MEASUREMENT OF POST-FUKUSHIMA CLIMATE CHANGE
MITIGATION OPTIONS FOR JAPAN, CHINA AND KOREA BY USING
GLOCAL CENTURY ENERGY ENVIRONMENT PLANNING (G-CEEP)
MODEL
Xuanming Su, Ritsumeikan Global Innovation Research Organization, Phone +81 75 466 3347, E-mail:
xuanming@fc.ritsumei.ac.jp
Weisheng Zhou, College of Policy Science, Ritsumeikan University, Phone +81 75 466 3418, E-mail:
zhou@sps.ritsumei.ac.jp
Masato Yamazaki, Ritsumeikan Global Innovation Research Organization, Phone +81 75 466 3347, E-mail:
masato-y@fc.ritsumei.ac.jp
Faming Sun, Ritsumeikan Global Innovation Research Organization, Phone +81 75 466 3347, E-mail:
sunfmjia@fc.ritsumei.ac.jp
Overview
Nuclear power played an important role in the world's electricity generation before Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear
power plant accident. However, it is a challenge for Japan to achieve the previous CO 2 emission reduction
targets considering the unclear nuclear future, and China and Korea also face similar problems for the nuclear
energy use. In view of this, this study assesses several nuclear limited and CO 2 emission reduction scenarios for
Japan, China and Korea based on the G-CEEP model. The primary energy consumption, CO 2 emission
reductions by different options, marginal abatement cost and GDP loss for each scenario are presented.
According to the results and discussion, it is found that there are three key options to reduce dependence on
nuclear power for Japan, as well as to reduce CO2 emissions by 2030: improving energy use efficiency,
increasing renewable energy and introduction of CCS, among which the energy saving contributes the biggest
share in total CO2 emission reductions, regardless of different nuclear use levels and different CO 2 emission
reduction levels. It is relative difficult for Japan to achieve B scenario with zero nuclear and 16% CO2 emission
reduction, and in this case, the marginal abatement cost will reach 240 USD/tC and it will cause up to -1.73%
GDP losses from the reference scenario. Energy savings also reduce most of the CO2 emissions for China and
Korea, but the renewable energy shows inconspicuous changes between CO2 emission reduction target and
nuclear limited scenarios in 2020 for China and Korea due to limited development of nuclear within 10 years.
For Korea, the CO2 emission reduction target in 2020 seems ambitious and it will cause significant marginal
abatement costs and GDP losses in both CO2 emission reduction target and nuclear limited scenarios. It is hasty
to say yes or no to the nuclear power before it gets a more comprehensive assessment.
The paper is organized as follows. After the introduction, the second section explores G-CEEP model framework
and its modeling methodologies, and states the population and GDP assumptions used in the model. The third
section discusses several scenarios including reference scenarios and additional scenarios with limited utilization
of nuclear power. Finally, this study concludes with energy policy implications and possible climate change
mitigation roadmaps for Japan, China and Korea, respectively.
Methods
Large scale non-linear planning programing, two-level CES production function, technological learning.
Results
First, reference scenarios and additional scenarios with limited use of nuclear power are presented for Japan,
China and Korea, respectively. The primary energy consumptions are given to evaluate the significance of
different renewable energy.
Second, this study identifies the contributions of different abatement options, such as energy saving, switching
among fossil fuels, CCS, renewable energy.
Third, we analyze the economic impacts caused by limited nuclear use and CO2 emission reduction in terms of
marginal abatement cost and GDP loss.
Conclusions
In brief, energy savings contribute most of the CO2 emissions reductions no matter the nuclear power is limited
or not. Japan is already one of the most energy-efficient countries in the world, but it also needs to make greater
efforts in improving energy use efficiency considering the direct impact of Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power
plant accident. China and Korea also need to give priority to improving energy use efficiency for the same
reason. To reduce dependence on nuclear power, the renewable energy and CCS also play important roles in
Japan’s energy future. However, CCS is now still under experimental period and its possible commercial
application scale goes beyond this study and thus it is not considered in the CO2 emissions reduction scenarios in
2020 of China and Korea. It is not suggested to remove all the nuclear power in near future for Japan due to the
relative large impact on Japan’s economy while the limted use of nuclear has limited impact on the CO 2
emission reduction targets of China and Korea in 2020. Certainly, there are still some other considerable
problems in the use of nuclear energy such as energy security, geographical conditions and risk prevention. It is
hasty to say yes or no to the nuclear power, at least for now, until it gets a more comprehensive assessment.
References
Su, X., Ren, H., Zhou, W., Mu, H., Nakagami, K., 2010. Study on future scenarios of low-carbon society in East
Asia area, Part 1: Development of glocal century energy and environment planning model and case study. Policy
Science 17 (2), 85 - 96, in Japanese.
Su, X., Zhou, W., Nakagami, K., Ren, H., Mu, H., 2012. Capital stock-labor-energy substitution and production
effciency study for China. Energy Economics 34 (4), 1208 - 1213.
Su, X., Zhou, W., Ren, H., Nakagami, K., 2012. Co-benefit analysis of carbon emission reduction measures for
China, Japan and Korea. Policy Science 19 (2), 99 - 112.