IEEJ e-NEWSLETTER
No.3(Based on Japanese No. 105)

Published: June 15, 2012
The Institute of Energy Economics, JapanIEEJ e-Newsletter Editor: Yukari Yamashita, Director
IEEJ Newsletter Editor: Ken Koyama, Managing Director
Inui Bldg., Kachidoki, 13-1 Kachidoki 1-chome, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0054
Tel: +81-3-5547-0211 Fax: +81-3-5547-0223

Contents
Summary【Energy Policy in Japan】
1. Discussions at the Fundamental Issues Subcommitteeof the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy
2. Reform of the electric power system
3. Verification of supply and demand outlook for this summer【Our View on Global Situations】
4. Discord between Japan and the U.S./Europe concerning
the EV quick charger standard
5. Background and influence of EU ETS Reform
6. China Watching: Policy trends in the automobile industry
7. ME Watching: Busy political calendar in May 2012
8. Russia Watching: Inauguration of the new Putin administrationand spotlight on Far East development

Summary
1. Discussions at the Fundamental Issues Subcommitteeof the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy
Energy mix options were discussed and it was decided to present four options to theEnergy and Environment Council. These options include “promptly establish zero
nuclear power,” “reduce nuclear dependency and re-examine after 2030,” “maintainsome nuclear power plants,” and “make customers choose in the market (without
setting a numerical goal for 2030). A reference scenario (setting nuclear dependency at35%) will also be presented.
2. Reform of the electric power system
The Fifth Expert Committee on Electric Power System Reforms discussed complete
liberalization and the options for introducing wide-area transmission and neutrality. It
was agreed to promote complete liberalization after introducing certain transitional
measures, for which the two options of functional separation (ISO) and legal separation
were discussed.
3. Verification of supply and demand outlook for this summer
The Supply-Demand Verification Committee independently verified the supply/demandassessment made by electric utilities, and concluded that if no nuclear power plantrestarts, Japan may face electricity shortages, especially in west Japan. It is necessary
to encourage effective power saving based on the saving rates proposed by the Energy
and Environment Council.
4. Discord between Japan and the U.S./Europe concerning
the EV quick charger standard
Eight U.S. and European automobile manufacturers announced their own EV quick
charger standard to restrain Japan’s lead in this field. Although there are growing
concerns about Japan’s leadership in the international standard, a calm response isneeded as the impact on the EV market seems to be limited.
5. Background and influence of EU ETS reform
EU ETS reform has been examined, including the introduction of regulations to reduce
CO2 emissions on aircraft arriving and departing in the EU area and a market
intervention system to maintain the carbon price in light of the slumping market price.
Although this is the EU’s own program, the carbon market players are closely watchingits impact on the future international carbon market.
6. China watching: Policy trends in the automobile industry
The central government decided the “12th Five-Year Plan for the Scientific andTechnological Development of Electrically-Driven Cars” and the “Energy-Saving and
New-Energy Automobile Industry Development Plan (2012–2020)” in succession. Thus,
China has clearly announced its strategy of accelerating technological and industrial
development of electrically-driven cars, especially EVs, in a bid to evolve from a mere
automotive giant to a world leader.
7. ME Watching: Busy political calendar in May 2012
The political calendar in the Middle East was packed in May 2012, including nuclear talks
on Iran, the GCC consultation summit, the presidential election in Egypt, theestablishment of a grand coalition in Israel, and an official tour of the Middle East by
Japan’s Minister for Foreign Affairs Koichiro Gemba. June will remain busy, as none ofthese issues has been even remotely settled.
8. Russia Watching: Inauguration of the new Putin administrationand spotlight on Far East development
Following the inauguration ceremony of President Putin, members of the new cabinet
and the executive office of the President were announced. Mr. Victor Ishaev, former
governor of the Khabarovsk region, who is familiar with the local economy of the Far
East and who has close ties with northeast Asian countries, was appointed as Minister for
Far East Development, a new post.

1.

