Mastering RE100: The Reality and Future Strategies in South Korea

Understand South Korea’s opportunities and challenges amid the corporate-led renewable energy revolution at a glance.

• Core concepts of RE100 and real implementation cases by global companies
• Current status of K-RE100 and structural dilemmas faced by Korean companies
• Practical alternatives to avoid greenwashing risks and achieve sustainable RE100

What is RE100? Everything About the Global Standard

“Let’s make 100% of the electricity companies use renewable!” RE100 has become a global business standard initiative. It goes beyond a simple environmental campaign, acting as a trade barrier directly linked to corporate survival.

Launched in 2014 by the nonprofit organizations The Climate Group and CDP, this campaign opened a new paradigm where companies voluntarily participate to drive growth in the renewable energy market rather than relying on government regulations.

Core Rules of RE100 and the Principle of ‘Additionality’

RE100’s goal is clear: to publicly commit to switching 100% of electricity consumption to renewable energy by 2050 at the latest. Member companies must transparently report their annual progress and meet interim targets of 60% by 2030 and 90% by 2040.

A key point is the ‘Additionality’ principle. From 2024, only electricity generated from power plants less than 15 years old will be recognized. This ensures corporate investments go beyond buying certificates from old plants and actually contribute to increasing new renewable energy facilities. This principle is the core guarantee of RE100’s credibility.

Global RE100 Trends: How Are the Leaders Moving?

As of the end of 2023, over 424 companies worldwide have joined RE100, creating a massive movement. Among them, South Korea ranks 4th globally with 36 member companies, showing quantitative growth but facing many qualitative challenges.

Apple, Google, BMW: Driving the Supply Chain

Behind RE100’s success is the bold leadership of innovative companies like Apple and Google. Apple achieved 100% transition in 2018 and now requires its suppliers to join RE100 as well. This is the main reason why Korean companies like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix have jumped into RE100.

Automaker BMW also sends a strong message: “No RE100, no deal.” Some domestic suppliers have lost contracts for failing to meet this standard, showing that RE100 is no longer optional but a survival issue where failure means exclusion.

Taiwan’s TSMC: A Wise Strategy Similar to Us

Taiwan’s TSMC, a semiconductor industry leader, offers important lessons for South Korea. Supported fully by the government, TSMC advanced its RE100 target by 10 years to 2040. The Taiwanese government encourages TSMC to build new plants next to large offshore wind farms, linking power demand and supply to enhance stability. TSMC’s case shows that achieving RE100 in semiconductors requires national-level strategies and support combined with corporate efforts.

The Light and Shadow of K-RE100: Ambitious Start, Harsh Reality

Following the global RE100 trend, the South Korean government introduced the ‘K-RE100’ system in 2021. It lowered participation barriers for SMEs and public institutions, achieving quantitative expansion but revealing serious contradictions.

A Strange Paradox: 100% Abroad, 9% Domestically?

Leading Korean companies like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix have already achieved or nearly achieved RE100 goals in the US and Europe, where renewable infrastructure is well established.

However, their domestic performance is dismal. The average domestic implementation rate of all Korean RE100 member companies is only about 9%, far below the global average of 53%.

The domestic RE100 implementation rates of Korean companies are significantly lower than those of their overseas operations.

This is not due to lack of corporate will but clear evidence that the environment to implement RE100 domestically is very poor.

Table 1: Summary of Major Korean Companies’ RE100 Performance (2023)

What Is the Best Way for Korean Companies to Achieve RE100?

What methods can Korean companies use to achieve RE100? There are currently four, each with clear pros, cons, and risks.

1. Direct Investment (Self-generation, Equity Investment): Building power plants directly, such as installing solar panels on factory roofs. This is the most reliable and potentially cost-effective long-term method.
2. Power Purchase Agreements (PPA): Long-term contracts with power producers to buy electricity directly. Since it contributes to new plant construction, it is internationally regarded as the most trusted ‘gold standard.’
3. Certificate Purchase (REC): Buying certificates proving electricity was generated from renewable sources. It is simple but criticized for low ‘additionality.’
4. Green Premium: Paying extra to the Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) to receive a ‘renewable energy usage certificate.’ The easiest method but with no guarantee the money funds new plants, making it internationally unrecognized as genuine greenhouse gas reduction and a critical flaw.

Table 2: K-RE100 Implementation Method Strategy Analysis

The Dilemma of Korean RE100 and the ‘Greenwashing’ Controversy

The reason Korean companies flock to the easy ‘green premium’ instead of PPA or self-generation is clear: triple challenges of supply shortage, high costs, and tight regulations.

As a result, a distorted structure emerged where a staggering 98% of K-RE100 implementation volume is procured via green premium. This blocks new investments, stifles market growth, and traps companies in a vicious cycle of buying ineffective certificates at high prices.

The feared happened. In March 2025, a climate group reported POSCO and SK Group to the Fair Trade Commission for advertising green premium purchases as actual greenhouse gas reductions, accusing them of ‘greenwashing.’ In my view, this incident is a symbolic warning that reliance on green premium strategies is a ’time bomb’ that can destroy corporate reputations at any time.

CFE Initiative: An Alternative or Confusion to RE100?

In this context, the Korean government proposed the ‘Carbon-Free Energy (CFE) Initiative,’ including nuclear and hydrogen as alternatives.

The problem is that CFE conflicts with RE100, which does not recognize nuclear as renewable energy. If Korean companies rely solely on CFE standards and then receive notices from global customers like Apple or BMW saying “That’s not accepted,” they face serious risks of being excluded from supply chains.

Conclusion: What Must South Korea Do?

For South Korea, RE100 is no longer optional but a matter of survival. Bridging the huge gap between ambition and reality requires urgent efforts from companies, government, and society.

• Key Summary

  1. Corporate Challenge: Move away from short-term convenience of green premium dependence and boldly invest in trusted methods like PPA or self-generation. This is the only way to avoid greenwashing risks and gain true value recognition.
  2. Government Role: Focus all policy efforts on activating the PPA market by reforming unreasonable regulations and strengthening financial support to make PPA easily accessible. Also urgently provide clear guidelines to resolve confusion companies face between RE100 and CFE.
  3. Social Cooperation: Promote ‘integrated PPA’ models that bundle demand from multiple SMEs and greatly expand SME-tailored support to protect the backbone of the industrial ecosystem.

Whether South Korea can turn the huge challenge of RE100 into an opportunity for sustainable growth depends entirely on how quickly and boldly it reforms its outdated domestic energy system.