Japan Power Generation Mix and Energy Security After Fukushima Nuclear Accident

Keiichi N. Ishihara Graduate School of Energy Science, Kyoto University

N. Unesaki, T. Tetsuo, S. Konishi, Q. Zhang, F. Hooman, N. A. Utama, B. C. McLellan (Scenario Planning Team, Kyoto University Global COE Program Energy Science in the Age of Global Warming toward CO2 Zero-emission Energy System)

Outline

Introduction
Past to present

Scenario planning
Electricity mix by 2030

Discussion
Japan government scenario

Summary

Contents

Introduction
Past to present

Scenario planning
Electricity mix by 2030

Discussion
Japan government scenario

Summary

Nuclear Power in Japan

10% TPES (Total Primary Energy Supply) 30% electricity supply

Develop nuclear power after the twice oil crises

Source: Agency for Natural Resources and Energy FY2008 Energy Supply & Demand Performance.
4

Energy Security Problem in Japan

Highly dependent on import due to the lack of domestic energy resource

Source: Agency for Natural Resources and Energy FY2008 Energy Supply & Demand Performance.
5

FACT

CO2 Emission Pressure in Power Generation Sector

Waste (Incineration of waste prastics and wasteoil, etc.) 3% 3% Other (Fugitive emissions from fuels, etc.) 0.003% 0.003%

Residential Sector 14% 5% National Total CO2 EmissionsFY 2009 1,145 Mt CO2 Commercial and Other Sector Commerce, Service, Office, ect. 19% 8% Transportation Sector Motor vehicles and ships, etc. 20%

Energy Industries Sector Electric Power Plant, etc. 7% 33%

Industry Sector Factories, etc. 34% 28%

( ) : Direct Emissions

Note: Indirect Emissions The proportion of the emissions from power generation by electric utilities allocated to final demand sector in accordance with the electricity consumption. 7

Source: Ministry of the Environment, 2011

10

11

12

13

NPP DAIICHI before the earthquake

14

15

16

17

18

Daiichi NPP after hidrogen explosion 15.03.

19

23.7(11)

2012

20

Energy mix after Fukushima

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2010 Apr May Jun Jul Aug 2011 Sep Oct Nov Dec
21

Nuclear Oil LNG Coal

Ratio

http://www.enecho.meti.go.jp/info/committee/kihonmondai/13th.htm

Power generation (2012)

90,000,000 80,000,000

Zero Nuclear Nuclear

70,000,000

60,000,000

50,000,000

40,000,000

30,000,000

Thermal

20,000,000

10,000,000

0
2012 Jan 2012 Feb 2012 Mar 2012 Apr 2012 May 2012 June 2012 Jul 2012 Aug 2012 Sep

Hydro

22

Oil crisis

Nuclear crisis

23

Request to Save Electricity

1st oil crisis Nuclear crisis

24

Comparison between two crises

Oil crisis Year Reason 1973, 79 Nuclear crisis 2011, 12 Sudden rise of oil price Fukushima NPP accident Effect Request 15% reduction Request 15% reduction Corresp Reduction of oil fire Reduction of nuclear ondence plant from 50% to 10% from 30% to 0%. For a (2000). As alternative, short time, oil and gas nuclear, LNG, coal have consumption is been introduced. increased. For a future, development of renewable energy is important.

25

Contents

Introduction
Past to present

Scenario planning
Electricity mix by 2030

Discussion
Japan government scenario

Summary

26

What is Scenario Planning?

Scenario planning is to describe stories in the possible future (future cone), but not to predict the future. It helps to prepare the future (catastrophic events such as disaster, crisis, climate change), and to propose a policy for resilient society. Scenario planning must be independent from strategy, especially in the academic field.

27

Future cone
possible
Scenario A plausible Scenario B probable preferable Scenario C

28

History of use by academic and commercial organizations

Most authors attribute the introduction of scenario planning to Herman Kahn through his work for the US Military in the 1950s at the RAND corporation where he developed a technique of describing the future in stories as if written by people in the future. Practical development of scenario forecasting, to guide strategy rather than for the more limited academic uses which had previously been the case, was started by Pierre Wack in 1971 at the Royal Dutch Shell group of companies and it, too, was given impetus by the Oil Shock two years later. By 1983 Diffenbach reported that 'alternate scenarios' were the third most popular technique for long-range forecasting used by 68% of the large organizations he surveyed.

