English Summary

Study of Potential for the
Introduction of Renewable
Energy （FY 2010）
Summary
focused on Tohoku and Kanto regions

1

Important Notes and Definitions【 Important Notes 】
1.

Comparison between different energies … The estimation results are shown in terms of the installed capacity (kW). However, as the standard capacity
factor (ratio of the actual power output of a power plant over a period of time to the theoretical power output if plant had operated at its full capacity
over the same period) varies from one renewable energy to another (for example, photovoltaic power generation is not feasible at night), theconversion factor to the generated electric energy (kWh) also varies from one such energy to another. Caution is, therefore, required for any
comparison between different types of energy.

2.

Handling of already developed potential … The estimation results include the power generation potential which has already been developed. However,as some power generation potential is developed from a viewpoint other than the commercial viability of development, simple comparison does notprovide an accurate picture.

【 Definitions 】
Abundance … The amount of energy resources which can be theoretically estimated by the feasible area for system installation, mean windvelocity, river discharge or other relevant factors. It excludes the amount of energy which is difficult to utilise based on the current technological leveland does not take various limiting factors (land inclination, legal restrictions, land use, distance from a residential area and others) into consideration.

Introduction potential … The amount of energy resources which take various limiting factors for energy collection and utilisation into
consideration. This amount is a portion of the abundance.

Possible introduction amount under scenario … This is a portion of the introduction potential which can hopefully be realised for actual use under aspecific scenario (assumptions) for project viability. For each type of renewable energy, the unit construction cost and other conditions are assumed to
conduct a simulation on project viability and the outputs of those projects where the internal rate of return before tax is approximately 8% or higher
totalised (the year of realisation is not considered). In general, the actual amount of energy developed is anticipated to be lower than the possible
introduction amount under scenario. It could exceed the possible introduction amount under scenario, however, as the introduction potential may be
developed disregarding the economic profitability.
The following two basic scenarios were considered to estimate the probable introduction amount: (i) introduction of a system to purchase the entire
amount of energies generated using renewable energy resources (feed-in tariff system) and (ii) cost reduction as a result of technological innovation.
Using these scenarios, a feasible amount of commercially profitable energy development was estimated.
i.
Basic Scenario 1 (FIT scenario) … This scenario assumes the continuation of the present cost level and the actual purchase at the purchaseprice at the start of the FIT system and for the period as specified by the Act on Special Measures Concerning the Purchase of Electric Power
Originating from Renewable Energies by Operators of Electric Utilities (FIT Act) which was approved by the Cabinet in March, 2011.
ii . Basic Scenario 2 (technological innovation scenario) … This scenario assumes a substantial cost reduction for equipment, etc.
through technological innovations and the maintenance of the purchase price at the start of the FIT system and for the purchase period as
specified by the FIT Act.
iii.

Reference scenarios … Reference scenarios where the introduction of a subsidy system and changes of the specificconditions for each type of renewable energy are assumed were also considered to analyse the likely changes of theintroduction potential and probably introduction amount.

S-1

2

Photovoltaic (PV） Power Generation （ Non-Residential# )1. Assumptions
Capacity Factor

RequiredArea

Solar Cell
System Cost

Auxiliary
Equipment Cost

Installation
Cost *2

FIT Purchase PriceFIT Purchase
Period12％*1

67 W/m2¥390,000/kW¥140,000/kW¥77,000/kW¥24, 36 or 48/kWh

15 or 20 years*1 The impact of the orientation of the installed system on the annual generation amount of electric energy was also considered.
*2 An additional installation cost of ¥10,000 ~ 20,000/m2 was added in those cases where a system is installed to windows or a roof with a complicated shape.
For abandoned farmland, a transmission line construction cost of ¥10 million/km and annual rent of 6% of the land price were considered because (i) it islikely to be located far from the existing transmission grid and (ii) it will no longer be used for farming.
# Potential of residential building … Ordinary houses were excluded from the scope of estimation as it would be inappropriate to estimate the probably
introduction amount from residential installation using the income and expenditure simulation for commercial PV power generation operation.
NEDO estimated the residential PV power generation potential in 2004.
Potential (i.e. abundance) … Detached houses: 101 million kW; apartment buildings: 106 million kW
Introduction potential (total potential around 2030 based on the technological development scenario) … Detached houses: 37.1 ~ 53.1 million kW;apartment buildings: 8.2 ~ 22.1 million kW

2. Estimation Results
The estimation results indicate the need for a lower cost through technological innovation and a subsidy in addition to FIT if PV power generation is tospread to non-residential properties.
FIT*1 +
TechnologicalInnovation*1 Scenario

FIT＋Subsidy*2

FIT + Subsidy *2+ Enlarged
Area of Installation *3

0

0 ~ 100 ~ 1010 ~ 2000.2 ~ 140 ~ 1414 ~ 2027

0

0 ~ 1.3

0 ~ 1.3

1.3 ~ 2.9

Abandoned Farmland (that which has become
woodland or waste land)

70

0

0 ~ 47043 ~ 58

Total

150

0

0.2 ~ 72

0 ~ 2669 ~ 100

Installed Capacity (million kW)

Introduction
Potential

FIT
Scenario

Public Buildings (Schools、City Halls, etc.)

