this past season as one of his toughest. He and his fellow farmers are battling increasingly erratic weather patterns, which they directly link to climate change. This has thrown their work into chaos, leaving them uncertain about their future. Their fields, once fertile, are now bearing the brunt of a changing climate.
This lawsuit, the first of its kind in South Korea, involves five farmers who are holding the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) and its subsidiaries accountable. They argue that the companies' heavy use of coal and other fossil fuels has accelerated climate change, leading to significant crop damage. Yeny Kim, a lawyer with Solutions for Our Climate, is handling the case and highlights the complexities of this situation.
And this is the part most people miss... South Korea, a manufacturing powerhouse, is now grappling with the challenge of transitioning to cleaner energy, especially considering it industrialized later than many Western nations that are now pushing for the abandonment of fossil fuels.
Hwang's fields are located on a reclaimed coastal plain, where the landscape is crisscrossed by waterways and frequented by migratory birds. The farmers here have faced a series of extreme weather events: a remarkably rainy September and October followed a bitterly cold spring that stunted plant growth. Summer floods caused further damage before the wet autumn bred fungal disease.
Hwang had to harvest his rice sooner than he would have liked because relentless rains pushed the stalks into the soil, causing the grains to sprout. He is expecting this year's harvest to be 20% to 25% below normal. "We began to question why it’s always the farmers — who haven’t done anything wrong — that end up suffering the consequences of the climate crisis. Shouldn’t we be demanding something from those who are actually causing it?" he asks.
Kim emphasizes that farmers are inherently vulnerable to climate change. In a recent climate report, the South Korean government detailed how extreme weather in 2024, the country's hottest year ever, triggered numerous agricultural disasters. These events included heavy summer rains that destroyed thousands of hectares of cropland, followed by weeks of intense heat that further damaged crops, especially rice.
Kim and her colleagues decided to file the lawsuit after speaking with Hwang and other farmers at local markets. They believe KEPCO should bear some responsibility for the unstable weather conditions, citing excessive carbon emissions and a slow transition to renewable energy. Based on Kim's analysis of publicly available data, from 2011-2022, these companies produced approximately 30% of South Korea’s greenhouse gas emissions and roughly 0.4% of global emissions.
"Therefore, they should also bear 0.4% of the responsibility for the farmers’ losses," Kim stated. The initial damage claims are set at 5 million won ($3,400) per client, with the amount likely to be adjusted as the case progresses. The plaintiffs are also symbolically seeking 2,035 won ($1.4) each to urge the government to phase out coal power plants by 2035, ahead of its 2040 target.
But here's where it gets controversial... Renewable energy accounted for only 10.5% of the national energy mix in 2024, while the KEPCO subsidiaries relied on coal for over 71% of their electricity production that year. KEPCO has stated its commitment to carbon reduction, aiming to cut emissions by 40% by 2030 from 2018 levels, but has declined to comment further on the lawsuit.
Experts suggest that the utility's mounting debt, exceeding 200 trillion won ($137 billion), restricts its ability to expand and modernize the power grid or invest in renewable energy. Yun Sun-Jin, a professor at Seoul National University, questions whether KEPCO can be held solely responsible, given that everyone benefits from its cheap electricity. She believes that it would be difficult to prove the utility directly caused farm losses, considering climate change is a "global problem." However, the lawsuit does highlight the need for a more effective approach to renewable energy, including deregulation of solar investments, expansion of sources like offshore wind, and ending KEPCO’s monopoly over electricity transmission.
South Korea is expected to reach its target of 32.95% renewable energy by around 2038, which is slower than the 33.49% average in 2023 among developed economies in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Some experts, including Yun, warn that South Korea’s slow shift to renewable energy could hinder its ambitions in advanced semiconductors and artificial intelligence, as its tech giants face global pressure to operate on clean power. Yun emphasizes that "Climate change and carbon neutrality are not just environmental concerns — they are economic issues, ultimately about jobs and our survival."
The impact of extreme weather is far-reaching in South Korea. Farmers now face higher costs and must use more labor to produce the same or lower yields. Ma Yong-un, an apple farmer, is using more pesticides due to increased pest and disease issues. The apples that thrived in cooler weather are now less plentiful and tasty. He began to seriously consider climate change in 2018, when a heavy April snowstorm damaged flower buds, leading to one of his worst harvests. Farming is becoming harder each year and he constantly wonders how much longer he can carry on.
What do you think? Do you believe power companies should be held accountable for the impact of climate change on agriculture? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
