Will community-based renewable energy projects
increase in Japan?

5th October 2015
Noriaki Yamashita

Free University of Berlin
Environmental Policy Research Center (FFU)

Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies

ISEP -Mission & Domain�The Non-Profit organization has promoted realization of sustainableenergy policy in Japan including FIT proposal since 2000.
Director： Tetsunari Iida�

Sustainableenergyrenewableenergy•Strategy after 3.11
•Community Financesocietyenergy market
reformclimatepolicy•Local & National Policy•International Negotiation•Japan Renewable Energy Platform•Sustainable Energy Finance•Social Acceptance2Local Project “Community Power（CP）” Projects

Community Wind, PV, Hydro•Citizen’s investment•Collaboration with NPOs and local enterprises in Hokkaido,
Iida-city, Odawara, and so on.

3Policy Research4Capacity Building
More than 100 interns (including 4 German interns) at ISEP andSeminar on community power projects at Kyoto Uni.

5

1

Energy shift after 3.11 in Japan

2

Increasing CP projects

3

Visit to the site of Energiewende

6Renewable Energy Capacity

7Renewable Energy Capacity

8

RE Capacity of top 7 Countries in 2014
[GW]
180"
160"
140"

OthersGeothermal  BiomassWind Solar 

120"
100"
80"
60"
40"
20"
0"




ChinaU.S.

Germany



Italy

SpainJapanIndia
9Renewable Energy after FIT-law (until May 2015)
Large scale PV is penetrated because of high tariff and shortperiod of construction.
(10MW) kW$7,858$

8,000$
7,000$
6,000$
5,000$



4,000$




InstalledPlanned

3,000$
1,684$

2,000$
1,000$

325$ 392$

33$

0$ 233$

10$ 66$

0$

7$
29$

233$

 



PV<10kW PV>10kW

Wind

Small Hydro Geothermal Biomass

10Electricity Share in 2030 in Long-term Energy Plan
Modest target for RE and less interest for heat and EE.
FY 2013966TWhRE

10%

Nuclear 0%

FY 2030
1,065TWh

2224%
2022%

Fossil Fuel

90%

5 %

Long-term Energy Plan (July 2015)11

Economical Effects of FIT in Japan（FY 2014）
Large Impact on investment and employment.
RE Ratio 6%(excl. large hydro)

Tariffs for
RE electricity

employment 220,000(IRENA)

Home
900B JPY

PowerProducers�
Investment,Loan�

FinancialInstitution�

0.75yen/kWh
Electric Price(Surcharge)�

Capacity
Investment�

RE Electricity
30TWh

Avoidable
Cost:248B JPY

ElectricUtilities

652B JPY

Electricity
867TWhPowerFacility�

(Regulated)�

Company(Office,Industries,Etc.)�
Electricity
Consumer�Investment 4,000B JPY(Total investment for clean energyin Japan) estimated by UNEP
Source'Data:'METI,'Es2ma2on'by'ISEP'

12

Sustainable Zone (FY2014)14 prefectures supply 10% of energy demand and 57 municipalities
can supply 100% energy demand(excluding industry demand).

Estimated by ISEP and Kurasaka Lab. Chiba Univ.�
Source: Sustainable Zone Study Group http://www.sustainable-zone.org

13

Most RE Projects are not owned by Local Entities
Until the end of 2013, most RE projects are not owned by localcitizens and companies.

OthersCompanies in
the municipalityCompanies inTokyo or Osaka
metropolitan area

 
Companies in
the prefecture'14

Policy Proposal for Community Power ProjectNational

1. Long-term national target and concept
2. Appropriate FIT revision and priority access with gridplanning
3. Consistency with existing laws (water right, hot spring
law, fishery rights etc)
4. Zoning map, consensus building and capacity building

Local

5. Mutual influence over community power projects andlocal policy and programs

15

1

Energy shift after 3.11 in Japan

2

Increasing CP projects

3

Visit to the site of Energiewende

16

Iida-city promoted Local Projects since 2004
Local NPO and ISEP cooperated citizens invested PV projects
with the help of Iida-city and MoE.