Discussions at the Fundamental Issues Subcommitteeof the Advisory Committee for Natural Resources and Energy
Shigeru Suehiro, Manager, Senior Economist
Energy Demand Supply and Forecast Analysis Group
Energy Data and Modelling Center

The 20th meeting (April 26) to the 25th meeting (May 28) of the Fundamental Issues Subcommittee were
held to discuss the revision of the Basic Energy Plan. The discussions focused on the energy mix options
proposed at the 18th meeting, and the draft interim report on the options, which is to be proposed to theEnergy and Environment Council, was approved at the 25th meeting.
The results of economic analyses carried out by five research institutes were presented at the 21st
meeting, showing the estimated impacts of options with the nuclear share ranging from zero to 35% on
GDP, electricity prices, etc. The estimates revealed that the zero nuclear option would cause GDP to shrink
by 1.0–5.0% compared to the reference standard. However, there were comments that the basis of theestimation was not uniform and that the results seemed unreasonable, so it was decided to review andpresent the characteristics and assumptions of the model again.
Concerning discussions on the options, another option of maintaining the nuclear share at 15% in thecase of decommissioning plants older than 40 years old was added to the options proposed at the 18th
meeting. As the discussions proceeded, the number of options was reduced based on opinions such as“easy-to-understand explanations for citizens are necessary,” “a message that appeals to the public isessential” and “there are too many options”. Eventually, the option of 35% nuclear power was set aside as areference based on the chairman’s decision due to conflicting opinions such as “(the option of 35% nuclear
power) should be removed because it opposes the policy of abandoning nuclear power generation” and“(the option) should be maintained to help curb global warming and also for energy security, and it isnecessary to inform the Japanese people on the economic impact assessment”.
The following draft options are to be proposed to the Energy and Environment Council:
Option 1: Abandon nuclear power completely as soon as possible (0% nuclear power, 35% renewableenergy by 2030)
Option 2: Reduce the nuclear share and re-examine the period beyond 2030 (15% nuclear power, 30%
renewable energy)
Option 3: Keep some nuclear power (20–25% nuclear power, 25–30% renewable energy)
Option 4: Let customers decide the optimal energy mix in the market (without citing numbers for 2030)
Reference: Maintain the nuclear power installed capacity at the current level (35% nuclear power, 25%
renewable energy)
The views of Commissioner Masakazu Toyoda, Chairman and CEO of IEEJ, can be summarized asfollows: There is no perfect energy. Not only nuclear power but also energy conservation, renewable energy
and thermal power generation have both advantages and disadvantages. Also, in terms of methodology, it is
not a question of deciding whether distributed or centralized power generation systems are better; rather, awell-balanced approach is required.
The subcommittee is scheduled to discuss the 2020 mid-term target for global warming prevention
measures.

1

2.

Reform of the electric power system
Junichi Ogasawara, Senior Economist, Manager
Electric Power Group, Electric Power & Coal Unit

At the Fourth Expert Committee on Electric Power System Reforms held on April 25, the promotion ofcompetition and the introduction of a wider-area system were discussed. Major topics included 1)
elimination of the barrier preventing power supply beyond supply territories and promotion of competition
through the wholesale electricity market, 2) the mechanism to promote effective utilization of supply powerover a wider area, and 3) the rules and mechanism to support neutrality in the transmission/distributionsector and fair competition among power sources. As the presentation by RTE, a French transmission
company, and Q&A on the presentation took longer than expected, few opinions were expressed at themeeting. Some of the key points in the discussion are outlined below.
The imbalance charge, which was established in order to guarantee the balance between generation andconsumption at all times and is to be paid when demand exceeds generation, is a barrier to new suppliers
entering the industry. It was generally agreed that it is important to make the imbalance charge transparent
by using the real-time market, which had been proposed by the power generation industry, but ideas for themechanism of the real-time market differed among members. Nothing was decided on other topics due tolack of time for discussion.
Next, the Fifth Expert Committee on Electric Power System Reforms was held on May 18, at which
complete liberalization and measures to protect customers, and options for introducing a wider area andneutrality in the transmission sector were discussed. As few members expressed opposition or concerns
about complete liberalization regarding protection of customers, in principle it was agreed to introduce
complete liberalization. It was decided to abolish the regulation on charges after providing a certaintransition period, and to separately discuss protection measures such as a final guarantee of service. The
writer, as a member of the committee, noted that a careful, detailed design is required because various
challenges may arise during the transition to complete liberalization.
Two options were proposed by the secretariat on the introduction of a wider-area system and neutrality ofthe transmission sector. These options are: 1) to utilize ISOs, in which branch offices are established ineach area by functionally separating the transmission sector assuming that a nationwide organization is set
up, and 2) to establish a legally separated transmission/distribution organization by taking measures toassure independence of personnel affairs, budget, etc. Although these options were discussed without
excluding the possibility of ownership separation, an agreement was not reached because opinions differed
on which option is better. The writer suggested that it is necessary to further discuss and verify thefeasibility and rationality of both options.
The real-time market system, which was proposed by the Federation of Electric Power Companies and inwhich a trade is made by 1 hour before the actual supply and demand, was also discussed. However, thediscussion made little progress as the committee members had differing views on the specific mechanismof the real-time market.