From wikipedia and/or A review of scenario planning literature TJ Chermack, SA Lynham and WEA Ruona - Futures Research Quarterly, 2001 pp 7-31
29

Modeling tools for electricity mix

30

Software to make scenarios

31

Japanese Energy Policy

Three main factors, safety of NPP, energy security (sustainable supply), and climate security by GHG emission should be taken into account. What energy mix can satisfy those three issues?

32

Nuclear Power Scenarios

Install Capacity Increase of NP in Japan (GWe)
14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

History Plan

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990
70

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

Install Cpacity (GWe)

S1 S2 S3

Reducing Maintaining Increasing

60 50

N1 N3

N2 History

40
30

20
10

Fukushima Nuclear Accident

0
1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year
33

NPPs in 2030 in Scenario1

TEPCO, Kashiwazaki Kaniwa

Hokkaido, Tomari 1 2 3

Hokuriku, Shika 1 2

14.3GWe
KEPCO, Ohi

Kyusyu, Genkai 3 4

Shikoku, Ikata 3

Capacity -0.5 GWe 1 GWE 1GWe34

Thermal Power Scenario

70 60 Oil Power Coal Power LNG Power Lifetime: 45 yeras no new buildings

Install Cpacity (GWe)

50

40
30 20 10 0 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Year

New LNG power plant will be introduced when needed.

35

PV Power Potential
Residential building [1] 20GWp (2020) 40GWp (2030) Public building [2] 10GWp Factories and Power Stations [2] 14GWp Unused Land [2] 5GWp Abandoned Farmland [2] 46GWp
10000

Physical Potential: 100 GWp

1000

100

10

Data Source: [1]: JPEA: Japan Photovoltaic Energy Association, 2011 [2]: ME: Ministry of the Environment, 2011

1 1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

36

KEPCO Solar Sakai (10MW)

70,000panels in 200,000m2 The largest mega-solar in Japan Equivalent to 1/800 of one unit of NPP

37

38

Wind Power Potential

On-Shore
25GWe

Off-Shore
25GWe
10000

Physical Potential: 50GWe

1000

100

10

Data Source: JWPA (Japan Wind Power Association), 2011

0.1 1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

39

Hourly Output Distribution of PV and Wind

Output distribution of PV and wind power
1.2

PV&Wind PV Wind

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

Source: JMA, AMeDAS data, 2001

40

1 238 475 712 949 1186 1423 1660 1897 2134 2371 2608 2845 3082 3319 3556 3793 4030 4267 4504 4741 4978 5215 5452 5689 5926 6163 6400 6637 6874 7111 7348 7585 7822 8059 8296 8533

Hours from Jan. 1st

CO2 Emission Factors

CO2 emission factor (g/kWh)
1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0

864

810 695 476 376 0 0 Wind 0 Nuclear 0 Hydro

Coal

Coal (600C)

Oil

LNG

CC LNG

PV

Data Source: CRIEPI , 2011

41

Scenario Design
Supply Side (S1-S3)
14.3 50.4

Demand Side (D1-D3)

Energy Saving D1 D2 D3 0% 15% 30%

Nuclear (GWe) S1 S2

S3
Other (Gwe)

60.8
Coal 31.8

Renewable Potential (GWp/e) PV 100 [1] Wind 50 [2] Biomass 2 [1] LNG 42.6 Oil 5.8 Hydro 21

Main Data
2001 electricity load [3] 2001 AMeDAS data [4] (solar irradiation, wind speed) CO2 factor of fuel [5]

Object:
Max renewable energy penetration

[1] ME (2011) : Potential for the Introduction of Renewable Energy. [2] JWPA (2011) Roadmap of long-term introduction of wind [3] FEPC (2011), TEPC [4] JMA, 2001-2005 [5] CRIEPI

42

Main Defined Operation Rules

Defined Rules Supply-demand
1. 2. 3. 4. 1. Blackouts is not allowed Only PV & wind power can become excess power Excess power ratio < 5% in total New building of LNG power plant is allowed Generation Priority: hydro, Nuclear/coal, PV & wind, gas/biomass, oil, pumped hydro 2. Capacity factor of coal-fired power can be lowered to zero for more renewable energy penetration 3. LNG power is used to pump up hydro as electricity storage during night in case of peak demand periods 1. Renewable energy penetration physical potential 2. Fossil fuel demand Max. supply capability 3. Facilities and resource can be imported from overseas

