JCOAL, Energy Security with Decarbonization Symposium 2024
September 3rd, 2024

The Status and Role of CCS in Japan
Keigo AkimotoGroup Leader, Systems Analysis Group
Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE)(Project Professor, Tokyo Institute of Technology)

1. Overview of Technological Measures
for Carbon Neutrality

Image of Primary Energy
for Carbon Neutrality (Net Zero Emissions)
CCU: CO2 Capture and Utilization
CCS: CO2 Capture and Storage
BECCS: Bioenergy with CO2 Capture and Storage
DACCS: Direct Air CO2 Capture and Storage

Energy saving or Reductionin embodied energy of goods/services(incl. Society 5.0)

【Use of overseas resources】
Nuclear

Nuclear
Domestic renewables

DecarbonizedenergyRenewable energy

3

Measures of grid to expand
renewables (incl. storage battery)Use of renewables surplus
for hydrogen

Use of overseas renewables (green Sys. fuels prone to be generated fromfossil fuels if the constraint on CO2 ishydrogen) (import of hydrogen,loose in the producing countries, whilefrom BECCS or DAC (with increased
ammonia, and syn. fuels (CCU))
cost) if the constraint is strict.

✓ Energy savings are important options
even for the net zero emissions.
✓ For the net zero, large expansions ofrenewable energies are crucial. On
the other hand, nuclear power, CCS,
and NETs are also important options.
✓ It is not so simple to achieve net zero
whose measure is renewables +electrification.

Use of overseas CO2 reservoir (pre-combustion CO2
capture) (import of blue hydrogen (incl. ammonia))

Fossil fuels + CCS

Remainingfossil fuels

Fossil fuels w/CCS
Fossil fuels
w/o CCS

Domestic CO2 storage

BECCS, DACCS
Forestation, mineralization (concrete CCU)

Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR)

Use of overseas CO2
reservoir (postcombustion)【Use of overseas
resources】

2. Economic Potentials of CCS
toward Net-Zero Emissions in Japan
RITE Transition Roadmap to Carbon Neutrality: 2023 Edition
https://www.rite.or.jp/system/en/latestanalysis/2024/03/transition_roadmap_to_carbon_neutrality_2023_edition.html

Energy Assessment Model: DNE21+ (Dynamic New Earth 21+)5



Systemic cost evaluation on energy and CO2 reduction technologies is possible.
Linear programming model (minimizing world energy system cost; with 10mil. decision variables and 10mil. constrained
conditions)
Evaluation time period: 2000-2100
Representative time points: 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020, 2025, 2030, 2040, 2050, 2070 and 2100
World divided into 54 regions
Large area countries, e.g., US and China, are further disaggregated, totaling 77 world regions.
Interregional trade: coal, crude oil/oil products, natural gas/syn. methane, electricity, ethanol, hydrogen, CO2 (provided
that external transfer of CO2 is not assumed in the baseline)
Bottom-up modeling for technologies on energy supply side (e.g., power sector) and CCUS
For energy demand side, bottom-up modeling conducted for the industry sector including steel, cement, paper, chemicals
and aluminum, the transport sector, and a part of the residential & commercial sector, considering CGS for other industry
and residential & commercial sectors.
Bottom-up modeling for international marine bunker and aviation.
Around 500 specific technologies are modeled, with lifetime of equipment considered.
Top-down modeling for others (energy saving effect is estimated using long-term price elasticity).














•
•

Regional and sectoral technological information provided in detail enough to analyze consistently.
Analyses on non-CO2 GHG possible with another model RITE has developed based on US EPA’s assumptions.

•

Model based analyses and evaluation provide recommendation for major governmental policy making on climatechange, e.g., cap-and-trade system and Environmental Energy Technology Innovation Plan, and also contribute to
IPCC scenario analysis.