2

3.

Verification of supply and demand outlook for this summer
Junichi Ogasawara, Senior Economist, Manager
Electric Power Group, Electric Power & Coal Unit

The Supply-Demand Verification Committee established in the National Policy Unit held six meetingsfrom April 23 to May 12, and objectively verified the validity of the supply/demand assessment for thissummer presented by the electric utilities. Concerning the future electricity supply/demand assessment
approach, the basic international standard is to compare the expected supply capacity with the assumed
demand and to confirm that the reserve margin is sufficient. As this approach was also taken for the
supply/demand assessment for this summer, the approach is comparable to the international standard.
The Supply-Demand Verification Committee identified the necessary reserve margin as 7% in advance.
According to the Committee, 3% of the 7% is a reserve for the increase of demand associated with daily
temperature variations, while 4% to 5% is required to respond to business fluctuations and unplanned
outages. On the supply side, the possibility of additional supply capacity was examined, including power
plants currently shut down, pumped-storage power generation, increase in thermal power generation, power
decline under high temperature, and more active use of in-house power generation. It was concluded thatthe current assessment results are generally adequate.
On the demand side, the adequacy of assuming the case of excessive heat, the amount of energy
conservation already established in society, and supply/demand adjustment contracts were verified. The
assumption of the case of excessive heat was considered appropriate because the verification examines
whether the supply/demand balance can be kept within the assumed risk. Concerning the amount of energy
conservation already established in society, the calculation method was generally approved althoughopinions varied. The verification took into account power companies’ efforts to avoid planned power
outages by interchanging electricity; thus, it was concluded that if no nuclear power plants are restarted,
there is a risk of electricity shortages, especially in west Japan.
The results of the recent examination are analyzed as follows. Firstly, concerning the reserve margin of
7% used as the assessment standard, the risk is underestimated due to: 1) many of the currently operating
thermal power plants are old, and 2) the assessment is based on the average accident rate even though many
thermal plants have been operating for a long time without sufficient maintenance. The amount of energy
conservation already established in society was obtained by calculating the difference between the actual
records of maximum electricity demand in 2011 and 2010 and subtracting the effects of businessfluctuations and temperature variations, and multiplying by the rate of establishment judged fromquestionnaires, etc. The risk of higher demand may also be underestimated because the calculation method
itself has not been thoroughly established, and thus there is a potential risk caused by the estimation of theamount of energy conservation.
In response to the conclusions of the Supply-Demand Verification Committee, the energy conservation
target for this summer was set by the Energy and Environment Council on May 18. This target is based on
the maximum electricity demand in 2010, which is different from the value calculated by the Committee,
so in effect, a cap level for the demand in each area is set as the target. Whether or not effective powersaving measures can be taken quickly before the summer starts will be the key.

3

4.

Discord between Japan and the U.S./Europe
concerning the EV quick charger standard
Hisashi Hoshi, Board Member, Director
New and Renewable Energy & International Cooperation Unit