17

Community Power in Japan
Brief History of Community Power in Japan
1st Community
Biomass & Eﬃciency

1st Community
PV & Eﬃciency

1st Community Wind

1st Community
HydroCommunity Power in Japan
Community Power Definition1. Local stakeholders own the majority or all of a project
2. Voting control rests with the community-basedorganization
3. The majority of social and economic benefits are
distributed locally* A project can be defined as “Community Power”, if at least two of the three criteria
are fulfilled
World Wind Energy Association Community Power Working Group:
WWEA highlights Community Power 23 May 2011 19

New Local Targets and Policies�
Some prefectures aim 100% RE regions or RE obligation.

Nagano�

Fukushima�•30% RE in 2050 (PES)•Hydro, PV•100% RE region in 2040 (PES)•Hydro, Wind, PV, biomass

Kyoto�

Tokyo�•RE obligation since 2012
•RE obligation (next year?)•large buildings (>2,000 sqm)•>3 kW PV or SHW, etc
20

Emerging Community Power Initiatives
25 model area sponsored by MoE

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

International Community Power Conference 2014
in Fukushima

28

29

30

Japan Community Power Association31

Primary Industry and Renewable Energy�
MoFA supports Renewable Energy as primary industry promotion.

Hokkaido�
Fukushima�

Chiba�
Tokushima�

Gifu�

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

More than 20 Renewable Energy OrdinanceSome municipalities include CP concept in their ordinance.		

43

Multiple actors of CP projects
Local governments should consider how to support thelocal actors by their authority.
仲間家族

地元企業
専門家

イベント参加者

地元銀行

市民出資参加者
応援団等「主役は市民、行政の役割は場づくり＆枠組みづくり」

44

3 important factor for Local CP concept
Vision of the local future is most important but most energy
plan by municipalities lack it.
地域の未来像・総合計画や環境基本計画
・自然エネルギー条例や各種ビジョンなど
・具体的なコンセプトや目標設定

政策パッケージ

推進体制づくり45

・地域の実状に合わせた政策の組み合わせ
・目的ごとに計画・規制・経済・情報的手法

・幅広いステークホルダーの巻き込みとネットワーキング1Energy shift after 3.11 in Japan
Increasing CP projects

3Visit to the site of Energiewende46• Kernkraft Brokdorf• Buergermeisterin• Kernkraft Geesthacht• Buergermeister• Greenpeace Energy• Stromnetz Hamburg• Berlin Energie• Buerger Energie Berlin• Agentuer fuer
Erneurbare Energie

47Lessons from research trip in Germany�
1. Energy democracy of distribution network and retail business inBerlin and Hamburg• Who owns the network and who makes decision, who gets benefit?
• Agenda setting and participation by citizen, less political leadership in Berlin.
• Smart city with more RE and EE needs integration of Infrastructure (and IT).
• Quick decision making is an important advantage of recommunalization.
• Retail business gives various options for urban inhabitants.

48

Lessons from research trip in Germany�
2. Contrast of nuclear phase-out between Brokdorf and Geesthacht• Minor impact on Geesthacht with 30 thousand population, some industry, andeasy access to Hamburg.
• Conflicts between national political decision and business strategy.

3. Energy shift directly leads to job shift•Taking over Vattenfall staffs for distribution network in Berlin and Hamburg.

•How to provide new job in Brokdorf.

•Priority access of RE means less sales of nuclear electricity.

49

Summary50

Will community-based renewable energy projects
increase in Japan? �
1. Energy shift after 3.11 in Japan• FIT have created major economical and social impacts but only for electricity.
• More policy supports for community power projects are needed.

2. Increasing CP projects• Successful CP projects sponsored by MoE are taking further steps.
• MAFF supports renewable energy as primary industry promotion.
• Some local governments strongly promote RE based on CP concept.

3. Visit to the site of Energiewende• Energy democracy of distribution network and retail business• Contrast of nuclear phase-out between Brokdorf and Geesthacht• Energy shift directly leads to job shift51Thank you for your attention

Noriaki Yamashita

nori0222@zedat.fu-berlin.deFree University of Berlin
Environmental Policy Research Institute(FFU)

yamashita_noriaki@isep.or.jp

Institution for
Sustainable Energy Policies