23

Power Stations and Factories, etc.

29

Low Use or Unused Land (Final Disposal Sites, etc.)*1 The estimation assumed a reduction of the system cost by ½ ~ 2/3, a purchase price of ¥ 36/kWh and a purchase period of 15 years.
*2 A subsidy to cover one-third of the project cost was assumed and the various FIT purchase prices in the earlier table were used.
*3 An installation area was assumed to be enlarged at factories, power stations, water supply/sewerage facilities and other sites while the various purchase prices inthe earlier table were used.

3

3. Geographical Distribution
One distinctive feature of PV power generation is the little geographical bias of its distribution as shown in the map here. Nevertheless, the areas along theSanriku coast, the northern part of the Kanto Region, Yamanashi Prefecture, Boso Peninsula and Izu Peninsula enjoy comparatively better conditions.

Annual solar radiance on the surface
with an optimal angle of inclination(annual average: kWh/m2・d)Fig. Annual solar radiance on the surface with an optimal angle of inclination in Japan (kWh/m2・d)
Source: NEDO, Guidelines for PV Power Generation Field Test Project (Design, Construction and System), 2010

S-2

4

Wind Power Generation
1. Assumptions
Capacity Factor

RequiredArea

TurbineSystem andConstruction
Cost

Road
Improvement
Cost*

Transmission
Line (66 kV)
Construction
Cost*

Survey and
Design Cost*

FIT PurchasePrice

FIT Purchase
PeriodDepends onwind velocity
6.5 m/s → 24%
7.5 m/s → 31%

10,000kW/km2¥250,000/kW¥8.5 million/km(assumed linear
distance x 2)

¥5.5 million/km¥46.7 million(20,000 kW
power plant
assumed)¥15 or 20/kWh

15 or 20 years* For offshore wind power generation, the foundations/floating platform cost, transmission line construction cost and survey and design cost were separately
estimated from those in the table based on the assumption that these costs would vary depending on the water depth.

2. Estimation Results
The estimation results suggest an extremely large introduction potential of wind power generation. However, a strong geographical bias exists as shown on themap on the following slide. In the case of the Hokkaido and Tohoku Regions for example, the estimated introduction potential exceeds the existing power supply
capacity (7.42 million kW for Hokkaido and 16.55 million kW for Tohoko). To determine the short to medium-term introduction potential, it is necessary to
examine various factors, including the limitation of the inter-regional system linkage capacity. These factors were not examined this time.
Installed Capacity(million kW)

Abundance

Introduction
Potential

FIT Scenario

FIT*1 + TechnologicalInnovation*1 Scenario

FIT＋Subsidy*2

FIT + TechnologicalInnovation + Subsidy*3

Onshore

1,300

280

24 ~ 140270

130 ~ 260

280

Offshore

－

1,600

0~3

140

0.3 ~ 330

1,200

Total

－

1,900

24 ~ 140410

130 ~ 590

1,500

*1 The estimation assumed a reduction of the wind turbine system and installation cost by half and a reduction of the civil engineering cost by 1/5, a purchaseprice of ¥20/kWh and a purchase period of 15 years.
*2 A subsidy to cover one-third of the project cost was assumed and the various FIT purchase prices in the earlier table were used.
*3 A subsidy to cover one-third of the project cost was additionally assumed for the FIT + Technological Innovation Scenario.

5

3. Geographical Distribution
As shown on these maps, there is a strong
geographical bias in the distribution of introduction
potential. The Tohoku Region has many sites withexcellent commercial viability.
Area

Introduction
Potential

FIT Scenario

Tohoku ElectricPower Area

300
million kW

9.8 ~ 40
million kW

Tokyo ElectricPower Area

83
million kW

0.25 ~ 2
million kW

The introduction potential in the table can be translated
to the generated energy listed below assuming a capacity
factor of 24%.
Tohoku Electric Power Area: 630 billion kWh/year
Tokyo Electric Power Area: 180 billion kWh/year
In the case of the FIT Scenario, the assumed capacity
factor of 24% produces the following generated energy.
Tohoku Electric Power Area: 21 ~ 83 billion kWh/year
Tokyo Electric Power Area: 0.53 ~ 4.2 billion kWh/year
As mentioned earlier, to determine the short to mediumterm probable introduction amount, it is necessary to
examine the limitation of the inter-regional system
linkage capacity and other factors.