Power generation and storage Resource Availability

Capacity factor load-following CO2 emission

1. Capacity factor: 75%Nuclear100%, coal 85% 2. P-hydro, LNG, oil and biomass operate in load-following mode
1. Average annual CO2 emission per kWh1990 level
43

Result: Installed Capacity Mix

Installed Capacity Mix
350 300 250 Oil New LNG LNG Biomass Hydro 100 50 Wind PV

GW

200 150

0
D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3

Coal Nuclear

S1

S2

S3

The high level penetration of renewable energy can reduce the dependence on nuclear and thermal power, but needs more flexible power sources to absorb fluctuations.

S1 S2 S3

Nuclear (GWe) 14.3 50.4 60.8

Energy Saving D1 D2 D3 0% 15% 30%

44

Result: Electricity Mix

1200 1000

Electricity Generation Mix

Oil
LNG Biomass Hydro Wind PV Coal Nuclear

800

TWh

600 400 200

0
D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3 D1 D2 D3

S1

S2

S3

S1 S2 S3

Nuclear (GWe) 14.3 50.4 60.8

Energy Saving D1 D2 D3 0% 15% 30%

45

Result: CO2 Emission

Total CO2 Emission
350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
D1 D2 S1 D3 D1

Million tonnes

1990 Level

D2 S2

D3

D1

D2 S3

D3

Except D1S1, CO2 emissions are from 10 million tonnes to 250 tonnes, that is less than 290 million tonnes in 1990 CO2 emissions reduction compared to 1990 level can be realized easily with the help of nuclear/renewable energy and energy saving S1 S2 S3

Nuclear (GWe) 14.3 50.4 60.8

Energy Saving D1 D2 D3 0% 15% 30%

46

Result: CO2 Emission

Average CO2 Emission
400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
D1 D2 S1 D3 D1

g/kWh

1990 Level

D2 S2

D3

D1

D2 S3

D3

S1 S2 S3

Nuclear (GWe) 14.3 50.4 60.8

Energy Saving D1 D2 D3 0% 15% 30%

47

Electricity Generation (GW)

Result: Supply Demand Balance Example (D1S1)

Supply-Demand Difference (GW)

81 GW LNG power

Pumped Hydropower (GWh)

Excess Electricity (GWh)

No Excess Electricity

48

Result: Supply Demand Balance Example (D1S2) Electricity Generation (GW) Supply-Demand Difference (GW)
More nuclear Less LNG

Pumped Hydropower (GWh)

Excess Electricity (GWh)

No Excess Electricity

49

Electricity Generation (GW)

Result: Supply Demand Balance Example (D2S3)

Supply-Demand Difference (GW)

More nuclear No coal fired power

Pumped Hydropower (GWh)

Excess Electricity (GWh)

50

Contents

Introduction
Past to present

Scenario planning
Electricity mix by 2030

Discussion
Japan government scenario

Summary

51

Provisional Translation

Options for Energy and the Environment

The Energy and Environment Council Decision on June 29, 2012

[Outline]
July 2012 National Policy Unit

Three Scenarios for 2030

2010

The shares mean those in the electric energy generated. Figures in parentheses indicate changes from 2010 before the Great East Japan Earthquake.

2030

0% scenario
Before additional measures

After additional measures

15% scenario 15%

(-10%)

20-25% scenario 20 to 25%

(-5 to -1%)

(Reference) Current Strategic Energy Plan of Japan

Share of nuclear energy

Share of renewable energy

26%
Note 1

0%
(-25%)

0%
(-25%)

45%
20% 35% 65%

10% 63% 37%

30%
(+20%)

35%
(+25%)

30%
(+20%)

30 to 25%
(+20 to +15%)

Share of fossil fuels Share of nonfossil energy resources

70%
(+5%)

65%
(Current level)

55%
(-10%)

50%
(-15%)

30%
(-5%)

35%
(Current level)

45%
(+10%)

50%
(+15%)

Approx. 1 Electric energy 1.1 trillion trillion kWh generated kWh (-10%) Final energy consumption Greenhouse gas emissions Note 2
(compared to 1990)

