Using electricity bills for pre-discharge costs… “People’s Burden” vs “Political Enforcement”

Wolseong Unit 1 appearance. yunhap news

There is controversy over the government’s decision to conserve some of the costs incurred in accordance with the post-discharge policy using the Electric Power Industry Fund (hereinafter referred to as the Electric Power Fund).

It is because some people are concerned that the use of the electricity fund, which is separated from the electricity bill, will eventually increase the burden on the electricity bill.

Since the Ministry of Industry is executing within the scope of the already raised funds, there will be no additional public burden such as an increase in electricity rates.

According to the Ministry of Industry, on the 3rd, the amendment to the Enforcement Decree of the Electricity Business Law, which was recently announced, added that the Electricity Fund can be used to save electricity costs recognized by the Minister of Industry.

The government has prepared legal grounds for the government to partially compensate for losses incurred by operators, such as Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power, due to the early closing of Wolseong Unit 1 and the construction of new nuclear power plants (Cheonji Units 1 and 2 and Daejin Units 1 and 2). will be.

The Electric Power Fund is accumulated by removing 3.7% of the monthly electricity bill. The total size is 4.47 trillion won as of the end of last year.

With this in mind, some argue that the government is passing the losses from the de-war on to the people. It is also pointed out that the government uses electricity funds in a way that does not match the original purpose.

Rep. Han Moo-kyung of the Future Consolidation Party proposed a revision of the Electricity Business Act on the same day that prevents the use of the electric power fund as compensation for losses due to the post-discharge policy.

A canister of used nuclear fuel dry storage facility built before Maxtor in Wolseong nuclear power plant. Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power

One lawmaker pointed out that there is no legal basis for compensation for losses due to the pre-discharge policy.

One lawmaker said, “(Amendment to the Enforcement Decree) is that we will pay the receipts generated by de-discharge to the public.” I said.”

In response to this controversy, an official from the Ministry of Industry said, “There will be no additional public burden such as an increase in electricity bills, as the maintenance of business expenses will be enforced within the expenditure limit of the already established electric power fund.”

There is no plan to increase the power fund or raise the electricity bill to spend on pre-discharge costs.

On the basis of using the Electric Power Fund, he explained, “The energy conversion policy aims to expand clean and safe energy and is consistent with the’continuous development of the electric power industry’,” the purpose of which is to install the Electric Power Fund.”

Article 48 of the Electricity Business Act stipulates that’the foundation for the electric power industry will be established to secure the resources necessary for the continuous development of the electric power industry and the foundation of the electric power industry.’

An official from the Ministry of Industry said, “In the past, we continued to spend power funds on related businesses in the process of converting from coal to oil and renewable energy.”

The government has yet to determine the amount of money to be paid to each operator. After the revision of the Enforcement Decree, the specific conservation targets and scopes will be determined through notification, so each operator can estimate the correct amount and take steps to maintain.


[ⓒ 세계일보 &, 무단전재 및 재배포 금지]