© OECD/IEA 2011

Energy Policy in Japan:Post-Fukushima

Shinji FujinoHead of Country Studies DivisionInternational Energy Agency(IEA)

1

© OECD/IEA 2011

Fukushima Dai-ichi

TOKYO■

The Great East Japan Earthquake2011.3.11

Earthquakes•Main shock

Magnitude : 9.0 (Mar. 11th)

•AftershocksMagnitude 7 or greater : 6 times

Magnitude 6 or greater : 96 times

Magnitude 5 or greater : 580 times

(As of Oct. 21st)

Tsunamis14 meters or higher

2

© OECD/IEA 2011

Lost Generation

In total, the power supply capacity in the affected regions including Tokyo was reduced by 40%(20GW).

3

© OECD/IEA 2011

Power Generation and Transmission

4

© OECD/IEA 2011

Transmission Interconnectors

5

© OECD/IEA 2011

Impact on Energy Supply/Demand Balance

■ Peak Demand of the Month in 2010

● Peak Demand of the Month in 2011

■ Supply Capacity of TEPCO in 2011

6Source:

© OECD/IEA 2011

１ ２ ３ ４ ５ ６ ７

１ ２

１ ２

１ ３

１ ２ ３

１ ２ ３ ４

４

１ ２

１ ２ ３ ４

１１

３

２ ３

４ ５

１ ２ ３ ４

１ ２ ３ ４ ５ ６

１ ３２

１ ２ ３１

２

Under 0.5 MW Under 1MW Over 1MW

In Operation: 11 reactors

Stopped: 39 reactors

２

Nuclear Plants in Japan

Onagawa

Fukusima Daiichi

Fukushima Daini

Tokai daini

Hamaoka

Igata

TomariHigashi Do-riKashiwazaki

Shiga

Turuga

Mihama

Ohi

Takahama

Shimane

Genkai

Kawauchi

54 reactors in Japan

( As of November 4th, 2011)

7Source:

© OECD/IEA 2011

Nuclear Debates in Japan

In the short termRestart nuclear reactors that were shut down after

the earthquake and tsunami

In the long termSlow phase-out of nuclear power

8

© OECD/IEA 2011

Current Energy Policy of Japan (June 2010)

Key Targets Energy Security

Doubling energy self-sufficiency ratio by 2030 (18% in 2009)

Environmental sustainability CO2 emission reduction: 25% below 1990 levels by 2020 (the ambitious

climate change goal announced in 2009)

Key Measures Zero emission power generation (nuclear and renewables): 50%

by 2020, 70% by 2030 (34% in 2009) Nuclear (54 units in 2011)

9 additional units by 2020 14 additional units by 2030

Renewables 10% of total primary energy supply by 2020(3.5% in 2009) more than 20% of total electricity supply by the early 2020s(10% in 2009)

9

© OECD/IEA 2011

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%Sw

eden

Fran

ce

Switz

erla

nd

Finl

and

Nor

way

Slov

ak R

epub

lic

Aus

tria

Belg

ium

Port

ugal

Hun

gary

Spai

n

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Ger

man

y

Den

mar

k

Japa

n

Uni

ted

King

dom

Italy

Gre

ece

Pola

nd

Net

herl

ands

Irel

and

Luxe

mbo

urg

Nuclear

Geothermal

Solar

Wind

Biomass and waste

Hydro

Oil

Gas

Coal

Energy Mix among Europe and Japan

102010 estimated

© OECD/IEA 2011

Comparision between Europe and Japan

Energy Mix Electricity Mix

11

2009

Europe : EU 27 countries + Norway, Switzerland

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Europe Japan

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Europe Japan

Coal Gas Oil Hydro Biomass and waste Wind Solar Geothermal Nuclear 2009

© OECD/IEA 2011

Korea

Luxemburg

Japan

Belgium

France

Ireland

Slovak Republic

Spain

Italy

Switzerland

Portugal

Hungary

Germany

Finland

Austria

Greece%

Sweden

Czech Republic

United Kingdom

Poland

United States

NetherlandsDenmark

CanadaIEA Europe

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140%Self-sufficiency without Nuclear

