The widespread adoption of electric vehicles is inevitable. Since electric vehicles are the only solution to the various pollutants caused by internal combustion engine vehicles, the temporary electric vehicle chasm is expected to be overcome soon.


As electric vehicles currently have disadvantages compared to internal combustion engine vehicles, various efforts to overcome these must continue. As part of these efforts, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's subsidy policy for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure will likely take a considerable amount of time to act as a catalyst for the promotion of electric vehicles.

Compared to countries like Europe, the United States, and China, which are showing confusion and inconsistency in their electric vehicle subsidy policies, Korea has been pursuing a relatively consistent subsidy policy and is believed to be achieving significant positive results.

Among the many countries that are promoting the spread of electric vehicles as a key national policy, Korea has established a significant number of subsidies and is providing ongoing support, which is likely an expression of the government's commitment to promoting and expanding the spread of electric vehicles.

Electric vehicles have accumulated a cumulative supply of about 600,000 units as of 2024, but this year, thanks to the supply of cost-effective electric vehicles, the cumulative supply is expected to reach about 800,000 units, and next year, it is expected that the era of over 1 million electric vehicles will finally arrive.

The Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's subsidies for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure have played a crucial and crucial role in the activation and expansion of electric vehicles, and this role will continue to be even more crucial in the future.

Therefore, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's subsidy policy for eco-friendly vehicles must have consistent and sustainable standards, and as it is a key government policy, it must naturally possess reliability, rationality, and universal validity.

Only when this policy foundation is in place will the continued activation and expansion of electric vehicles be possible in the future.

However, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's recent electric vehicle subsidy policy shows several serious problems. There have been many different opinions in the meantime, but in the big picture, the government has set a certain direction for its policies, and has relatively faithfully reflected the opinions of the industry and various stakeholders in the detailed systems and guidelines, and has made detailed adjustments to address issues, so it has proceeded without any major problems.

On the other hand, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's subsidy guidelines and actual administration announced since the second half of 2024 are showing serious problems and errors.

First, the basic electric vehicle subsidy policy should not have significant differences in support policies for passenger cars and commercial vehicles, i.e., by vehicle type.

However, while there is no significant difference in subsidy policies for electric passenger vehicles, which are receiving a lot of public attention, this is not the case for electric commercial vehicles, which receive relatively less public attention.

Previously, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment had been in charge of testing standards and certification procedures for all eco-friendly vehicles, and had delegated subsidy approval to local governments. However, starting in July 2024, the Ministry of Environment suddenly took over the authority to approve subsidies only for electric commercial vehicles.

If the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment directly exercises the authority to approve subsidies in specific fields, there will be problems with rationality and universal validity compared to other types of subsidies where local governments approve subsidies based on market demand. In addition, there is a risk that the central government will apply arbitrary and self-imposed standards, and there is a high possibility that it will intensively support or exclude specific companies or models.

In fact, a recent situation has strongly proven this, raising questions about the intentions of the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's direct approval of subsidies for electric buses.

Therefore, the authority to approve subsidies for electric buses should be delegated back to local governments, just like for other vehicle types, to separate the responsibilities and roles of the central government and local governments, thereby responding to market demand and restoring trust.

The electric bus market is already sufficiently divided between domestic and imported products and between large and small businesses.And autonomous competition is underway, and market share evidences this. While misinformation suggests that Chinese electric buses are dominating the domestic market, their actual market share remains at around 30%. Since last year, they have been selling without subsidies, demonstrating their cost-effectiveness.

The Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment must stop its excessive market intervention and ensure fairness.

Second, I fully agree with the need to strengthen support for ternary NCM batteries, which are mainly produced by domestic companies among the batteries used in electric vehicles.

However, electric vehicles are a means of transportation used by all citizens, and safety issues such as fires have become a major concern, especially recently.

Therefore, there are many factors to consider when evaluating electric vehicle batteries, including not only energy density but also fire safety (chemical safety), lifespan, charging efficiency (whether rapid charging is possible), resource recycling factor, warranty period, and battery safety management system.

In the future, we will need to establish evaluation criteria that comprehensively consider these aspects.

In particular, since the performance standards for batteries required for each vehicle type, such as passenger cars, commercial vehicles, and special vehicles, are different, these aspects must also be taken into consideration. Standards that unconditionally emphasize only energy density are not helpful to the safety of the people, nor to the competitiveness of our country's companies and industries.

Furthermore, it is an administrative act that is simply incomprehensible that the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment suddenly revised the energy density regulations for large electric passenger vehicles in April 2025, less than six months after the revised regulations were announced in November 2024.