Integration Cost of VRES: integration with aPower Generation Mix Model by Univ. of Tokyo and IEEJ

6

 As DNE21+ is a global model and not suitable for the analysis regarding internal power grid and regional conditions ofrenewable energy, it applies the results of the study on the assumption of integration cost under high VRE penetration
based on an optimal power generation mix model, by Fujii-Komiyama Laboratory, the University of Tokyo and theInstitute of Energy Economics, Japan.
 Time fluctuation of VRE output is modeled based on nationwide meteorological data, e.g., AMeDAS, to estimate theoptimal configuration (power generation and storage system) and the annual operation by linear programming.
 Calculated with hourly modeling by 5 divided regions (Hokkaido, Tohoku, Tokyo, Kyushu and others). Prerequisites for
power generation cost, resource constraint, etc, are defined in line with DNE21+.

Grid integration costs approximated from theanalysis of the Univ. of Tokyo – IEEJ power
generation mix model＝Assumption on grid
integration costs in DNE21+ (Marginal cost wheneach implementation share is realized）

Considered in modeling・・・ Output control, power storage system (pumped hydro, lithium-ion
battery and hydrogen storage), reduction of power generation
facility utilization, inter-regional power transmission lines, electricity
loss in storage and transmission
Not considered in modeling・・・ Intra-regional power transmission lines, power grid, influence of
decrease of rotational inertia, grid power storage by EV, prediction
error of VRE output, supply disruption risk during dark doldrums

Solar PV
太陽光
600

55

500

[¥/kWh]

1
0.8

44

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
20:00
16:00
12:00
8:00
4:00
0:00

0.2

0.1

Output example of PV

31-Dec

1-Dec

1-Nov

1-Oct

1-Sep

1-Aug

1-Jul

1-Jun

1-May

1-Apr

1-Mar

1-Feb

1-Jan

0

As the VRE ratio increases, marginal integration costs
tend to rise relatively rapidly. This is because under
the circumstance where a large amount of VRE hasalready been installed, if it is further installed, it will be
required to maintain an infrequently used power
storage system or transmission line to deal with therisk that cloudy weather and windless conditions willcontinue for several days or more.

33

22[US$/MWh][US$/MWh]integration cost
System系統統合費用

66

Output(p.u.)

0.9

700

77

風力
Wind

400

300

200

11

100

0

0
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Share
of total power generation[%](%)
総発電電力量に対するシェア

45

50

55

60

CO2 Marginal Abatement Cost [$/tCO2]

Emission reduction potentials and costs in 2050 by sector and technology:
Japan
Transport: High efficiency /Shift among fossil fuels
Transport: Zero emission fuels

Power generation: High efficiency /Shift among fossil fuels
Power generation: CCUS

Power generation: Solar thermal

Power generation: Biomass

Power generation: Synthetic methane

Power generation: Hydro / Geothermal

Other energy conversion

Residential & Commercial: High efficiency /Shift among fossil fuels
Residential & Commercial: Zero emission fuels

Power generation: Nuclear power

Industry: CCUS

Forestation

Power generation: Wind power

Industry: High efficiency /Shift among fossil fuels
Industry: Zero emission fuels

DACCS, Mineralization

Power generation: Solar PV

Power generation: Hydrogen / Ammonia

Use of bio fuels inRoad Transportation
Concrete products withabsorbed CO2 (for road)
Adoption of hydrogen DRI

Heat supply by
Gas CGS, etc.

Use of syn. liquid fuelsin Road Transportation

Refinery loss reduction due todecrease of petroleum products
demandEnergy saving in energyintensive industries, etc.
Adopting CCS to co-firingof coal / biomass
Shift from coal
to gas CGC

Adopting CCS
to gas power

Use of syn. methane
in Residential &Commercial sector

DACCS will serve as a “backstop”
technology even in Japan, but will
have a dependency on CO2
storage potentials domesticallyand possibilities of transport tooverseas.

DACCS

Adopting CCS
to gas power

Adopting BEV tolight truck, etc.

