Brazil vs South Korea: Electricity Compared
Brazil generated 764 TWh of electricity in 2025 and South Korea 628 TWh, according to Ember. Brazil's largest source was hydro (52.1%); South Korea's was coal (31.1%). Each kWh generated emitted 109 gCO2/kWh in Brazil and 418 gCO2/kWh in South Korea. These are Ember annual statistics for 2025, compiled from national sources; they are not real time.
Who is bigger and who is cleaner? Brazil is the bigger electricity producer, generating 1.2 times as much as South Korea in 2025 (764 TWh against 628 TWh). Brazil has the cleaner electricity by carbon intensity, at 109 gCO2/kWh against 418 gCO2/kWh in South Korea in 2025.
Why this comparison: both among the 20 largest electricity users.
Open this comparison in the interactive tool to add more countries or change the metric.
Key Facts
- Hydro supplied 52.1% of Brazil's electricity in 2025, against 0.6% in South Korea.
- South Korea's electricity was 3.8 times as carbon intensive as Brazil's in 2025, at 418 gCO2/kWh against 109 gCO2/kWh.
- The average person in South Korea used 12.09 MWh of electricity in 2025, 3.4 times as much as in Brazil (3.58 MWh).
- Low carbon sources supplied 88.9% of Brazil's electricity in 2025 and 39.9% of South Korea's.
- Electricity demand in 2025 was 775 TWh in Brazil and 628 TWh in South Korea.
Key Figures, 2025
Ember annual statistics| Measure | Brazil | South Korea |
|---|---|---|
| Total generation | 764 TWh | 628 TWh |
| Electricity demand | 775 TWh | 628 TWh |
| Demand per person | 3.58 MWh | 12.09 MWh |
| Carbon intensity | 109 gCO2/kWh | 418 gCO2/kWh |
| Power sector emissions | 83.4 MtCO2 | 262 MtCO2 |
| Low carbon share | 88.9% | 39.9% |
| Largest source | Hydro 52.1% | Coal 31.1% |
Generation Mix, 2025
Share of generationCarbon Intensity, 1985 to 2025
Ember annual statistics| Year | Brazil | South Korea |
|---|---|---|
| 1985 | 61 gCO2/kWh | 524 gCO2/kWh |
| 1986 | 85 gCO2/kWh | 431 gCO2/kWh |
| 1987 | 74 gCO2/kWh | 345 gCO2/kWh |
| 1988 | 66 gCO2/kWh | 405 gCO2/kWh |
| 1989 | 66 gCO2/kWh | 383 gCO2/kWh |
| 1990 | 60 gCO2/kWh | 379 gCO2/kWh |
| 1991 | 62 gCO2/kWh | 399 gCO2/kWh |
| 1992 | 63 gCO2/kWh | 427 gCO2/kWh |
| 1993 | 61 gCO2/kWh | 451 gCO2/kWh |
| 1994 | 61 gCO2/kWh | 493 gCO2/kWh |
| 1995 | 63 gCO2/kWh | 479 gCO2/kWh |
| 1996 | 68 gCO2/kWh | 481 gCO2/kWh |
| 1997 | 71 gCO2/kWh | 492 gCO2/kWh |
| 1998 | 71 gCO2/kWh | 463 gCO2/kWh |
| 1999 | 90 gCO2/kWh | 453 gCO2/kWh |
| 2000 | 89 gCO2/kWh | 462 gCO2/kWh |
| 2001 | 106 gCO2/kWh | 475 gCO2/kWh |
| 2002 | 97 gCO2/kWh | 473 gCO2/kWh |
| 2003 | 91 gCO2/kWh | 458 gCO2/kWh |
| 2004 | 102 gCO2/kWh | 463 gCO2/kWh |
| 2005 | 99 gCO2/kWh | 450 gCO2/kWh |
| 2006 | 96 gCO2/kWh | 451 gCO2/kWh |
| 2007 | 91 gCO2/kWh | 474 gCO2/kWh |