Heated arguments are taking place over the quick charging method of EV (electric vehicles). The EV
quick charger is an example of the international standardization of smart grid related technology that Japan
has been working toward. In March 2010, the CHAdeMO Association was founded by the firms including
Tokyo Electric Power Company and four Japanese automobile manufacturers, aiming to standardize thecharging method and to increase the installation of quick chargers. CHAdeMO type quick chargers havebeen successfully introduced in line with the development of EVs by Nissan and Mitsubishi. A total of
1,150 units have been installed in Japan and 240 units overseas.
However, eight U.S. and European automobile manufacturers including GM of the U.S. and Volkswagenof Germany recently announced the “Combo” chargers of a different standard. These Combo chargers use
the same connector for normal charging at houses and quick charging, as the name suggests, while the
CHAdeMO chargers use different connectors. The reason why the U.S./European group is promoting theCombo system, which is still at the planning stage, is merely to hinder the leading Japanese group.
There is a concern over this move as another anti-Japan alliance, rather like the so-called “Galapagos
Syndrome”. This may be a reasonable reaction considering Japan’s repeated difficult experiences withinternational standardization issues. Since those who control the standardization will win the market, it isnatural to seek to expand alliances such as the CHAdeMO Association. However, it is important to ensurethat excessive countermeasures do not obstruct successful development of EV charging technology and themarket.
Differences in charging methods, while not trivial, are merely differences in some of the specifications of
EV. According to some estimates, the EV market will expand from approximately 70,000 cars now to 14
million by 2030. With this size of market, two types of EV charging standard can coexist. Actually,
Volkswagen of Germany, one of eight companies to announce the adoption of the “Combo type”, alsodeclared that it will adopt the CHAdeMO type when entering the Japanese EV market, which is scheduled
to be in mid 2013.
If automakers do not want to manufacture different types of EVs for different charging methods, anotheroption is to provide both CHAdeMO and Combo type connectors on the quick chargers, just as gasoline
stations sell diesel, regular and high-octane gasoline. Moreover, as battery efficiency and charging speed
still need to be improved, a new generation of charging specifications beyond CHAdeMO and Combo may
be required.
There is still time to seek the optimal method and to converge efforts by accepting the co-existence ofboth standards for the time being while various options remain. We should not commit the stupidity ofhindering the spread of EVs by waging war over the standards of the charging infrastructure, as Mr. Carlos
Ghosn, President and CEO of Nissan Motor Co., worries.

4

5.

Background and influence of EUETS reform
Hiroki Kudo, Assistant to Managing Director
Global Environment and Sustainable Development Unit

Concerning the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) launched in 2005, various reforms have been
discussed and decided for the start of Phase III in 2013 and it is attracting growing international attention
because of its impact.
For example, the regulation on emissions reduction was expanded in January of this year to cover all
aircraft departing from and arriving at airports in the EU area. However, some national governments,
including the U.S. and China, which have a strong stake in the departure and arrival of aircraft in the EU
area, are considering imposing economic sanctions on the EU on the grounds of unilateral introduction ofpolitical measures. Furthermore, the EU decided to implement its own measures to restrict the usage ofcredits by limiting the emission reduction credits of greenhouse gases that can be used for accomplishing
the EU ETS targets to those derived from projects carried out in Least Developed Countries (LDC) from2013.
The key reform is the “Set-Aside” system. This system is a mechanism to allow EU ETS member
countries to have authority to control the market trading price at a certain level by reserving a certain
amount of EU Allowance (EUA) traded by the ETS and controlling the amount of supply. The inherent aimof the ETS is to achieve an absolute target reduction of greenhouse gases in the most economically efficientmanner by trading. In contrast, the Set-Aside system is similar to the Feed-in Tariff (FIT) system of
renewable energy in that it allows national governments to adjust market prices to maintain the target
carbon price and thereby encourage business operators to make investments.
Such measures have been introduced as the carbon market has slumped along with the economy
following the Lehman shock and the financial crisis in Europe, which have decreased the demand for EUA
and emission reduction credits, and the market trading price remains low. There is also concern about the
influence on future investment in global warming countermeasures. Therefore, political lobbying over the
introduction of the Set-Aside system has continued in order to revitalize the market regardless of opposition
based on the institutional problem of giving member countries the authority to interfere with the market andthe fear of stricter emissions targets being introduced.
As the EU ETS accounts for more than 75% of the total international carbon trading
market, its reform will affect the future coordination of the international market, the systemdesign by countries which are considering introducing the emissions trading system, andconsequently, the utilization of credits, etc. in the new framework of the United Nations
beyond 2020. Therefore, the market players are watching the actions of EU ETS to predict the
future direction of the international carbon market.

56.

