[Reporter’s Notebook] Can We Trust Policy When the Climate Minister Gets the Numbers Wrong?

"Currently, the bid price for solar power is about 80 won per kilowatt, and for onshore wind power, it is around 169 won. We are working on a roadmap to reduce this to below 150 won."

This was the statement made by Minister Kim Seonghwan of the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment at a press briefing at the Sejong Government Complex on December 1, 2025. It was intended to address concerns that expanding renewable energy could lead to higher electricity rates. While the policy vision behind the statement was ambitious, the figures cited were incorrect from the outset. The day after the briefing, the Ministry requested a correction: the actual solar power bid price is in the 150-won range, and onshore wind power is in the 160-won range. This correction came less than an hour before the article was set to be published.

It is concerning that the head of a government ministry, while emphasizing the necessity of expanding renewable energy, was not even aware of the basic price data. If a roadmap is built on incorrect baseline figures, it is highly unlikely to reach its intended goal. One could dismiss this as a simple mistake. However, since Minister Kim has consistently advocated for an energy transition based on renewables, this cannot be overlooked.

Inaccuracy in figures is not a "minor error." Especially in the process of public discussion, where the government must balance industrial interests and address local opposition, figures serve as both the "language of policy" and the "unit of trust." When the unit price jumps from 80 won to 150 won, the economic viability of investments changes completely; when 169 won becomes the 160-won range, the context of the statement shifts entirely.

If the head of a ministry is confused about these figures, it is not merely a personal memory lapse but reveals the absence of a "data command center" within the organization. The fact that the minister cited incorrect numbers indicates that the system for verifying, updating, and accurately incorporating data into every policy statement is not functioning properly. This can become a risk factor in the detailed policy decisions affecting the profitability of the renewable energy industry and the fairness of transmission network investment benefits.

The credibility of policy does not come from "eloquence of philosophy." It comes from the consistency of decision-making based on the accuracy and integrity of data. In policy matters directly affecting the public's wallets, such as electricity rates, the unit price of renewables that determines industrial competitiveness, and the compensation scale that affects local acceptance, the government's language must be grounded in precise figures.

Minister Kim spoke of philosophy-referencing the Agricultural Revolution, the Industrial Revolution, and the era of decarbonization as the third great civilization. However, what the public wants to know is not the origin of the universe, but practical and accurate answers to real questions: "Will electricity rates rise? At what price will electricity be purchased and sold? Is the compensation fair?"

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.