7

Hydrogen/ Ammonia
power
generation
BECCS

Solar PV,
Wind power

H2-based
CCS DRI

Ready-mixed
concrete CO2
trace absorption /curing promotion

Reforestation/
rehabilitation

Nuclearpower▲16% from2015 level

CO2 Reduction compared with Baseline [MtCO2/yr]

CCS is a relatively cheap
option also in Japan(50-250 USD/tCO2 in 2050).

GHG
CO2carbon neutral carbon neutral
Note 1) This analysis shows the result of the estimation under the technology assumption in the “Reference case”.
Note 2) The emission reduction potentials in this analysis should be referenced as a rough guide, as the emission reduction effects by sector / technology will vary depending on the definitionof the variables for sectors, countermeasures, and technologies, etc.

Assumed scenarios for the 2 C and 1.5 C goals
Scenarios

Globalaveragetemp.
increase

Policyimplementationspeed#

Disorderly
Below 2 C

1.7 C in
2100(peak:1.8 C)

Gradual(NDCs in2030)

8

Corresponding scenarios

CDR
contribution

Renewables
and BEV

Differences inpolicy intensity
among regions

mediumMedium cost
reductions

Large (major
developed countries:
CN by 2050)

Likely below 2 C, Disorderly:
NDC [C3b]
DelayedTransition

APS
(WEO
2022)

Small

High cost
reductions

Small (equal MAC
among countries)

Likely below 2 C Orderly:with immediate
Below 2C
action [C3a]

SDS
(WEO
2021)

Large

Medium cost
reductions

Large (major
developed countries:
CN by 2050)

Rapid

MediumHigh cost
reductions

Rapid

Small
(Near-zero of
CO2 by sector)

High cost
reductions

Orderly
Below 2 C

1.7 C

Rapid

Disorderly
1.5 C1.4 C in
2100(peak:1.7 C)

Gradual(NDCs in
2030)

Orderly 1.5
C

1.4 C in
2100(peak:1.6 C)

1.5CCO2_CN

Approx.
below 1.5 C# The emission reduction targets in 2030 of NDCs submitted in the end of December 2021 are considered.

IPCC AR6(IPCC 2022)

NGFS (2022) IEA

1.5 C with highovershoot (IMPNeg) [C2](Disorderly:
Divergent
Net Zero)*Medium (major
developed countries:
CN by 2050)

1.5 C with no or
limitedovershoot [C1]

Orderly: Net
Zero2050

Large (major
developed countries:
CN by 2050)

1.5 C with no or
limitedovershoot [C1]NZE* The emissions pathway is rather similar to the Orderly 1.5 C✓ The assumed scenarios are consistent with the long-term goals of Paris Agreement, and cover the existing scenarios
which are widely referred globally.
✓ The scenarios also cover a certain range of uncertainties in technologies and policies.

GHG emissions (Japan)

9

1400

DACCS
Non-CO2 GHGs

1200

Prosess CO2
LULUCF CO2

GHG emissions [MtCO2eq/yr]

1000

Other energy conversion
Power generation

800

Residential andcommercial
International naviation

600

International aviation
Other domestic transport

400

Domestic aviation
Road transport

200

Other industries
Chemical0Paper and pulp
Cement

-200

2015

2030

2040

2050

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

Iron and steelNote) For the GHG emissions other than CO2 in 1.5C-CO2_CN,
the values in Orderly 1.5C are shown here.

✓ To achieve CN in GHG emissions in 2050, DACCS, the use of LULUCF CO2 (fixation by forestation), and the measures for net negative
CO2 emissions in the Power sector, such as BECCS and e-methane+CCS, will be applied.
✓ In Orderly 2.0C where CN in GHG emissions in 2050 is not assumed, the total GHG emissions will be approximately ▲69% relative to2013, with positive CO2 emissions from the Power sector and the Iron and steel sector.