China Watching: Policy trends in the automobile industry
Li Zhidong, Visiting Researcher
Professor at Nagaoka University of Technology

China, which saw both its annual car sales and production exceed 18 million units and has grown tobecome the world’s largest auto market, is now attracting worldwide attention. On March 27, the Ministryof Science and Technology announced the “12th Five-Year Plan for the Scientific and Technological
Development of Electrically-Driven Cars”, and the State Council executive meeting presided over by
Premier Wen Jiabao approved on April 18 the “Development Plan for Energy Saving and New Energy
Automobile Industry (2012–2020)” compiled by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology.
Thus, China has clearly revealed its strategy to evolve from a mere automotive giant to a world leader by
accelerating technological and industrial development of electrically-driven cars, especially EVs.
The technological program defined the development of electrically-driven cars consisting of EVs andFuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs) as key to improving the international competitiveness of China’s automobile
industry and securing a stable energy supply and reduction of carbon emissions. It was also announced thatthe industrialization of hybrid vehicles (HVs) is to be achieved by the end of 2015, and that a large-scalemodel project to commercialize electrically-driven cars, mainly small-size EVs, is to be carried out. In
addition, large-scale industrialization of electrically-driven cars is to be promoted between 2016 and 2020,and commercialization of next-generation power batteries and fuel cells is to be started. Numerical targets
were also set, including increasing the energy density of power batteries for purely EV passenger cars to atleast 120 Wh/kg while reducing the cost to 1500 yuan/kWh or less. On the other hand, the industrial
program considers the structural transition to electrically-driven cars as the major development strategy of
the automobile industry, and intends to actively promote the popularization of HVs as well as theindustrialization of EVs. The targets include cumulative sales and production of EVs of 500,000 units by
2015, rising to 5 million units or more by 2020, while EV production capacity is to be increased to 2
million units by 2020.
The national government launched an experimental project to promote the use of electrically-driven cars
by providing subsidies to corporate organizations, in 13 cities including Beijing, starting from January 2009.
The number of cities covered by this project was increased to 20 from May 2010, while the project started
to include general users in five cities including Shenzhen. In spite of these efforts, cumulative sales, mainlyof EVs, remained at just over 8,000 units by 2011. To accomplish the target for 2015, it will be necessary to
manufacture and sell 123,000 units per year on average, and at least 490,000 units in 4 years from now,which will not be easy. The experimental project will continue with the introduction of subsidies as asupport measure, and the Ministry of Finance has decided to waive taxes on electrically-driven cars on
March 6. The prompt introduction of a carbon tax may also be effective.
The technological project has also set the targets of constructing 2,000 charging stations and providing
400,000 quick chargers mainly in the experimental area by 2015. To achieve these, it is necessary to unify
the charging method to attract investment from electricity network operators and the oil industry. Althoughorganizations such as the Standardization Administration of China decided four aspects of the national
standards for the EV charging system at the end of 2011 and technical conditions for EV passenger cars inthis May, a standard for the charging method has yet to be established. A standard needs to be set soon to
improve the charging infrastructure and to achieve international standardization based on experience. In
terms of strategic mutual benefits, cooperation between Japan and China should be actively promoted.

6

7.

ME Watching: Busy political calendar in May 2012
Koichiro Tanaka, Board Member
Director of JIME Center

Even though the nuclear talks held in Baghdad concerning Iran lasted far longer than scheduled,substantial agreement was not reached, and it was merely agreed to hold the next meeting in Moscow.
There is a great gap between the position of P5+1 which considers Iran’s compliance with the UN Security
Council resolutions as the starting point, and Iran which insists on its right to enrich uranium and considers
that the resolutions are illegal. Criticism of Iran’s enrichment activities following the detection of uranium
enriched up to 27% in the Fordow facility has not helped bridge the difference either. About a month before
the West’s sanctions against Iran take full effect, there is a common interest in continuing discussions
between Iran which wants to avoid such restrictions and the EU which would like to delay imposing
sanctions due to concern about the impact on the Euro zone. However, the present situation dominated byprinciples is unlikely to change any time soon.
Although the GCC Arabian Union, under which the substantial merger proposed by Saudi Arabia to
Bahrain would be expanded to all of the GCC area, was discussed at the GCC advisory summit, it was
decided to continue thorough discussions. The approach seems to help Bahrain and Oman, which inevitablymust seek economic assistance from the wealthy oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia since theArab Spring. However, more reasonable purpose may be to counter the threat of Iran considering theposition of Bahrain which is struggling to deal with the uprising by Shiite residents, and that of the UAE
which is facing off against Iran over the territorial issue of three islands including Abu Musa Island.
In Egypt, the long-awaited presidential election was held on May 23 and 24, 1 year and 4 months after
the “revolution” last year. However, votes were split among the candidates, and so those who survived to
the final vote were neither the former Foreign Minister Mr. Moussa nor any liberal democratic candidate,but Dr. Morsi, the leader of the Freedom and Justice Party, supported by the Muslim Brotherhood and Mr.
Shafiq, the last prime minister of the Mubarak administration. Copts and seculars are wary of Dr. Morsi due
to his emphasis on Islam, while the younger generation dislikes Mr. Shafiq who has a military backgroundand is tainted by association with the former administration. Thus, the run-off election on June 16 and 17
will not strengthen unity among the Egyptian people but actually deepen the rift.
Meanwhile, Israel looks prepared to deal with major issues, including the peace process, based on a
grand coalition that was created by including the largest opposition party, Kadima. The tug of war between
those led by defense personnel and intelligence community who are both objecting to attack Iran and Prime
Minister Netanyahu who has been advocating war is attracting worldwide attention. Japanese Foreign
Minister Mr. Gemba’s recent visit to Israel carried two equally important messages: the effect of economic
sanctions against Iran which is pressing ahead with its nuclear development, and a caution to Israel against
its hasty military intent.