Fig. Distribution of Introduction Potential of Onshore Wind Power Generation

S-3

6

Small and Medium-Scale Hydropower Generation (Installed Capacity < 30,000kW )1. Assumptions
Capacity
Factor

Generation System Cost

Road Improvement
Cost

Transmission Line
(LV) Construction
Cost

FIT Purchase PriceFIT Purchase Period65%

Use of the calculation method listed in
the NEDO’s Small and Medium-Scale
Hydropower Generation Handbook¥5 million/km(linear distance x 2
assumed)¥5 million/km¥15 or 20/kWh

15 or 20 years

2. Estimation Results
The estimated probable introduction amount and other values for small and medium-scale hydropower generation are shown in the table below. In thisestimation, it was assumed that water would be taken at the upper end of a certain section (called a “link”) of a river or agricultural canal and discharged at thelower end of the link. To avoid any adverse impacts on existing water use, a section where the rate of discharge would be the lowest was selected for the link
along with dates with a high intake level. It must be noted that consideration of the maintenance discharge in addition to these selection criteria has likely put theestimation results on the conservative side.
Moreover, work related to hydropower generation may be conducted for purposes other than actual power generation. As such, the simulation results for all
scenarios are even more conservative. These estimates must, therefore, only be used for reference purposes and are placed in brackets in the table.
Installed Capacity(million kW)

Abundance

RiversIntroduction
Potential

FIT*1 +
TechnologicalInnovation*1 Scenario

FIT
Scenario

FIT＋
Subsidy*2

FIT + TechnologicalInnovation + Subsidy*31714(0.9 ~ 2.8)

(4)

(2.4 ~ 5.2)

(7.1)

Agricultural Canals

0.32

0.3

(0.16 ~ 0.2)

(0.2)

(0.22 ~ 0.26)(0.29)

Water Supply, Sewerage andWater for Industrial Use*4

0.18

0.16

17

14

(1.1 ~ 3)(4.3)(2.7 ~ 5.4)

(7.4)

Total

*1 The estimation assumed a reduction of the generation system cost by half, reduction of the civil engineering cost by 1/5, a purchase price of ¥20/kWh and apurchase period of 15 years.
*2 A subsidy to cover one-third of the project cost was assumed and the various FIT purchase prices in the earlier table were used.
*3 A subsidy to cover one-third of the project cost was additionally assumed for the FIT + Technological Innovation Scenario.
*4 These figures are quoted from the FY 2009 Study. The probable introduction amount was not estimated for any of the scenarios.

7

3. Geographical Distribution
As the introduction potential is high in the Tohoku andKanto Electric Power Areas, it is essential to conduct fieldsurveys, primarily focusing on those river systems.

Area

Introduction
Potential

Tohoku ElectricPower Area

4.3 million kW

Tokyo ElectricPower Area

2.1 million kW

This introduction potential can be translated into the following
generated energy.
Tohoku Electric Power Area: 24 billion kWh/year
Tokyo Electric Power Area: 12 billion kWh/year

Fig. Distribution of Introduction Potential of Smalland Medium-Scale Hydropower Generation (Rivers)

S-4

8

Geothermal Power Generation
1. Assumptions
Capacity Factor

Extended
Reach

Geothermal
Resources
SurveyProduction and
Return Well
Construction

Pipeline
Installation

Generating
FacilityLand
Acquisition
andPreparation

FIT
PurchasePrice

FIT Purchase
Period< 5,000 kW: 70%> 20,000 kW: 80%
Hot spring: 90%

1.5
km*1

¥3.5
billion*2¥13.1 billion*2¥6.1
billion*2¥200,000/kW¥2.3 billion*2¥15 or20/kWh15 or 20 years*1 This was not considered in the FY 2009 Study.
*2 These are for the case of 50,000 kW and other values were used to correspond to the estimated generating capacity at each site.