CO2 capture, storage and utilization [MtCO2/yr]
CO2 capture, storage and utilization [MtCO2/yr]

150

CO2 balance (Japan)

10
CO2 overseas transport
CCU
CO2 geological storage
CaptureDAC
Ammonia production
CementCoal-fired
BF-BOF
Oil-firedHydrogen production
Gas-fired
Biomass-fired
Biomass-fired
Gas-firedHydrogen production
Oil-fired
BF-BOF
Coal-fired
Ammonia production

0

Storage,utilization
DAC

-100

CO2 geological storage
CCU

-50

CO2 overseas transport

2050

1.5C-CO2_CN
1.5C-CO2_CN 1.5C-CO2_CN

2050

Orderly 1.5C
Orderly 1.5C
Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C
Disorderly 1.5C Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C
Orderly 2.0C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C
Disorderly 2.0C

Orderly 2.0C

2040

1.5C-CO2_CN 1.5C-CO2_CN
Disorderly 2.0C

2030

2040

Orderly 1.5C
Orderly 1.5C
1.5C-CO2_CN

2030

Disorderly 1.5C Disorderly 1.5C
Orderly 1.5C

-150

Orderly 2.0C
Disorderly 1.5C

Disorderly 2.0C

-150

Disorderly 2.0C
Disorderly 2.0C
Orderly 2.0C

-100

1.5C-CO2_CN
1.5C-CO2_CN
Disorderly 2.0C

-150

Orderly 1.5C

-100

CementOrderly 1.5C
1.5C-CO2_CN

-50

50
-50

Disorderly 1.5C
Disorderly 1.5C
Orderly 1.5C

0

100
0

Orderly 2.0C

50

150
50

2.0C1.5C
Orderly
Disorderly

100

Disorderly 2.0C
2.0C2.0C
Disorderly
Orderly

CO2 capture, storage and utilization [MtCO2/yr]

150 100

Storage,utilization

2030
2040
2050
✓ CO2 capture through fossil-fired power
generation and BF process(Super COURSE50)
are observed in 2040.
✓ CO2 capture through DAC and Biomass processes will be large in 2050.
✓ Under 1.5C-CO2_CN, with limited CDR uses including BECCS and e-methane+CCS in the Power sector, CO2 is captured from coal-fired(incl. Biomass co-firing) and gas-fired, and in the Cement sector in 2050. Captured CO2 via DAC is used for CCU.

Primary energy supply (Japan)

11

500

Non-energy use gas
Non-energy use oil

450

Non-energy use coal

400

Import of hydrogen and ammonia

Primary energy supply [Mtoe/yr]

Import of biofuels

350
Solar thermal
Solar PV

300

Wind power

250

Nuclear power

Hydro and Geothermal

200

Biomass w/ CCUS

150

Biomass w/o CCUS

100

Import of e-methane (synthetic
methane)Gas w/ CCUS

50

Gas w/o CCUS
Import of e-fuels (synthetic oil)

2015

2030

2040

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline0
Oil w/o CCUS
Coal wi/ CCUS
Coal w/o CCUS

2050

✓ Import of hydrogen and ammonia, e-methane, and biofuels would be cost-effective as the MAC of Japan is higher than other countries.
However, those amounts in Orderly 2.0C are relatively small (approx. ▲69% relative to 2013 in 2050).
✓ Coal use incl. with CCUS is scarcely observed in the scenarios of GHG CN in 2050. However, in Orderly 2.0C, some coal w/o CCUS anda reasonable amount of gas w/o CCUS are likely to remain.
✓ Import of hydrogen and ammonia, e-methane, and biofuels would be cost-effective as well in 1.5C -CO2_CN.

Electricity supply (Japan)
121800

Solar PV (w/o grid)Wind power (w/o grid)

1600

Ammonia (cofiring with coal)