| 2008 | 114 gCO2/kWh | 477 gCO2/kWh |
| 2009 | 87 gCO2/kWh | 495 gCO2/kWh |
| 2010 | 114 gCO2/kWh | 500 gCO2/kWh |
| 2011 | 100 gCO2/kWh | 497 gCO2/kWh |
| 2012 | 128 gCO2/kWh | 502 gCO2/kWh |
| 2013 | 168 gCO2/kWh | 512 gCO2/kWh |
| 2014 | 193 gCO2/kWh | 493 gCO2/kWh |
| 2015 | 189 gCO2/kWh | 488 gCO2/kWh |
| 2016 | 150 gCO2/kWh | 489 gCO2/kWh |
| 2017 | 156 gCO2/kWh | 511 gCO2/kWh |
| 2018 | 137 gCO2/kWh | 519 gCO2/kWh |
| 2019 | 142 gCO2/kWh | 497 gCO2/kWh |
| 2020 | 133 gCO2/kWh | 458 gCO2/kWh |
| 2021 | 168 gCO2/kWh | 460 gCO2/kWh |
| 2022 | 103 gCO2/kWh | 438 gCO2/kWh |
| 2023 | 96 gCO2/kWh | 427 gCO2/kWh |
| 2024 | 106 gCO2/kWh | 416 gCO2/kWh |
| 2025 | 109 gCO2/kWh | 418 gCO2/kWh |
Demand per Person, 1985 to 2025
Ember annual statistics| Year | Brazil | South Korea |
|---|---|---|
| 1985 | n/a | n/a |
| 1986 | n/a | n/a |
| 1987 | n/a | n/a |
| 1988 | n/a | n/a |
| 1989 | n/a | n/a |
| 1990 | n/a | n/a |
| 1991 | n/a | n/a |
| 1992 | n/a | n/a |
| 1993 | n/a | n/a |
| 1994 | n/a | n/a |
| 1995 | n/a | n/a |
| 1996 | n/a | n/a |
| 1997 | n/a | n/a |
| 1998 | n/a | n/a |
| 1999 | n/a | n/a |
| 2000 | 2.25 MWh | 6.21 MWh |
| 2001 | 2.08 MWh | 6.59 MWh |
| 2002 | 2.14 MWh | 7.02 MWh |
| 2003 | 2.23 MWh | 7.32 MWh |
| 2004 | 2.33 MWh | 7.72 MWh |
| 2005 | 2.39 MWh | 8.14 MWh |
| 2006 | 2.47 MWh | 8.39 MWh |
| 2007 | 2.57 MWh | 8.83 MWh |
| 2008 | 2.66 MWh | 9.15 MWh |
| 2009 | 2.64 MWh | 9.32 MWh |
| 2010 | 2.84 MWh | 10.15 MWh |
| 2011 | 2.91 MWh | 10.55 MWh |
| 2012 | 3.01 MWh | 10.71 MWh |
| 2013 | 3.08 MWh | 10.73 MWh |
| 2014 | 3.12 MWh | 10.69 MWh |
| 2015 | 3.05 MWh | 10.75 MWh |
| 2016 | 3.05 MWh | 10.94 MWh |
| 2017 | 3.06 MWh | 11.20 MWh |
| 2018 | 3.09 MWh | 11.48 MWh |
| 2019 | 3.17 MWh | 11.34 MWh |
| 2020 | 3.13 MWh | 11.13 MWh |
| 2021 | 3.24 MWh | 11.72 MWh |
| 2022 | 3.28 MWh | 12.02 MWh |
| 2023 | 3.43 MWh | 11.93 MWh |
| 2024 | 3.57 MWh | 12.09 MWh |
| 2025 | 3.58 MWh | 12.09 MWh |
Brazil history · South Korea history
Source: Ember (ember-energy.org), licensed under CC BY 4.0. Data as of 2025.
Related
Cite this page
World Power Monitor. (2025). Brazil vs South Korea: Electricity Compared. https://worldpowermonitor.com/compare/brazil-vs-south-korea/
World Power Monitor. Brazil vs South Korea: Electricity Compared. Data as of 2025. Data from Ember. https://worldpowermonitor.com/compare/brazil-vs-south-korea/
@misc{wpm_compare_brazil_vs_south_korea_2025,
title = {{Brazil vs South Korea: Electricity Compared}},
author = {{World Power Monitor}},
year = {2025},
note = {Data as of 2025. Data from Ember.},
url = {https://worldpowermonitor.com/compare/brazil-vs-south-korea/}
} Permalink: https://worldpowermonitor.com/compare/brazil-vs-south-korea/
The Copy buttons add today's date as the access date.