2. Estimation Results
The estimated probable introduction amounts and other values for geothermal power generation are shown in the table below. For this estimation, the geothermal
density distribution map prepared by Muraoka of the AIST and others were used. When data for micro river systems in individual areas is required, the moredetailed evaluation of resources will be required.
For hot spring power generation, Muraoka et.al. estimated using hot spring data produced by Kanahara et. al. This type of power generation is essentially includedin the category of hydrothermal resources with a temperature range of 53°C ~ 150°C. However, as it uses natural hot spring sites or developed hot spring sites, thecommercial viability data is quite different from the ordinary development of hydrothermal resources. As such, the probable introduction amount for hot spring
power generation is separately listed in the table for the development of hydrothermal resources with a temperature range of 53°C ~ 150°C.
Installed Capacity (million kW)

Abundance

Development of Hydrothermal
Resources (150℃～)

24

FIT*1 + TechnologicalInnovation Scenario*1

FIT Scenario

Introduction
Potential
6.4

0.52~ 5.4

FIT＋
Subsidy*2
5.7

2.0 ~ 5.6

5.8

0

0

2.0 ~ 5.6

5.8

(53～150℃)

9.6

7.8

0

0

Hot Spring Power Generation*4(0.72)(0.72)

0.57 ~ 0.68

0.72

33

14

1.1 ~ 6.1

6.5

Total

FIT + TechnologicalInnovation + Subsidy*3*1 The estimation assumed a reduction of both the generating system cost and the civil engineering cost by 1/5, a purchase price of ¥20/kWh and a purchaseperiod of 15 years. For hot spring power generation, a reduction of the generating system cost by half was assumed.
*2 A subsidy to cover the total cost of surveying and drilling was assumed and the various FIT purchase prices in the earlier table were used.
*3 A subsidy to cover the entire cost of surveying and drilling was additionally assumed for the FIT + Technological Innovation Scenario.
*4 The current prevailing cost of hot spring power generation is said to be ¥120 million for a 50 kW system (¥2.4 million/kW). Given the fact that some business
operators are aiming at achieving a cost of ¥0.25 ~ 0.3 million/kW (for a system of 50 kW or larger) for the start of commercial operation in FY 2011, a power
generation cost of ¥0.5 million/kW was used here.

9

3. Geographical Distribution
As shown on the map, there is a strong geographical bias in
the distribution of the introduction potential. The Tohoku
Region has many sites with excellent commercial viability.
Area

Introduction
Potential

FIT Scenario

Tohoku ElectricPower Area

3.5 million kW

0.2 ~ 1.3 million kW

Tokyo ElectricPower Area

1.4 million kW

0 ~ 0.22 million kW

The introduction potential in the table can be translated to thegenerated energy listed below assuming a capacity factor of 75%.
Tohoku Electric Power Area: 23 billion kWh/year
Tokyo Electric Power Area: 9.3 billion kWh/year
In the case of the FIT Scenario, the assumed capacity factor of
75% produces the following generated energy.
Tohoku Electric Power Area: 1.3 ~ 8.5 billion kWh/year
Tokyo Electric Power Area: 0 ~ 1.4 billion kWh/year
In these areas, there are many hot spring sites where thetemperature and quantity of hot water are suitable for hot spring
power generation.

Fig. Distribution of Introduction Potential of Geothermal
Power Generation (Hydrothermal Resources, over 150℃)
10

S-5

Reference

Statistics on Power Generation (FY 2009)
Installed Capacity(million kW)

Power Demand (billion
kWh/year)

Nationwide

203.97

858.5

Tohoku Electric Power Area

16.55

79.0

Tokyo Electric Power Area

64.49

280.2

Photovoltaic (PV) Power Generation (including Housing; Nationwide)

2.63

-

Wind Power Generation (Nationwide)

2.19

－

Small and Medium-Scale Hydropower Generation (Nationwide)

9.55

－

Geothermal Power Generation (Nationwide)

0.53

－



Commissioned to … EX Corporation, Asia Air Survey Co., Ltd., Pacific Consultants Co., Ltd. and

Subcontracted to …

External Advisors for the Study (in alphabetical order)

Itochu Techno-Solutions Corporations
Nagai Laboratory of College of Industrial Technology, Nihon University
NTT GP-ECO Communication, Inc.
Prof. Hiroki HONDO: Associate Professor, Graduate School of Environment and Information Sciences, Yokohama National University
Prof. Hisashi KOBAYASHI: Professor, College of Agriculture, Ibaraki University
Prof. Hirofumi MURAOKA: Professor, North Japan Research Institute for Sustainable Energy, Hirosaki University
Mr. Masaru NAKAJIMA: Secretary General, Japanese Association for Water Energy Recovery
Dr. Tetsuro NODA: Advisor, National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology (AIST)
Mr. Yoshikazu OKABAYASHI: Secretary General, Japan Photovoltaic Energy Association
Mr. Tetsuo SAITO: Secretary General, Japanese Wind Power Association

11

S-6