Already, the industry is frequently criticizing the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's measures as discriminatory against certain domestic small and medium-sized enterprises.

Such discriminatory administration hinders fair and autonomous competition in the market, infringing on the rights of citizens as consumers in the short term and hindering the nation's industrial competitiveness in the medium and long term.

This small and medium-sized company was a domestic electric bus company that had been designing vehicles and selecting parts directly and producing them at a subcontractor factory in China. It is understood that since four years ago, in accordance with the government's policy to foster domestic electric buses, it has been in the process of building a domestic production plant and localizing its main model.

However, the fact that the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment suddenly announced an increase in the battery energy density standards before the vehicle was even released, making it impossible to receive any subsidies even after the vehicle was released, must have been a matter of survival for the company, and it must have been the background to sufficiently question the intentions of the sudden announcement of the revision of the guidelines.

The revised notice for November 2024, already announced by the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment, is adding to these suspicions because it sufficiently includes preferential benefits for the ternary batteries of the three domestic battery manufacturers.

This small and medium-sized enterprise was the first to implement a 9-year, 1 million km warranty on electric bus batteries, which was a decisive trigger for the revitalization of electric buses in Korea. It is also known to be promoting domestic production of not only electric buses but also batteries, which adds to the regret.

Perhaps, from the second half of 2024 to the present, there have been issues such as administrative litigation with the Ministry of Environment due to the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment's ban on subsidies for Chinese electric buses, and there is even a reasonable suspicion that this may be retaliatory administrative action.

It is an industry standard and fact that it takes at least two years of development and certification to change the battery installed in a vehicle.

However, it would be a serious administrative error without any justification to ask for battery replacement within a grace period of only about eight months.

Therefore, it would be appropriate to extend the Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Environment's energy density policy, revised and announced in April 2025, by at least one year, rather than starting from January 2026. I hope the government will pursue policies that "save" businesses, not "kill" them.

Third, even if energy density is presented as the standard for subsidy payment, the policy of providing 100% if the presented standard is met and 0% if not is an administrative policy that has lost its universal validity even from a common sense perspective.

For a policy of differential subsidies based on energy density differences to have a minimum level of universal validity and common sense, it would be appropriate to establish detailed energy density standards and implement differential payments. This means supporting a reasonable soft landing, not polarization, is crucial.

Fourth, the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment is promoting energy density regulations favorable to ternary batteries as a key criterion for its subsidy policy in the short term to protect and foster domestic electric bus companies, but this is likely to come back as a boomerang in the near future.

Domestic passenger car manufacturers are already increasingly equipping their vehicles with Chinese iron phosphate batteries, taking into account price competitiveness and fire safety, and domestic battery manufacturers are also adding iron phosphate batteries to their main products. I understand that there may be differences in subsidies for these electric vehicles, but there is no discrimination such as a ban on payment.

If electric buses equipped with domestically produced iron phosphate are introduced, I would like to ask what kind of response the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment will implement and what kind of subsidy policy it will implement.

I believe that they will not give the cliché answer of, 'We can revise it when we get there.'

Subsidy policies for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure are a key national policy initiative to meet the global demand for zero carbon emissions.

It is also a national project that must be promoted with sufficient consideration of both the country's industry and environment.

The source of funding for this policy is the people's tax money, and therefore, all citizens should receive reasonable support and help promote the spread of electric vehicles.

These policies must naturally have credibility, rationality, universal validity, and legitimacy.

If the Ministry of Environment is expanded and reorganized into the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment, and the existing administrative errors persist, public trust will collapse and domestic industries will lose their competitiveness.

From our perspective, which relies on exports to create food, we cannot easily take advantage of the "America First" policy pursued by powerful countries like the United States and China.

Fortunately, given the current US-China conflict, we expect China to show friendly gestures toward us in areas that are not its core interests for the time being.

Although it is difficult to specify, a representative example would be the lack of special protests against the Korean government's failure to provide subsidies to Chinese electric buses in the electric bus sector.

The government should strive to create a fair and autonomous domestic market during these times.We must foster domestic eco-friendly vehicle production companies with international competitiveness by guaranteeing competition and actively support them so that they can actively utilize the global free trade order based on the WTO and FTAs.

Furthermore, as the Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment has become a central government agency with greater power and responsibility, rather than the Ministry of Environment, we expect to see a universally valid and just administration that is accompanied by fairness and rationality.

I highly value the Ministry of Environment's efforts and achievements in promoting eco-friendly vehicles, and I look forward to further development of the Ministry of Climate, Energy, and Environment. I urge them to immediately correct any shortcomings.