Self-sufficiency

Nuclear as share of TPES

Self-sufficiency without Nuclear = Total Production / TPES12

2010 estimated

TPES: Total Primary Energy Supply

© OECD/IEA 2011

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%N

orw

ay

Switz

erla

nd

Swed

en

Fran

ce

Aus

tria

Finl

and

Belg

ium

Slov

ak R

epub

lic

Spai

n

Hun

gary

Den

mar

k

IEA

Eur

ope

Port

ugal

Net

herl

ands

Luxe

mbo

urg

Italy

Japa

n

IEA

28

Ger

man

y

Uni

ted

King

dom

Irel

and

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Pola

nd

Gre

ece

t CO2/ kWh

Fossul Fuels Renewables Nuclear CO2 / Electricity., CHP & heat output

CO2 Emissions by Electricity Generation

132009

© OECD/IEA 2011

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Japa

n

Luxe

mbo

urg

Uni

ted

King

dom

Irel

and

Net

herl

ands

Belg

ium

Czec

h Re

publ

ic

Slov

ak R

epub

lic

Gre

ece

Pola

nd

IEA

28

Hun

gary

Fran

ce

Ger

man

y

Italy

IEA

Eur

ope

Spai

n

Den

mar

k

Switz

erla

nd

Port

ugal

Finl

and

Aus

tria

Swed

en

Nor

way

Hydro Wind Geothermal Solar Biomass and waste Share of Renewables(%)

Renewables as share of TPES

2010 estimated 14

Renewablesas share of TPES

© OECD/IEA 2011

Low Nuclear Case - WEO2011Second thoughts on nuclear would have

far-reaching consequences

• “Low Nuclear Case” examines impact of nuclear component of future energy supply being cut in half

• Gives a boost to renewables, but increases import bills, reduces diversity & makes it harder to combat climate change

• By 2035, compared with the New Policies Scenario: coal demand increases by twice Australia’s steam coal exports

natural gas demand increases by two-thirds Russia’s natural gas net exports power- sector CO2 emissions increase by 6.2%

• Biggest implications for countries with limited energy resources that planned to rely on nuclear power

15

© OECD/IEA 2011

Low Nuclear Case: Implicationsfor Japan's energy security

Self-sufficiency rates in selected regions

Less nuclear would further reduce Japan's energy self-sufficiency, intensifying concerns about energy security

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2009 2035 2009 2035 2009 2035 2009 2035

Japan United States EU Korea

Nuclear

Fossil fuel

Renewables

NPS

LNC

16

© OECD/IEA 2011

Low Nuclear Case: Implicationsfor Japan's climate goals

CO2 emissions in the New Policies Scenario and the Low Nuclear case in Japan

Less nuclear would make it harder for Japan to meet its climate goals: in the Low Nuclear Case its CO2 emissions are 50 Mt higher in 2035 than in

the New Policies Scenario

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

1990 2010 2020 2035

Mt New Policies Scenario

Low Nuclear Case

450 Scenario

Copenhagen Accord50 Mt

17

© OECD/IEA 2011

Low Nuclear Case: Implicationsfor Japan's spending on energy imports

Primary coal and gas demand and annual spending on imports in the Low Nuclear Case in Japan

In the New Policies Scenario, Japan’s spending on imports of gas doubles to $66 billion between 2009 and 2035, but this would

reach $80 billion in the Low Nuclear Case

Spendingon coalimports

Spendingon gas

imports

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Billi

on

dolla

rs (

2010

)

2009

2035:New Policies Scenario

2035:Low Nuclear Case

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Coaldemand

Gasdemand

Mto

e

18

© OECD/IEA 2011

Lessons learned from Japan after Fukushima

Nuclear Safety

Energy Efficiency Challenges

Smart City Recovery Plans

19

© OECD/IEA 2011

Lessons learned from Europe for future

Strengthened Grid Connections

Market/Regulatory Framework

Renewable Deployment

20

© OECD/IEA 2011

Common Challengefor Europe and Japan

“ Policy Volatility”？

21