Ammonia

1400
Electricity generation [TWh/yr]

Hydorogen (cofiring with gas)
Hydrogen

1200

Solar thermal

Solar PV

1000

Wind power
Nuclear power

800

Hydro and Geothermal

Biomass (cofiring with coal) w/ CCUS

600

Biomass w/ CCUS

400

Biomass (cofiring with coal) w/o
CCUS
Biomass w/o CCUS

200

Gas w/ CCUS
Gas CGS

2015

2030

2040

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline

1.5C-CO2_CN

Orderly 1.5C

Disorderly 1.5C

Orderly 2.0C

Disorderly 2.0C

Baseline0

Gas w/o CCUS
Oil wi/ CCUS

Oil w/o CCUS
Coal wi/ CCUS
Coal w/o CCUS

2050

✓ Electricity supply is in an upward trend, especially in the strict emissions reduction scenarios.
✓ The deployment of renewable energy, such as solar PV, the use of CCS, and power generation with imported hydrogen and ammonia areobserved. Also, e-methane is used for gas power generation in 2050 in the scenarios other than Orderly 2.0C.
✓ Solar PV and wind power are likely to diffuse further due to high cost reduction in Orderly 1.5C.
✓ In 1.5C-CO2_CN, a portion of coal with CCUS increases due to the constraint of BECCS and e-methane+CCS.

3. Policy Status in Japan

Long-term commitment to revenues for new decarbonized
power through capacity market in power sector (1/2)
Issues for investment

14

New scheme✓ In the capacity market, the revenues for providing kW are uncertain in the future, and there can be large risks ofinvesting in decarbonized power plants (including CCS) which are higher unit costs of kW in general.
✓ A new scheme for new decarbonized power which commit the revenues for 20 years has been introduced from FY2023.
Then, a certain part of the investment risks will be reduced.

Long-term commitment to revenues for new decarbonized
power through capacity market in power sector (2/2)

15Consideration in different lead time
Deadline for power supply
Solar PV
Wind, geothermal

Hydro power
Hydrogen, ammonia,
biomass, LNG withhydrogen/ammonia, CCS

NuclearBattery
LNG (only forlimited years)✓ Construction times are different among power sources. Different lead times among power sources are
considered in the new capacity market for long-term decarbonized power.

GX transition bond and carbon price(under discussions)
GX transition bond

16

Carbon pricing

GX investment: over 150 trillion JPY

Mobilizing investment

Mobilizing investment✓ Introduction of emissions trading schemes in the future (for just image, ETS with free allocation fromaround 2025, and with auction from around 2028), and subsidy schemes through “GX transition bond” ofover 150 trillion JPY based on the auction revenues in the future.

the Act on Carbon Dioxide Storage Businesses (enacted in May, 2024)
17

Aiming to develop a businessenvironment in which privatecompanies are able to launch
CCS businesses in Japan by
2030, the bill is to stipulate
provisions involving thefollowing:• establishing a licensing
system for storage businessand trial-drilling,• establishing a storage rightsystem and a trial-drillingright system, and• developing businessregulations and safety
regulations pertaining tostorage businesses andpipeline carbon dioxidetransportation businesses.

4. Conclusion

Conclusion
19 The Government of Japan decided the 6th Energy Strategic Plan, and new Global warming












countermeasure plan in October 2021: carbon neutrality (CN) by 2050, and -46% in 2030. Now The
7th Energy Strategic Plan is under development.
To achieve carbon neutrality, in principle, primary energy should consist of renewable energy,
nuclear energy, and fossil fuels with CCS. The combination of an increase in electrification ratio
and low- and de-carbonized power supply plays a vital role in achieving net-zero emissions.
CCS will play a certain role toward CN in Japan as well as the importance of global strategy
including the utilization of overseas-made renewable energy and CCS through hydrogen,ammonia, e-methane (synthetic gas), and e-fuels (synthetic oil).
Negative emission measures such as DACCS will also play an important role in achieving net-zeroemissions including the opportunities in the implementations overseas with emission credit
transfer.
The transition measures and policies will also be very important. After 2030, CCS plays animportant role also in Japan for the transition to the 2 C or 1.5 C long-term goal of the Paris
Agreement.
The policy schemes to mobilize large amounts of investment in decarbonized energy sources (e.g.,
nuclear power, CCS) with high risks for investments are important.
The CCS act was enacted in May 2024, and carbon pricing policies are under development inJapan, and they also serve the incentive to CCS deployments.