The history of civilization has grown ceaselessly like flowing water, evolving without haste. The political, economic, and social prosperity we enjoy today was never achieved overnight but is the result of gradual and sustained development. Society feeds on change, and at the foundation of that change lies the stable supply of energy. Behind every conflict the international community faces, large or small, sits the issue of energy security.
A stable energy supply presupposes energy diversity. Only when oil or natural gas supplies become unstable and can be replaced by other sources such as renewables, nuclear power, or hydrogen can energy security truly be realized. Only nations equipped with industrial systems capable of utilizing diverse energy sources can lead in competitiveness. Hydrogen energy is one of the core pillars of such a system. The fact that it has been continuously nurtured across successive administrations since the Roh Moo-hyun government reflects an immutable principle in energy policy. History has repeatedly proven that it takes considerable time and consistent national support for a new energy source to establish itself as a major one.
Recently, the government has been shifting the Clean Hydrogen Portfolio Standard (CHPS) to grant bonus points only to clean hydrogen produced domestically. The direction of building a foundation for energy self-sufficiency is understandable in itself. The problem is that reality cannot keep pace with that speed. Domestic clean hydrogen is in absolute short supply and lacks economic viability. Attempting to achieve immediately a goal that could be reached only after several years would impose unbearable demands on the fuel cell power generation ecosystem. The hydrogen industry would no longer be able to develop, and ultimately this would result in a weakening of the stable energy supply. When ideal goals are placed ahead of reality, energy security grounded in energy diversity only moves further away.
Companies partnering in hydrogen energy have quietly devoted themselves to research and development (R&D) over the past decade, raising the domestic component localization rate to 98 percent. This is the concentrated result of trillions of won in private investment and the sweat of countless researchers. If the domestic market disappears, the hydrogen ecosystem that has been developed to achieve the goal of a hydrogen economy could fall into an unrecoverable state. What is even more regrettable is that now is the decisive moment for building a competitive ecosystem for the hydrogen economy. In the United States, power shortages driven by the rapid growth of data centers are becoming a reality, and fuel cells are drawing attention as a leading alternative. Korean hydrogen industry companies are already in discussions with local partners. Dismantling the domestic demand base now is no different from cutting open the belly of the goose that lays golden eggs.
The government's pursued transition to clean hydrogen fuel cell power generation must proceed gradually, reflecting both technological progress and supply realities. Energy policy must be pursued with a certain continuity even as administrations change, and it should not move in a direction that dismantles the foundation of the hydrogen industry, which has grown steadily to date. If the government exercises a little patience, making clean hydrogen supply infrastructure a reality and designing the transition roadmap together with industry, the goal can be achieved without strain.
Hydrogen fuel cell technology and the industry have passed their infancy and stand at a stage where they can soon enter a growth phase offering new opportunities. Supporting the industry so that it can recover its competitiveness and find a sustainable growth path on its own, within a balanced and predictable policy environment — this is precisely the role of government. Today's energy transition policy would do well to take to heart the lesson of "jeoktoseongsan (積土成山)," that soil accumulated little by little eventually forms a mountain.