7

8.

Russia Watching: Inauguration of the new Putin administrationand spotlight on Far East development
Shoichi Itoh, Senior Researcher
International Strategy Analysis Group, Strategy Research Unit

The presidential inauguration ceremony of Vladimir Putin was held on May 7. The new president, with asix-year term of office, approved the list of new cabinet members proposed by the new prime minister
Dmitrii Medvedev on May 21, and signed the Presidential Decree appointing members of the Executive
Office of the President on May 22. Seven out of 18 members of the Executive Office of the President weremoved sideways from the cabinet led by the former Prime Minister Putin. In the new cabinet, First Deputy
Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov and four out of six deputy prime ministers among the new appointees and six
ministers including the foreign minister and the finance minister remain in office from the former cabinet,
reflecting Putin’s strong influence.
The new cabinet post attracting much attention is the Minister for Far East Development, which is
concurrently held by Mr. Victor Ishaev, the Plenipotentiary Representative of President in the Far Eastern
Federal District. This post was created independently from the Ministry of Regional Development, which isin charge of social and economic affairs in other regions. Minister Ishaev served as Governor of the
Khabarovsk region from 1991, when the former USSR collapsed, to April 2009 when he was appointed as
the Plenipotentiary Representative of the district. Mr. Ishaev is known to be critical of the central
government for its inadequate measures for the Far East.
President Putin ordered the new cabinet to draw up a draft proposal to accelerate development of the Far
East by July 1, before the opening of the APEC conference in Vladivostok in September of this year in the“Presidential Decree on the Long-Term State Economic Policy” which he signed on the day of his
inauguration ceremony. Although the history of comprehensive social and economic development programsin the Far East dates back to the era of the Soviet Union, which ran a planned economy, the program itself
has been revised three times already in the 21st century. However, the process of revising half-hearted
implementation in every next long-term plan has continued.
In Russia, there are two opposing views over how best to develop the Far Eastern economy. One groupinsists that an active national industrial policy is essential while the other focuses more on market economy
principles. President Putin and Minister Ishaev belong to the former, and so intervention by the federal
government in the economic development of the Far East district is likely to increase.
Although the Far Eastern district accounts for 36% of the total area of Russia, it has just 4% of the
population. Both the gross regional product and the foreign capital participation ratio account for no morethan 5% of the whole of Russia. Active efforts to attract foreign capital and large-scale eastward movementof domestic capital are essential for full-scale economic development. Minister Ishaev, who has long hadstrong ties with Japan, China and Korea, is surely well aware of the reasons why foreign capital fromsurrounding countries has not increased as expected, but can he come up with a new policy to improve theinvestment environment? We should closely follow his actions along with the outcome of the draft proposal
to establish a “State Corporation for East Siberia and Far East Development” (tentative title) directly under
the Executive Office of the President and the draft “Bill for East Siberia and Far East Development”.

8More information on IEEJ can be found by clicking below.
IEEJ Calendar of Events
Energy Indicators of JapanTop of IEEJ Homepage
Back Numbers of IEEJ e-Newsletter9