Approx. 1 Approx. 1 trillion Approx. 1 trillion Approx. 1.2 trillion kWh kWh kWh trillion kWh
(-10%) (-10%) (-10%)

390 million 310 million kl 300 million kl 310 million kl kl (-72 million kl) (-85 million kl) (-72 million kl)

310 million kl
(-72 million kl)

340 million kl (Around 30%)

-0.3%

-16%

-23%
(-21%)

-23%
(-22%)

-25%
(-25%)

Note 1: The share of nuclear energy under the current Strategic Energy Plan of Japan (53%) is the share of large-scale power sources (excluding cogeneration and private power generation) Note 2: Figures in parentheses indicate only energy-related CO2 emissions.

Electricity mix at 2030

0.9kWh1.0kWh
0.1kWh 2.7kl3.0kl 0.3kl 13.915.8 1.8

10GDP 1.32030

GDP 620
20101.120200.8

540
20100.220200.4

2010 510 0.9kWh1.0kWh

0.9kWh1.0kWh

0..1kWh 2.8kl3.1kl 0.3kl 14.515.7 1.2

0.1kWh 2.8kl3.1kl ) 0.3kl :14.2 15.4 1.2

35 kWh CO2 12 23 12,000

1.1kWh

CO2 3523
12

CO2 3825
13

10,000

8,000
6,900 (63%)

5,300 6,000
(63%)

4,700

6,000 4,000 2,000

5,100
(58%)

(54%)

4,200
(48%)

(48%)

3,700
(42%)

4,800
(48%)

3,700
(42%)

Fossile

1,100 (10%) 2,900 (26%)

3,000
(31%)

3,000
(34%)

3,000
(31%)

3,000
(34%)

2,500
(25%)

2,500
(29%)

RE

3,500
(37%)

3,500
(40%)

1,500
(15%) D1 S1

1,500
(17%)

2,000
(20%)

2,000

2,500
(25%)

2,500
(29%)

Nuclear

(23%)

0 scenario

15% Scenario

20%

25%

Sustainability (Diversity)
0.3 0.29 0.28

0.27
0.26 0.25

HHI index better

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009 2010 2011 2030(0Nuc) 2030(S1D1)

0.24
0.23 0.22

0.21
0.2 1.7 1.65 1.6 1.55

Shannon index

1.45 1.4

1.35
1.3 1.25 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009 2010 2011 2030(0Nuc) 2030(S1D1)

HHI: Herfindhal-Hirshman Index

better
55

1.5

Immediate fatality rates

56

Risk factor (Immediate fatality rates)

30000
25000

Arbitrary unit

20000

15000

10000

5000

0 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2009 2010 2011 2030(0Nuc) 2030(S1D1)

57

Monthly expense for electricity

family more then two people

14,000

12,000 10,000
Yen/month 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Month
58

2010 2011 2012

10

11

12

Impact to our economy Indirect expenditure of electricity in a family

Item
Electricity Personal service Commerce Food Transportation Health welfare ICT

Per month (JPY)

10000 2484 2288 1405 955 811

586 457 380

313 249 22037
22
59

Education/research Real estate

Water and waste management Private car Total

World energy flow

Jonathan M. Cullen, Julian M. Allwood ; The efficient use of energy: Tracing the global Volume 38, Issue 1, January 2010, Pages 7581

flow of energy from fuel to service, Energy Policy

60

Challenge: Room for EE improvement (Present55/475=11.6%)

Combusion

Heat transfer

Friction etc

Jonathan M. Cullen, Julian M. Allwood, Theoretical efficiency limits for energy conversion devices, Energy,Volume 35, Issue 5, May 2010, Pages 20592069

61

Contents

Introduction
Scenario planning

Past to present Scenario planning

Electricity mix by 2030

Discussion
Japan government scenario

Summary
62

Summary

Summary and Future Work

Power generation in Japan was shown in the past and the present. Nuclear played a key role over time after oil crisis. Nuclear will continue to supply our electricity after Fukushima accident, even the share is reduces. Otherwise, Japanese energy security becomes vulnerable. Then, the strengthening nuclear safety is the most important in Japan, even in the world.

Future Work

Demand estimation based on macro economy activities. Global energy network, Replacement of coal-fired power. New electric devices (Battery, EV, HP) and Smart Grid. 63

Thank you for your kind attention